Secular Nazis...

[tabibito]

You continue to miss the point that the issue is specific to the protection of the constitutional principle of separation of state and church in the context of a facility (the restaurant) which, according to the federal Civil Rights Act, is a ‘public accommodation’ as defined in the Act. It has no relevance to “senior citizens”, “gender-based discounts”, general assemblies or any other red herring group you choose to nominate unless they too come under the purveu of the Act.

Places of public accommodation are not the state unless the state itself is running them. How can this separation of church and state be said to exist when the state imposes regulations on the church that it does not impose on other associations?

[Teallaura]

You continue to miss the point that the issue is specific to the protection of the constitutional principle of separation of state and church in the context of a facility (the restaurant) which, according to the federal Civil Rights Act, is a ‘public accommodation’ as defined in the Act. It has no relevance to “senior citizens”, “gender-based discounts”, general assemblies or any other red herring group you choose to nominate unless they too come under the purveu of the Act.

Idiot, gender and age are categories covered under the CRA. So yeah, if a faith based discount is unconstitutional then an age or gender based discount would also be unconstitutional. But neither are because a DISCOUNT isn't ACCESS. The CRA regulates access - only if a discount interferes with access (which this doesn't) would it come under the CRA.

Your knowledge of law is singularly unimpressive.

[Darth Executor]

Don't you dare call those people my 'peers' ever again.

Are you a wealthy industrialist?

[Epoetker]

Are you a wealthy industrialist?

No, but I understand them enough to know that, unlike their forebears 100 years ago, who may have had actual friends and relatives in affected areas, most now have absolutely no problem with either hunkering down in whitopias or leaving the country if their actions cause their neighborhoods to look like Compton.

After all, when all you consider morally worth fighting for is the fortunes of your immediate family, you can throw the rest of your people and any friends you made growing up under the bus. As it was for Jews, so shall it be for whites.

[Darth Executor]

No, but I understand them enough to know that, unlike their forebears 100 years ago, who may have had actual friends and relatives in affected areas, most now have absolutely no problem with either hunkering down in whitopias or leaving the country if their actions cause their neighborhoods to look like Compton.

After all, when all you consider morally worth fighting for is the fortunes of your immediate family, you can throw the rest of your people and any friends you made growing up under the bus. As it was for Jews, so shall it be for whites.

Their forebears 100 years ago had no more trouble with unleashing misery on their countrymen than they do today. They had less, actually, since they were more than happy to fight a brutal war for it whereas today's upper class undesirables largely stick to social engineering.