or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by jfc1138

Inevitable, though too long in coming: "AMENDMENT XIV Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868. Note: Article I, section 2, of the Constitution was modified by section 2 of the 14th amendment. Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or...
That was sort of settled when "That mean store wouldn't let me sit at the lunch counter" became the description of an illegal discriminatory act. Perform whatever quaint religious ceremony one prefers (though you'd better refrain from stoning people you catch working on Sunday or wearing polyester-cotton blends any time), what RFRA is about. While out in the public sphere? Equal protection under the law.  Furthermore baking isn't a religious act, while I'm a little more...
Because he was writing in dissent? ETA: Though his harkening back to "the Aztecs" does give a certain pause: ritual, large scale, public human sacrifice? Maybe that's why I received notice of the closing of the front area for construction: the Chief putting up a nice basalt slab so he can rip the hearts out of victims and have their blood run down into the street? ​Now Scalia? Tall;y expect that, but Roberts being a baseball fan is a surprise....
That's just how powerful the Bible is. Personally I like to use it as a talking point against cotton-polyester blends.....
14th Amendment; EQUAL protection under the law. States no doubt have the right to ignore ALL marriage. They can just delete all legal connection to that. 
Not a blip on her balance sheet, which makes her case being about the indies and people starting out more persuasive as it won't mean anything for her economically. 
Business: she asked something of Apple, they asked something of her in return.
She's a Yankee so that would probably be: "No".
I'd think concern for people with limited data plans (which has to be the source for the restriction) would be addressed if that choice were opt in for allowing updates or big downloads of whatever material, such as big podcasts (the Whitehouse Press briefing comes in at about 135 MB and is restricted to WiFi)  over other modes than Wi-Fi- with a suitable written warning about potential data overages if opted for. Then let people choose within the context of their own...
"more than" does not remove the Klan does it?
New Posts  All Forums: