Mopac

Ok, well, congratulations on that Bible thing, it certainly seems to be popular, I hope you're getting a bunch of royalties.

And, by the way, what did you base it on?  Were there any underlying principles or first and second order axioms or did you just make it all up off the cuff?

You’ve probably seen these signs at restaurants: “We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone.” Or, “No shirt, no shoes, no service.”

But what do these signs really mean? Can a business just refuse service to someone? Can they throw you out if you forgot your flip-flops on the beach? When is a refusal to serve someone justified and when is it discrimination that could lead to a lawsuit? [LINK]

Sure, sure, they can do all of these things, as long as they don't discriminate or advocate violence.

I'm sure there are plenty of gun owning minorities and gays who hate other minorities and gays just as much as anyone and would love to join.

Making a law that says, "everybody play nice" is not going to jeopardize my freedom in any way whatsoever. 

“The Equality Act would gut religious freedom protections — even the freedom currently enjoyed by houses of worship,” the letter argues.
“Under its changes to the employment nondiscrimination provisions in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, some houses of worship would be barred from ensuring their leaders and other employees abide by their beliefs about marriage, sexual behavior, and the distinction between the sexes.”
The leaders warn that women who identify as men would have to be accepted as men and be “potentially eligible to serve in positions reserved for men,” such as a Catholic priest or Jewish rabbi.
The conservative leaders warn that religious employers who fall under Title VII law could be forced to offer insurance coverage for hormone therapy, sex reassignment surgery or other procedures that violate their consciences.   
“[T]he Equality Act would expressly do away with the Religious Freedom Restoration Act’s application to its provisions, thereby precluding any religious freedom claims which clergy or others might bring,” the letter adds. “Under such restrictions, the pathway for the gospel would slowly be closed off.”
While the Equality Act has been praised and supported by LGBT activists and Democrats, conservative-leaning think tanks and legal organizations have voiced concerns that the bill would impact those who don’t affirm the gender ideology pushed in the bill.
The Equality Act was reintroduced by Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi in March. Critics have contended that it could compel speech, lead to the closing of nonprofit adoption and foster care providers, allow biological men to compete in women’s sporting events and even coerce medical professionals to do procedures that go against their consciences.
As some parents have already lost custodyfor their refusal to support a child’s wishes for gender transition, critics feel such a situation will become more common if the Equality Act were to pass.
In an op-ed this week, Perkins, a Baptist pastor, stressed the fact that the Equality Act expands the meaning of the 1964 Civil Rights Act to include “pregnancy, childbirth, or a related medical condition.”
“In other words, under the terms of this proposal, ‘pregnancy, childbirth, or a related medical condition’ shall not receive less favorable treatment than other physical conditions,” Perkins wrote.
“Under this big new umbrella of ‘discrimination,’ any American who doesn’t want to fund, offer, perform, or participate in abortion on demand will have no real choice. They can conform — or they can be punished.

the disadvantage of not being white, is just another name for white privilege. a rose by any other name would smell as sweet. damn it, logic! it will do that to ya.