Gay married man defends baker, as does the Supreme Court

Gay married man defends baker, as does the Supreme Court  | "If a baker won't bake you a cake, ~ DAVE RUBIN FIND ANOTHER BAKER. DON'T DEMAND THAT THE GOVERNMENT TELL HIM WHAT TO DO with his private bu | image tagged in baker,gay marriage,supreme court,wedding cake,dave rubin,memes | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
17,860 views, 186 upvotes, Made by james3v6 2 months ago bakergay marriagesupreme courtwedding cakedave rubinmemes
Add Meme
Post Comment
reply
27 ups, 4 replies
Roll Safe Think About It Meme | IF A CHRISTIAN BAKER WON'T BAKE YOU A CAKE FOR A GAY, FIND A MUSLIM IT'S THE RELIGION OF PEACE | image tagged in memes,roll safe think about it | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
reply
13 ups
BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!! You should submit that.
reply
11 ups, 1 reply
Bad Luck Brian Meme | FINDS A MUSLIM BAKER HEY BRO | image tagged in memes,bad luck brian | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
reply
13 ups, 1 reply
Bad Luck Brian Meme | BAKER THINKS HE'S GAY BRINGS HIM UP TO THE ROOF FOR BETTER LOOK AT A NEIGHBORHOOD | image tagged in memes,bad luck brian | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
reply
6 ups
Bad Luck Brian Meme | HAS A NICE LOOK OVER THE NEIGHBOURHOOD TESCO | image tagged in memes,bad luck brian | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
reply
11 ups
i.imgflip.com/1bqp5y.gif (click to show)
reply
10 ups, 2 replies
AVERAGE GUY YOU GO ACROSS THE STREET!  SUPERMARKET WILL MAKE YOU ONE! MUSLIM BAKER | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
True story. Hidden cam.
reply
5 ups, 1 reply
Isn't that Steven Crowder? He did this a few years back.
reply
5 ups, 1 reply
Yup. The “average (slightly outspoken) guy”. ; D
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
He can be funny at time, regardless of his political views.
reply
2 ups
Yes, he can be funny sometimes, but he can also be a bit annoying... ; )
reply
3 ups
I remember this.
reply
13 ups
Support from another planet i.imgflip.com/27p13t.jpg (click to show)
reply
9 ups
i.imgflip.com/23fb81.jpg (click to show)
imgflip.com/i/23fb81
reply
8 ups, 1 reply
Kind of oversimplifying his position, isn't it? He also had a super long discussion on how these kinds of decisions may snowball in a direction the original participants would find disturbing.
reply
14 ups, 2 replies
Definitely.
Can't fit a position as deep as Rubin's into a meme!
Start getting the government to encroach upon the liberties of others who you disagree with and it could very well be turned back on you eventually. Especially when "your political or cultural opponents" are in power. But people who react on their feelings only care about what makes them feel better now. Sad.
reply
7 ups
Very well put.
reply
3 ups, 2 replies
True, and the repercussions of "Religious Liberty" laws that impose the will of any religious group on others has blown back pretty hard, too. Groups suing schools to allow religious clubs to form on public school property ended up opening the door to atheist and satanist groups. And now there's a case before a court about a church suing for government funds to be allotted to fix up their church's playground, which could be used later to rescind tax exempt status and closed book policies for churches. Bet they didn't think about that when they complained. :D
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
That playground case was decided late last year. The court found in the church's favor.

But you definitely have a point. Some Christian groups fight some legal battle, without realizing the ruling would also apply to any and all religions. Look at this cake case. Someone could refuse to bake a cake for a black couple or a Christian couple and say it's because of their strongly-held religious convictions, and they would be legally protected.
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
"Someone could refuse to bake a cake for a black couple or a Christian couple and say it's because of their strongly-held religious convictions, and they would be legally protected."

That is not a true statement. Simply stating a belief is "strongly-held" does not envoke legal protection.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Yes it does evoke legal protection. That's exactly what this Jack Phillips case was about: his strongly-held religious convictions.
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
Simply stating that something is a "strongly-held religious conviction" does not make it recognized by the courts as you have suggested. If you were to take a few minutes to study the history of supreme court cases on this matter, you will find there is a higher bar to meet, other than simply "claiming" a religious conviction, in order to obtain legal protection. Your original statement was falsely arguing that any "claimed" conviction would receive legal protection. You were trying to agure that there was a slippery slope to this decision but the premise to your argument was false.
reply
2 ups
I never once used the phrase "claimed conviction".

There was a case (United States v Ballard - 1944) where a guy was suspected of scamming people out of money using a "fake" religion. SCOTUS ruled that the truthfulness of his beliefs could not be put on trial, only his sincerity.

And yes, I have studied Supreme Court cases that deal with this kind of thing. If there is a specific one you had in mind, let me know and I'll check up on it.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
The upside to a church losing 501(c)3 status would be the freedom of speech on the pulpit. I think they would be better off if that happened.
reply
0 ups, 2 replies
I've always felt that a pastor's place within the church itself is preaching the Word of God, not stumping for a particular Party or candidate. At least from the pulpit. What he does privately is his own affair, but when he is at the altar he is there to preach the Word. He can preach on the morality and Biblical or non-Biblical nature of our laws, and that's already legal, but to use his place at the altar to tell his congregation who to vote for, which is not legal, is an abuse of the trust given him. The church is the House of God, not a place to try and associate God's authority with a particular political candidate or Party.

Can you imagine if the Israelite priests had used the Holy of Holies to hang banners for Pilate or Caesar? They'd have been stoned for blasphemy.
reply
0 ups
I disagree. If a particular candidate is a nasty, vile, criminal pedophile, shouldn't the pastor alert the congregation to this? If the candidate is actually a God-fearing person who is being shut out of the media, shouldn't the pastor alert the congregation to this? Our government became incredibly corrupted after churches were forced into 501(c)3 status. It's not the only factor (operation mockingbird), but it is a big one.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
I forgot to mention that in the Old Testament, God was very strict about what could be placed in the tabernacle and Holy of Holies. After Jesus fulfilled the Law, we don't have that issue anymore. No more stonings (unless you're into Sharia law).
reply
0 ups
Even Jesus said the Temple was for GOD. For PRAYER. For taking care of the spiritual needs of the people and for worshiping the Lord. He also indicated that the earthly glories of this world are in no way comparable to the eternal glory of God.

If a politician is doing something despicable and sinful the pastor can use his pulpit to talk about the sin, not about the politics. Once he's out of that building his responsibilities change. He is still a pastor, he still carries weight with his congregation, and he can support or denounce a politician like any other private citizen, but that altar is for GOD, not for his personal stance on who should vote for who.

Using his God given authority as the Shepherd of the Church body to push a particular candidate's earthy political message from the pulpit is borderline blasphemous. In using that pulpit to stump for a human political candidate you are presuming to speak FOR God and claim that God, in His infinite wisdom, totally agrees with YOUR political ideology. You're saying, "Hey, I know I'm here to feed you spiritually and lead you to the Lord, but let's talk about why you should vote for Bob Gunderson and his taxation plans."

In using the Altar of God, which is for God ALONE, to promote a politician you metaphorically make that politician and his agenda equal to God and God's agenda. You indicate that your earthly political preferences are equal to God's eternal plan. Because if the Altar of God is for GOD ALONE, and you use it to promote a temporal politician, you either bring God down to the level of the politician or you have raised that politician up to share God's spotlight.
reply
7 ups
reply
7 ups, 2 replies
I think the two cancel eachother
reply
7 ups, 1 reply
My attitude about people is, if they don't want my money, they don't have to have it.

Hey, what's your fave cake?
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
Although birthday cake is purty good.
Yours?
Lemme guess.
Redvelvet
reply
6 ups, 1 reply
Choco with choc icing, yaya!

There's this Valencia Bakery on Jerome Ave in the Bronx where we used to get our birffday cakes when we were kids. Yellow cake with layers of pineapple, white icing on top, served with vanilla ice cream on the side that came packed with a chunk of dry ice we'd put in a bucket of water and run around outside as fog rose...

That cake was friggin awesome, and we had fun with the ice....
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
When I was younger my friends and I would mess around with dry ice bombs. Dangerous but fun.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
Oh my, how did you manage that? I remember the slightest touch, yeeouch!!!

We just ran around the yard with the bucket like it was the greatest thing ever...
OH! And I'd even toss in random stuff from my chemistry set hoping to blow it up! WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!! Yes, I've always been an idiot, haha
reply
1 up, 1 reply
I can't remember if we used gloves or what, but we'd break off pieces and put them in a plastic bottle, add some water, quickly screw the lid on tight and get away quickly.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
That sounds awesome! Wish I thought of it back then, haha

One 4th of July, my friend down the block, his uncle was a cop. He got a ton of fireworks from a bust, and gave a load to his family. Since we had so much, we'd light packs of firecrackers, toss them in a garbage can (metal back then), quickly put on the lid and sit on it just to feel them muffled pings. I think he did a few M80s that way too. Good times.
reply
2 ups, 2 replies
Be honest you sat on it to stimulate your anus.
reply
1 up, 2 replies
We were kids, you zagnut...

When we were teens tho, he had a bunch of his friends from school come over on the 4th. The whole bunch bought only M80s and Bottle Rockets that year. They went to this parkway down the block and threw the M80s. I stayed away for most of that because I have sensitive hearing and them things are just way loud and they did this for hours plus I had a friend over from hs and we went home for BBQ. Whatever.

Anyways, when those ran out, we divided into two sides, and had a war with the bottle rockets, using used Roman Candle sticks left over from other people to shoot at each other. At one point my side made a charge, screaming and shooting away, but then they blasted the f**k out of us as we were out in the open, so our leader screamed, "RETREAT! RETREAT!" so we ran back.

Good times.

Are fireworks legal where you're at? Because they're not here.
2 ups
F**k yea.
Merica.
Bottle rockets
All that shiz.
I drop like 300 a year on the 4th.
2 ups
When did the make them illegal there?
That sucks!
reply
1 up
"Natalie_vance
F**k yea.
Merica.
Bottle rockets
All that shiz.
I drop like 300 a year on the 4th."

"Natalie_vance
When did the make them illegal there?
That sucks!"

Dunno, I was surprised when we took a trip to Fla way back they were legal, then I found out in PA and wherever else they're legal too.

People still got em, just had to know where.

That Giuliani asswipe tried stopping them, and finally he did one year. I was living in a apt in a crowded neighborhood (Arthur Ave/Belmont, the one in a Bronx Tale) and took the longest walk. The only thing burning was BBQ grills on the sidewalks. Quiet as hell. He even got the Mafia one they had in out neighborhood. They had block parties on the 4th with pro quality shit. Someone ratted out where they were stored days before. Assholes.

Did you call them "Jap Rockets"? Cuz that's how we called them.
reply
4 ups, 2 replies
i.imgflip.com/20qt44.jpg (click to show)
reply
3 ups
I figured this case was a result of militant SJWs buy I didn't realize how ridiculous it was. It's funny how the media doesn't report those little details.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
i.imgflip.com/2brvqh.jpg (click to show)
reply
1 up, 2 replies
Technically, it's a narrow decision because what the decision effects is "narrow". In their decision, they even said that this can't be seen as setting a legal precedent in this case, so that's why it's "narrow".
reply
2 ups
i.imgflip.com/22edi6.gif (click to show)
reply
0 ups
I'm not with you.
When You look up "narrow ruling definition" google only relates to the 'Jack Phillips Supreme Cort'-case.
pretty much a neologism - not a code term.
reply
6 ups, 1 reply
i.imgflip.com/2bnnks.jpg (click to show)
reply
4 ups, 2 replies
If a Nazi in full regalia goes into a Jewish bakery asking for a cake to be made with a big spastically on it, should the Jewish baker be forced to make it?
If a KKK member in full dress goes into an African American bakery, should the black baker be forced to serve him?
If a total jerk comes into my bakery, insulting my staff, should I be compelled to serve him?
reply
2 ups
I'm joking, of course, about using violence :)
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
What's a "spastically?"
reply
1 up
Swastica autocorrected.
reply
3 ups, 2 replies
reply
5 ups
I would be fine with that. There are other businesses that would provide services. The free market will take care of that business.
reply
4 ups
No problem. I'll find another shop.
reply
[deleted]
5 ups, 6 replies
That's all it takes.Now all a businessman has to do is claim religious belief to bar people of another ethnicity. It'll happen.
reply
6 ups, 1 reply
Do you even know why "Jim Crow" laws were passed?
It is because so many business people would have served others regardless of their race. So the government passed laws to enforce segregation.

There are so many businesses who will serve people regardless of the message they want promoted that the government does not have to pass laws to force business owners participate in speech and activities they find offensive and/or morally reprehensible.
https://youtu.be/alrcdi_VfS0?t=16s
reply
2 ups
Don't worry James, they said they were from the government and they're here to help. Don't you know that more laws are always the answer? /sarc
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
A sexual orientation is not the same as racial ethnicity.

But private businesses have the right to deny based on race. Bit they'll definitely lose their business when they have to file for a chapter 11.
reply
[deleted]
2 ups, 1 reply
Back when I first started doing stand-up, I was booked into a bar that catered predominately to African-Americans.Working word here is predominately: they were a business and the only color they looked at was the color of the patrons money.Their customers were black or white. I didn't see any Asians there, or Hispanics, but Had they entered, they would have been treated as anyone else: as a customer. The last time I was back in Ohio, I checked and it was still in business.

As long as a customer isn't disturbing the peace or harassing other customers, I see no problem in that
reply
1 up, 1 reply
It should go both ways. Some customers don't deserve the business. Being forced by the government to accept all patrons is wrong. But as you stated, if the green is all that matters, the chances of them staying in business longer are much higher.
reply
[deleted]
2 ups
True, some customers DON'T deserve the business. I've had those, and actually sold something out from under one that was being a jerk. Working a flea market back in '89, selling yard art. Woman kept hammering me down on the price of a piece of lawn art I was selling. She walked away and came back five minutes later to buy it (she never committed to buying it until then) but I'd already sold it and the last one I had in stock. For more. She was pissed. Oh well, she wasted a lot of my time. thing is I didn't refuse her due to gender, or race, or religious belief: but I did refuse her service cause she was a jerk.
reply
2 ups
America is not a religious country. Swiggy I am also scared for that, but I hope of it happens it will wake people up to how gay discrimination is comparable to black discrimination, accept it was done on a larger scale for blacks.
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
Stfu. People on the other side cry discrimination all the time and get their way.
Anyway. "Poc" are doing a great job of segregating themselves these days.
Prove me wrong.
reply
6 ups, 1 reply
They "woke"!!!
reply
3 ups, 2 replies
reply
8 ups, 2 replies
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
So she wouldn't want someone lumping all black people together, but she's fine lumping all liberals together? She sounds ignorant.
reply
5 ups, 1 reply
I prefer the term "Leftists" myself, but I can't change how other people speak. She was on the Left for a long time and got "Red Pilled" now she talks about how the political left (the side from which all the Leftists originate) uses emotion and fear to keep black people on their team.

You should listen to her talk before labeling her "ignorant." She has videos all over YouTube from 5 minute clips to hour long speeches given at colleges.
Candice Owens AKA Red Pilled Black
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
The fact that she's using MRA terminology makes her sound even more ignorant and foolish.

She lumped together everyone one the left side of the political spectrum. That's ignorant.

Also, some people on the right use emotion and fear to manipulate people.

"Gays are trying to recruit your children!"
"Atheists are trying to take prayer out of schools and ban the Bible!"
"All liberals want abortion up to nine months!"
"Democrats are Marxist socialists!"
"California is trying to outlaw the Bible!"
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
You don't have to listen to her.
You could just judge her by one quote and the terminology she use and make up your mind that she is ignorant.

That type of thinking reminds me of some of my Fundamentalist Christian friends.

BTW that's a nice list of red herrings you have there...
reply
2 ups, 2 replies
How do you generalize a single person? You gave a quote. I thought that quote made her sound dumb.

Also, those aren't red herrings. You said that she accused people on the left of using emotion and fear as a control tactic. I simply pointed out that some people on the right do it as well.
2 ups
So you dont really wanna engage in the discussion, you simply wanna have the equivalent of a "no u." And scribble out the the truth in her statement.
Typical leftist behavior.
1 up
Sweeping Generalization: Inverse of hasty generalizations: applies a general statement too broadly or infers the outcome of specific case to a broad group.

We've been talking about "taking the Red Pill" since Obama was in office almost 10 years before Cassie Jaye released her MRA movie. Being "red pilled" is a reference from the Matrix (1999) it didn't begin with the men's rights advocates.

When the topic under discussion is specific, in this context you calling Candice Owens ignorant because you generalized her and her terminology as being "MRA terminology," and instead of actually interacting what what she has to say and why you'd say that without hearing her first, you change the subject and say, "well other people do it too!" and list specific instances that is called diverting attention from the true subject so you don't have to interact with the subject/topic. That's called a red herring.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
You're not the first leftist to call her names. That's all your side has when you can't interact with her arguments.
reply
1 up, 2 replies
she is an attention seeking hypocrite, yea racism does not exist yet -

""""But that, Owens said, is the course her life took. In 2007, she accused a classmate of leaving threatening voicemails threatening to kill her and spewing graphic racist epithets.""
reply
2 ups
Malcom x would b**ch slap your candy ass. Lol
reply
1 up, 1 reply
I'd ask you for a primary/first hand source where she said, "racism doesn't exist" but in leftist land the thought you have in your mind is reality.

Yep, keep proving her right by using slander.
reply
1 up
reply
0 ups, 2 replies
Who do you know that went through this? I'll wait.
reply
1 up
reply
1 up
reply
1 up
I agree 100%. Another case of "be careful what you wish for".
reply
0 ups
Why do you have a problem with freedom of association?
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
What do you think it will be made of, love hearts and unicorns?
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
You're right.
reply
1 up, 2 replies
reply
3 ups, 2 replies
Anybody could be tempted to do that if they are being put under a lot of pressure and stress.
reply
4 ups
reply
2 ups
True
reply
2 ups
reply
1 up, 1 reply
reply
0 ups
i.imgflip.com/2ce3z2.gif (click to show)

Wait a minute, do you really believe that, or are you posting this because it is useful against Conservatives for the moment? This is how I feel about who a business owner should be able to associate with: i.imgflip.com/2bqp2p.jpg (click to show)
reply
2 ups, 2 replies
I defend them too! Gay people said it was only for marriage equality. It wasn't. It was to bully those that disagree with them. I am ashamed.
reply
2 ups
reply
1 up, 2 replies
So by your logic, black people in the 60s "bullied" whites into getting rid of segregation. You're part of the LGBT community and so am I, but you don't speak for me (and I don't speak for you, either)
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
https://youtu.be/alrcdi_VfS0?t=16s
reply
0 ups, 2 replies
In the video, he basically said that the free market would take care of discriminatory businesses.

Not all of the time. There is at least one restaurant (I think in Texas or Oklahoma) that refuses to serve any gay people. I don't see them going out of business anytime soon.

As I've said before, I don't think that businesses should be forced to serve people if they don't want to. But it's pretty hypocritical when the very same people who support the Christian bakers and photographers turn around and whine and complain when YouTube or Facebook censors their material.
reply
0 ups
Really? If that is all you got out of that video you should watch it a few more times.
reply
0 ups
Generally, when someone claims the free market will take care of discriminatory practices, it means a nondiscriminatory competitor will benefit. That doesn't mean any business who discriminates will go bankrupt. And discriminatory businesses shouldn't go bankrupt if they provide a product/service their customers buy.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Please go force Muslims into doing gay things. I would love to see that.
reply
1 up
Go back and read my other comments. I've said numerous times that business owners should *not* be forced to provide goods or services to people to whom they don't want.
reply
1 up
reply
1 up, 1 reply
reply
1 up
i.imgflip.com/2bbeia.gif (click to show)
i.imgflip.com/1qaf2e.gif (click to show)
reply
2 ups, 3 replies
*replaces gay with black* Oh uh, nevermind what I just said about finding another baker

Fcking lul dude
reply
4 ups, 2 replies
What religious beliefs would be encroached by providing a wedding cake to a balck person? Oh uh, your argument suggesting a "slippery slope" does not have merit.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Uh actually in the early 1900s Biblical interpretations of white superiority were used to keep blacks down, as they are used today on gays. It is all about the interpretation. Certainty's argument is completely reasonable.
reply
0 ups
Most Brown people around the world - Asians, Arabs, Latinos, Africans - believe gayness is an abomination. Stop being racist with your gayness.
reply
1 up, 2 replies
Google "Christian identity movement"
reply
5 ups, 1 reply
i.imgflip.com/2bqp2p.jpg (click to show)

I'm fine with racist, hateful people who claim to be Christians *segregating* themselves off from society. Why do you want those people to stay in business?

Correct me if I am wrong...Your position seems to be, "Keep the racist, segregationist, supremacist in business by using the government to force them to sell products and do business with people they don't want to. Instead of allowing the free market to put them out of business."
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
"Correct me if I am wrong..."

You're wrong.

My position is exactly the opposite. Although I find what Jack Phillips did to be disgusting and reprehensible, I believe that the law does and should protect his actions. I do not believe that businesses should be forced to sell things or provide services to people to whom they don't want. My point was that the Supreme Court decision legally protects people who would not only turn away customers based on sexual orientation if it conflicts with their religious beliefs, it also protects people who would turn away customers based on that person's race or ethnicity if it goes against the business owner's religious beliefs.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
i.imgflip.com/2bqp2p.jpg (click to show)
That's great if that is your position!
Have you read the Majority Opinion on the case to see what SCOTUS actually ruled? I've only read the highlights, but this case was a "narrow ruling" only in favor of Phillips. It did not set a precedent to be used in future "religious liberty" cases. If there is a "perceived cultural precedent" it is weak and very general. The ruling in this case would not help Barronelle Stutzman or Melissa Klein.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
I have not read the decision, but I have heard evangelical commentators discuss it, and they said the same thing you are saying. They say that worries them for that very reason.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
"I have not read the decision,"
but I have heard evangelical commentators discuss it, and they said the same thing you are saying. They say that worries them for that very reason.

Typical Leftist Behavior.
reply
0 ups
Listening to what conservative Christians have to say is typical leftist behavior?
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Ok I looked that term up. It's a bunch of people who use the word "Christian" but don't even pretend to follow the teachings of Christ. However, you would be hard pressed to find a supreme court decision that would view that movement as a religion. As such, it would receive no legal protection.

Even if it did receive legal protection, I would be fine with that since their business would not survive a free market.
reply
1 up
If you don't believe that Christian Identity adherents try to follow what the Bible says, you are sorely mistaken. They get their doctrine, values and theology straight from the Bible.

And if you don't believe the Supreme Court would classify it as a religion under the legal definition, you are very, very sorely mistaken. Say what you want about their beliefs and teachings, but it absolutely fits the legal and constitutional qualifications of a religion.

Now don't think for a moment that I'm defending them. I think they're vile garbage. But they are constitutionally protected, as they should be, like every other US citizen.
reply
2 ups
Orrrrrrrrrr replaces that with nazi?

Discriminatory and backwards, yes, but it is a private business, and if the owners have a specific religious belief with certain prohibitions, the choice is their decision and right.
reply
0 ups
https://youtu.be/alrcdi_VfS0?t=16s
reply
1 up, 1 reply
It is the same as discriminating against blacks, except sexuality is not in the civil rights laws. None of it is really about cakes but about equal opportunity. If many places will not hire you, you do not have equal opportunity to succeed, which is what America is about.
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
i.imgflip.com/2bqp2p.jpg (click to show)
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
America is a socialist society, where there are restrictions and laws to keep a civilized society.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
And equal opportunity to succeed for all people, no matter what others think of them because of race or sexual orientation.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
You just hate White people. And I hate you for it.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
That was one of the most retarded statements I have ever heard. A vast majority of American gays are white, I am white, and I said nothing about putting whites to disadvantage, but that it was great blacks were given equal opportunity.
reply
0 ups
reply
4 ups, 2 replies
reply
9 ups, 1 reply
Lizardism is a surprisingly strict religion.
reply
5 ups
reply
7 ups, 1 reply
I am a Christian and I would be fine with that. I support a business to refuse service to anyone for any stupid reason. The free market will naturally take care of that business.
reply
2 ups, 2 replies
reply
5 ups, 2 replies
Your picture is an example of a public accommodation provided by the government. I do not support the government choosing who to serve. My statement about the free market still applies and does not require a law.
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
Even if it were not a public accomodation provided by the government, the government passed the laws making segregation mandatory in all public places. People fail to understand that the free market would have reduced segregation to small businesses that would have gone out of business quickly.

If self imposed segregation were allowed today those businesses would quickly go out of business and they would have so much social stigma and they would be shunned from civil society. The non-argument that, "The KKK would shop there or frequent that establishment," doesn't understand that a business can't thrive serving only a fringe group of people who are already ostracized by civil society.
https://youtu.be/alrcdi_VfS0?t=16s
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
Hi James, thank you for expanding on my statement. I did not watch the YouTube video but I agree with the rest of your comment.
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
If you have time, look up Ben Shapiro.
reply
3 ups
Oh that's what the video was. Ok I'll take a look, I enjoy listening to him.
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
I stand corrected. If that occurred today, I would hope that people all people would boycott that business.
reply
1 up
reply
0 ups
https://youtu.be/alrcdi_VfS0?t=16s
reply
3 ups
Flip Settings

Created with the Imgflip Meme Generator

Show embed codes
EXTRA IMAGES ADDED: 1
IMAGE DESCRIPTION:
"If a baker won't bake you a cake, FIND ANOTHER BAKER. DON'T DEMAND THAT THE GOVERNMENT TELL HIM WHAT TO DO; with his private business."; ~ DAVE RUBIN
hotkeys: D = random, W = like, S = dislike, A = back
Feedback