Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

http://www.clickorlando.com/news/owner- ... e/34270608" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"PROFILING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Thankfully, Obama is taking steps to secure our nation from armed terrorists...

The problem I have with Muslims is the problem I have with other religious, be it Catholic, Jew or "Christian"or whatever... If you wear it on your sleeve and want to force it on everyone around you, get the fuck away from me.

andy7171 wrote:The problem I have with Muslims is the problem I have with other religious, be it Catholic, Jew or "Christian"or whatever... If you wear it on your sleeve and want to force it on everyone around you, get the fuck away from me.

OK, Andy!

That also includes the rest of you fucks trying to tell me what to believe.

I also said "Christian" because I have run into several people who tell me I'm not one if I'm a Catholic. I don't understand, nor care to, figure out all the divisions of the Protestants. I just lump them into one and punch them if they wear orange on St. Patricks Day.

It's his shop, let him do what he pleases. I don't agree with it but hey, it's a free country.



Or at least it used to be.

kalm wrote:

andy7171 wrote:The problem I have with Muslims is the problem I have with other religious, be it Catholic, Jew or "Christian"or whatever... If you wear it on your sleeve and want to force it on everyone around you, get the fuck away from me.

OK, Andy!

Ooooohhhh! Atheists!!

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJ882QYzr-M[/youtube]

andy7171 wrote:That also includes the rest of you fucks trying to tell me what to believe.

I also said "Christian" because I have run into several people who tell me I'm not one if I'm a Catholic. I don't understand, nor care to, figure out all the divisions of the Protestants. I just lump them into one and punch them if they wear orange on St. Patricks Day.

No one here telling you what to believe. We do though inform you your beliefs are stupid and the product of child abuse and brainwashing.

Ibanez wrote:It's his shop, let him do what he pleases. I don't agree with it but hey, it's a free country.



Or at least it used to be.

Public Store. Can't discriminate based on race, gender or religion. What he is doing is unconstitutional.


Funny how the gun-humpers think that the Constitution only consists of the 2nd Amendment.

dbackjon wrote:

Ibanez wrote:It's his shop, let him do what he pleases. I don't agree with it but hey, it's a free country.



Or at least it used to be.

Public Store. Can't discriminate based on race, gender or religion. What he is doing is unconstitutional.


Funny how the gun-humpers think that the Constitution only consists of the 2nd Amendment.

It's owned or run by the government?

Ibanez wrote:

dbackjon wrote:

Public Store. Can't discriminate based on race, gender or religion. What he is doing is unconstitutional.


Funny how the gun-humpers think that the Constitution only consists of the 2nd Amendment.

It's owned or run by the government?

Doesn't matter. It is open to the public. He can fly a Christian Flag, A KKK banner etc. But can not deny service to anyone based on race, religion or gender.

dbackjon wrote:

Ibanez wrote: It's owned or run by the government?

Doesn't matter. It is open to the public. He can fly a Christian Flag, A KKK banner etc. But can not deny service to anyone based on race, religion or gender.

I thought private businesses could deny service.

Ibanez wrote:

dbackjon wrote:
Doesn't matter. It is open to the public. He can fly a Christian Flag, A KKK banner etc. But can not deny service to anyone based on race, religion or gender.

I thought private businesses could deny service.

Not on that basis, if they are open to the general public.

Denied based upon looks.

travelinman67 wrote:Denied based upon looks.

How many guns have you bought from this asshole?

travelinman67 wrote:

kalm wrote:
OK, Andy!

Ooooohhhh! Atheists!!

They're not atheists you twit!

Their religion is a legit as any.

dbackjon wrote:

Ibanez wrote: I thought private businesses could deny service.

Not on that basis, if they are open to the general public.

Only because SCOTUS has re-written the Commerce Clause, without the prerogative to do so.

Shhhh, CG...I don't think Dback sees how steep and slippery the slope has become.

travelinman67 wrote:Shhhh, CG...I don't think Dback sees how steep and slippery the slope has become.

In your opinion. Most Americans see that as a valid use, and under the Federal Government's purvey, since states have continually shown they are incapable of protecting civil rights.


Oh, and the 14th Amendment.



And what slippery slope? What about making sure that public businesses are open to all gives you nightmares?

dbackjon wrote:

travelinman67 wrote:Shhhh, CG...I don't think Dback sees how steep and slippery the slope has become.

In your opinion. Most Americans see that as a valid use, and under the Federal Government's purvey, since states have continually shown they are incapable of protecting civil rights.


Oh, and the 14th Amendment.



And what slippery slope? What about making sure that public businesses are open to all gives you nightmares?

TRUMPmanfail6.93

dbackjon wrote:

travelinman67 wrote:Shhhh, CG...I don't think Dback sees how steep and slippery the slope has become.

In your opinion. Most Americans see that as a valid use, and under the Federal Government's purvey, since states have continually shown they are incapable of protecting civil rights.


Oh, and the 14th Amendment.



And what slippery slope? What about making sure that public businesses are open to all gives you nightmares?

Most Americans see that as a valid use? Well, most American can't identify all fifty (or fifty-seven) states.

The Commerce Clause is now used to regulate things that are neither interstate or commerce. So, fuck most Americans.

CitadelGrad wrote:

dbackjon wrote:

In your opinion. Most Americans see that as a valid use, and under the Federal Government's purvey, since states have continually shown they are incapable of protecting civil rights.


Oh, and the 14th Amendment.



And what slippery slope? What about making sure that public businesses are open to all gives you nightmares?

Most Americans see that as a valid use? Well, most American can't identify all fifty (or fifty-seven) states.

The Commerce Clause is now used to regulate things that are neither interstate or commerce. So, fuck most Americans.

I think most Americans say Fuck you to people like you, and the country is better for it.

Ibanez wrote:It's his shop, let him do what he pleases. I don't agree with it but hey, it's a free country.



Or at least it used to be.

Yes. That's the way it SHOULD be. People engaging in commerce on either side of any transaction should be free to engage in commerce with anyone they want to or opt NOT to engage in commerce with anyone they want to.

But, unfortunately, that's not how it is. Somewhere along the way a critical mass of people in this country lost sight of the idea that the point is liberty.

Public Store. Can't discriminate based on race, gender or religion. What he is doing is unconstitutional.

It's not unconstitutional. It's contrary to Judicial Oligarchy Decree. There is nothing in the Constitution that legitimately gives government the power to tell that guy who he can and/or cannot engage in commerce with. Nothing.

I saw the thing about most Americans thinking giving the Federal government such power is a valid use. It's not a valid use. I think it would be more correct to say that most Americans don't have a clue and/or just focus on the ends. That's why we don't follow the Constitution anymore. It's a factor in the People tolerating what the Judiciary has been doing.