or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by GadgetDon

 While you can argue that the decision of Citizen United was too broadly written. What the FEC was claiming was that it had the right to censor anything they wanted by calling it a "commercial". It wasn't just, or even primarily, the makers of the movies they were claiming jurisdiction over, but the cable company itself for showing it. Imagine what Nixon could've done with that. The Washington Post articles clearly were advertisements for the Democratic party, you can't...
They might, but bigots tend to be rather stupid and not at all subtle. So a lot of them will make it very clear about why they are discriminating, and even if they dissemble, they often get caught. Remember, it's a tort, not a criminal offense, so the case must be proven only by a preponderance of the evidence. They may get away with it in a single case, but it's the pattern that hangs them (and whistleblowing employees).
If there would be additional expense or effort or risk, that would be one thing. If you were asked to perform an action that you normally would not do (like photograph the after-wedding orgy), that would also be reasonable to reject. "My beliefs say that what you do is really really icky so even if you want me to do the exact thing I do for everyone else, I refuse", that's not reasonable. The first are judging the job. The latter is judging the person.
It's the old "your rights end where my nose starts". When you advertise to photograph weddings, or you have rooms for rent, or you're hiring to fill a job, and you say "I am judging your life by my religious beliefs and so am punishing you by refusing you what I've said I'll do for everyone", you just hit the nose.
There's some truth to that. But there are so many details to how Washington works, what pressure groups there are, what's the real way that laws come into being and how the staffs operate and the various executive Departments - you need to know those to be effective or you'll be rolled. Take President Carter. I respect him greatly as a person. But he came into the Presidency as an outsider, knowing almost nothing about how things work in Washington. So he didn't know how...
 Best line I ever heard was about the Perot candidacy. "The Presidency is not an entry-level position."
 I have. Oddly enough, my opinion is unchanged - while your interpretation is one possible one, it is not the only possible interpretation and frankly your interpretation was shown to be unworkable.  Basically, you want us to live under the Articles of Confederation even though the Constition was necessary but the Articles of Confederation proved to be incapable of handling even the small nation we were at the time (and would be disastrous in our current much larger and...
The suggestion that Tim Cook can't criticize a bad law in Indiana because of worse laws in Iran is an ideal example of "The Perfect Is The Enemy of the Good"
You're demanding a VERY wide definition of "free exercise of religion" to make the claim in this case - far less wide than the definition of other rights used in Roe v. Wade which I'm going to make a wild guess and say you oppose.
Point me to the section of the law that says "thou shalt not baketh the pizza for men that lie with each others or those of different colors of skins" and you can try to make the claim that your ability to exercise your beliefs is being violated. And no, the laws that say you must murder those people doesn't count - you can try to murder gay people and claim you're following your religious beliefs (and enjoy your time in prison for it) but that's not the same as no pizza...
New Posts  All Forums: