Comments by "D Mc" (@dmc8092) on "Mississippi Signs Off On The New Anti-LGBT Jim Crow" video.

  1. +Rachelle Armstead So, if it's not Jim Crow level we should ignore it? And what are you talking about this is enforced by the government.
    2
  2. +Rachelle Armstead It disenfranchises gay people by not giving them access to legal recourse.
    2
  3. RKAddict101 Except that it does disenfranchise gay people from legal recourse. If firemen choose that it violates their religious freedom to put out the fire in a gay couple's house that couple would have no redress through law.
    2
  4. RKAddict101 Because the couple could be outside huddling together just like a straight couple. But, in any case, the couple wouldn't have to actually be gay the firemen could just assume and sight deeply held religious beliefs. The firemen's job is to put out fires NO MATTER WHO THE OWNER is, but this law makes it so that they can, because of their religious beliefs choose not to do their job. Are you actually trying to defend this blatantly unconstitutional law?
    2
  5. RKAddict101 So you think this law is just?
    2
  6. RKAddict101 Hospitals are private businesses. Pharmacies are private businesses. You think the workers of those places should be able to pick and choose who they give service to?
    2
  7. Frank08046 But, the ones that are should be able to refuse service to gay people?
    1
  8. Frank08046 So what's the point? You said private businesses should be able to discriminate. Would you do a carve out for certain private businesses?
    1
  9. Frank08046 Sorry, I thought you were still the person I was talking to. I didn't realize that you had jumped into the conversation. But your comment was still stupid within the context of the discussion, dumbass. If you weren't defending that what was your point?
    1
  10. RafaAnto32 But they are private. Should they be allowed to refuse service?
    1
  11. RafaAnto32 So, the law is bad, right?
    1
  12. RafaAnto32 Why are you arguing with me?
    1
  13. RafaAnto32 Your argument for this horrible law is that laws don't make sense? What's the matter with you?
    1
  14. RKAddict101 Yeah, I think your ideas of what businesses that serve the public should do are stupid and that municipal governments should be able to regulate who gets to do business in their boundaries. If you don't want to serve the public then start a private club. 
    1
  15. RKAddict101 They can if they claim it's their "deeply held religious beliefs" which apparently trumps everyone else's rights. It's better that people can only be denied service based on their actions, not their race, sex or sexual orientation.
    1
  16. RKAddict101 In some of these places with open carry laws and such I wouldn't doubt some Christian would shoot someone and then get away with it because of these laws that put their beliefs above everyone else's. But, do you also believe that the Woolworth's Lunch counter was right for banning black people?
    1
  17. RKAddict101 So. Do you think hospitals should be able to turn people away. How about pharmacists? How about fire departments and county clerks? And how are we of the public to know who these places are no serving? Will they put a list of the groups of people on their doors so we'll all know? I would actually be okay with that. I want them to put "We don't serve these groups of people" on their doors and websites because that is exactly what we would need if your way of thinking is valid.
    1
  18. RKAddict101 Wow. So the whole civil rights movement was a mistake. Black people should have just accepted not being given access to things. I don't want to live in your world.
    1