Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill
Because the governemnt has a legitimate interest in a smoothly running society. Discrimination based on race, sex, etc. tends to be disruptive. That aside, private individuals running a commerical business should be required to provide service to all, but not contracts.
When applied to say gay marriage it could be:
-Cake baker must serve gays, blacks, native americans, whites, asians etc by allowing them to buy cakes at his store.
-Cake baker does not need to accept a contract to customize a cake saying "Adam and Steve are married"
Rather, gays are just sold a cake and they can put what they want on it. Likewise, neo confedrates can shop for and buy a t-shirt from the black T-shirt printer. But, he can decline a contract to customize it with the CSA battle flag.
is government here to feed, cloth, put shelter over your head, force you to behave in a moral fashion.........no
government is instituted to secure rights of the people, ..which is the fundamental law of the u.s.....the DOI
if rights did not need to be secured, governments would not need to exist,...James Madison--"if men were angels no government would be necessary"
since rights being secure is the fundamental basis of government's existence , then how can government use force on people who have not infringed on another person rights [which is a crime], or violated health and saftey laws [business regulation]?
all your explaining to me is......... because someone would be mad at another person, and have his feelings hurt, and government needs to force people to do business with people they do not wish to.......feelings are not protected by Constitutions.
their is no right to be served, ......however every citizen does have right to property, and right to association, ....these are rights, so tell me how government can violate those rights of the people, just because they don't like how someone behaves, which is not unlawful.
our constitution is written for government only, and
it states clearly the government cannot use force on a citizen to make him serve another citizen, unless a crime has been committed.....discrimination is not a crime.
the court case in CO, was an administrative law case, with an administrative judge presiding over it.
again...how can government use force on anyone to do something they do not wish to do, if they have committed no crime or not endangered anyone, ...by the fundamental laws of our nation, ..............government has no authority to do........... anything on the matter of discrimination between private citizens/business.
