Political Forums  

Go Back   Political Forums > Politicalchat.org discussion boards > History
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

We appreciate your help

in keeping this site going.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-08-2017, 10:05 PM
donquixote99's Avatar
donquixote99 donquixote99 is offline
Ready
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 19,174
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pio1980 View Post
An aside, bakers and florists claiming a religious exemption to the requirement for equal accommodation of goods and services.
By law, the requirement exists, but its also possible that demands could be made for goods and services strictly as harassment and intimidation. For instance, custom pastries and floral arrangements for people and groups hostile to the people providing the service, which goes way beyond simply extending the reciprocal courtesy of not requesting something from someone who in good concience feels they cannot provide the service.
How should this be adjudicated?
Harassment like you describe certainly wrong, if and when it happens. But at least the harassed providers would get paid. If the whole thing stops being an issue, the motivation for any such harassment goes away, I think. Don't think we need to complicate the law here.
__________________
If you Love Liberty, you must Hate Trump!
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-09-2017, 06:11 AM
donquixote99's Avatar
donquixote99 donquixote99 is offline
Ready
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 19,174
Well, second-amendment people regard self-defense as a natural right, and many would put hunting in that category as well. One thus has a right to the necessary means. In the case of self-defense, it is typically pointed out that a defender should not have to face a better-armed criminal.
__________________
If you Love Liberty, you must Hate Trump!
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-09-2017, 06:39 AM
Pio1980's Avatar
Pio1980 Pio1980 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: NE Bamastan
Posts: 11,070
I don't know that hunting game is a "natural" right any more than impregnating any female slower than a given males' ability to catch them is a natural right. Otherwise, Wildlife husbandry is an important aspect to any permitted responsible hunting program and I have no objections whatsover to fostering responsible mentoring of such.

There is something fundamentally wrong with having to defend oneself mainly against fellow citizens because the culture and laws give them unlimited access to offensive arms. Unfortunately, that is my reason for keeping them here. Someone will always be better armed, but just a Mossberg and buckshot is formidable home defense against most in the event of a hostile confrontation. Scalia saw the right to own and use a handgun for household defense under the 2nd, nothing further.
__________________
I'll believe corporations are people when Texas executes one.

Last edited by Pio1980; 10-09-2017 at 12:22 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:48 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.