Search results for query: *

Absent a public accommodation law, yes. Public accommodation laws were conceived to prohibit certain kinds of private discrimination. The point, though, is the legislature had to pass legislation to prohibit certain kinds of private discrimination since such discrimination was not by default...

And the “actual expression” in the Jackson Pollock art work below is what? Arguably none. So, no speech protection for those paintings?

Yet, the 14th amendment doesn’t forbid private discrimination. Neither does the 14th amendment mandate the state governments to prohibit private discrimination. States can pass public accommodation laws but there isn’t a 14th amendment mandate to do so. So, by way of example, she (the web...

And you ruined a very good reading of what I said with the adorably hyperbolic phrase “womb slavery.” That was sophistry. Much like it was sophistry to use the word “parasite” in regards to the fetus and someone on the same side of the issue as you called you out on that one.

Well, try focusing on the plain language of what was said, rather than resorting to ostentation by the use of the word “diagram” in the phrase “unable to diagram this sentence” for the purpose of casting aspersions. What exactly do you not understand what was said?

Except I’m not “attacking the precedent” of Roe. I am addrsssing rather poor arguments to defend Roe. To be clear, if SCOTUS reverses Roe it will be on the basis of rejecting what is known as Substantive Due Process. Substantive Due Process is and has been the vehicle by which the Court has...

I agree. However, I am not an advocate for and do not advocate religious morality should be codified on the basis it is their religious belief. I am very much more aligned with a Libertian notion of generally what a person does with their body, and doesn’t affect others physically or others’...

My god, no donation is “analogous” because donation of an organ IS complete loss of the bodily organ but neither a pregnancy or Roe requires a woman to lose or risk loss of an organ. Hence, your “donation” of an organ by order of the State isn’t analogous and doesn’t follow from a reversal of...

Arguing a reversal of Roe leads to the result of forced organ donation on the unstated premise Roe forbids the State from telling a woman she must allow a fetus to use her body and its organs, is “perfectly good arguments”? If you think that is a good argument, tell me how and why. A reversal...

Perhaps. I’m not familiar enough with any data to speak positively as to what “People” do. The same is true for me regarding “(many) women,” and such quantities really isn’t relevant anyway. This isn’t an argument or dialogue by numbers or grouping. Rhea made a specific argument and it wasn’t...

Perhaps I am. Perhaps I am and you do not know it. Perhaps your speculation as to what I’m “well versed” isn’t sound argumentation or reasoning. Why is it people who have a damn narrative have to adhere to their narrative although it’s fraught with poor resoning, and defensively speculate what...

Oh? So you think your act of telling me what you’ve said is “objective morality” makes it “objective morality”? No, you have told me what you personally think is morality but that doesn’t make what you’ve said or spoke about “objective” and it doesn’t render your subject matter as “objective...

You aren’t being asked to prove a negative. You have been asked to prove an affirmative claim. You’ve assumed a universal morality, a morality that exists objectively and independently of human existence, tantamount to a law of nature. That’s your burden to show it exists. First, to address...

This very likely violates the Colorado public accommodation law, since “creed” is protected and your remark of “racist” is a reference to the racist “creed” of the KKK. Yes, a generalized “threatened” and nonexistent “hostile” environment as the basis to deny service to a group of people you...

But their “creed” is protected under Colorado law, the same Colorado law protecting transgender.

But their “creed” is protected under Colorado law.

It isn’t rational to think you’ve “called out” anyone by abandoning the plain text meaning of two separate phrases, expressed with separate words, and thereby expressing two separate points. And it isn’t unreasonable because you say so, more famed channeling of Des Cartes, “I think, therefore I...

Or maybe this is about your bigotry, as you unyielding declare what is moral, what isn’t morality, and what is freedom and what isn’t freedom, for everyone else, and command they bend to your personal views.

Says the person shifting the burden. No, you are burden shifting again. You are asking me to A) Refute something you haven’t shown to exist, a universal morality parallel to laws of nature. You ASSUME “must be harm and a victim” is a universal moral necessity, but you have no evidence to...

Burden shift much? It makes sense to you for someone to prove something doesn’t exist? That’s what you asking me to do, to “prove” a universal morality doesn’t exist. How does one prove with evidence the non-existence of something? Of course there isn’t going to be any evidence of existence if...