The tyranny of the minority

2minkey

2minkey

bootlicker
Winky said:
yes you just keep on believing communism is our only hope obi-wan kenobi
Click to expand...

hah funny little boy confuse communism with capitalism. perhaps you think that the globalized economy is driven by communism HA HA HA poop.
 
jimpeel

jimpeel

Well-Known Member
2minkey said:
so he could refuse service to jews i.e. the sign actually mirrors policy as opposed to just being a prop?
Click to expand...

The right to free assembly trumps these silly feel good laws that let anyone barge into your circle of comfort. It existed from the beginning of the country and it affirms the right of every person to free association with persons of their choice.

See: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=000&invol=99-699


BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA et al. v. DALE
Click to expand...
certiorari to the supreme court of new jersey​
No. 99-699. Argued April 26, 2000--Decided June 28, 2000​
​
Petitioners are the Boy Scouts of America and its Monmouth Council (collectively, Boy Scouts). The Boy Scouts is a private, not-for-profit organization engaged in instilling its system of values in young people. It asserts that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with those values. Respondent Dale is an adult whose position as assistant scoutmaster of a New Jersey troop was revoked when the Boy Scouts learned that he is an avowed homosexual and gay rights activist. He filed suit in the New Jersey Superior Court, alleging, inter alia, that the Boy Scouts had violated the state statute prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in places of public accommodation. That court's Chancery Division granted summary judgment for the Boy Scouts, but its Appellate Division reversed in pertinent part and remanded. The State Supreme Court affirmed, holding, inter alia, that the Boy Scouts violated the State's public accommodations law by revoking Dale's membership based on his avowed homosexuality. Among other rulings, the court held that application of that law did not violate the Boy Scouts' First Amendment right of expressive association because Dale's inclusion would not significantly affect members' ability to carry out their purposes; determined that New Jersey has a compelling interest in eliminating the destructive consequences of discrimination from society, and that its public accommodations law abridges no more speech than is necessary to accomplish its purpose; and distinguished Hurley v. Irish-American Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual Group of Boston, Inc., 515 U. S. 557, on the ground that Dale's reinstatement did not compel the Boy Scouts to express any message.​
​
​
Held: Applying New Jersey's public accommodations law to require the Boy Scouts to admit Dale violates the Boy Scouts' First Amendment right of expressive association.​
​
Click to expand...
​
​
 
2minkey

2minkey

bootlicker
they just live in a different neighborhood jim. they're the same kinda cats as you. in many ways.
 
Winky

Winky

Well-Known Member
if your right to private property is infringed
well how much more infringed do you want
than Osamacare?
 
catocom

catocom

Well-Known Member
2minkey said:
oh LIFE IS SOOOOO HARD.

over in shabazz-town it's easy though, they get handouts left and right.

well cato i think you just proved winky's assertion that you're a bunch of pussies. i would add marginally literate, as well.
Click to expand...

Hey, I'm just for "Equal" rights.
Not preferential treatment.

Are you saying we should be racist?
 
2minkey

2minkey

bootlicker
sorry it was difficult to understand your post due to poor language usage.

so, certainly your assessment of this 'preferential treatment' is dead-on accurate, and you yourself are not a racist.

it is just those other people that have a problem.

got it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top