1. These businesses would have to show how catering a gay marriage is in contrast to their religion AND that will open up how the business is run. If the business can't show that their faith is part of other operations they are hosed. Because yes the courts will go there. If you are Christian you better not be picking and choosing what parts of the religion you practice when it comes to dealing with the public. I can't wait till when a journalist finds one of these places open on a Sunday for example
2. The GOP needs to distance it's self from this issue. This thing is a loser of an issue in 2016.
"and why would a black person want to be driven on a bus where the driver didnt want them?"
That was you in post #1694 the very first mention by you of a bus at all....Notice no "private" in there at all....And following the line of postings before that, clearly IMHO, you injected this analogy to disingenuously tie this argument of this thread to the civil rights struggles of the past.
As to your assertion that public transit systems are sometimes privately operated, I found this:
"Public transport bus operation is differentiated from other bus operation by the fact the owner or driver of a bus is employed by or contracted to an organisation whose main public duty or commercial interest is to provide a public transport service for passengers to turn up and use, rather than fulfilling private contracts between the bus operator and user. Public transport buses are operated as a common carrier under a contract of carriage between the passenger and the operator.
The owners of public transport buses may be the municipal authority or transit authority that operates them, or they may be owned by individuals or private companies who operate them on behalf of the authorities on a franchise or contract basis."
Public transport bus service - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Which would lead me to cede the point to you also, until you read this:
"The massive subsidies that were granted to US and Canadian railroads are an example of state intervention. In the early 20th the overprovision of rail lines, competition between carriers and market failures led to a crisis in many parts of the transport industry, particularly after 1918. This led to a growing degree of government involvement in the transport industry, both to offset market failures, jurisdictional conflicts and to ensure that services could be maintained for the sake of the "public good":
In many cities private bus companies were taken over by municipally controlled transit commissions in the 1930s and 1940s.
The airline industries in many countries were placed under the control of a national public carrier, for example Air France, Trans Canada Airlines, and British Overseas Airways Corporation.
Railways were nationalized in Europe after World War Two, and in the US, after the collapse of the Penn Central Railroad and several other lines, a publicly-funded passenger system (Amtrak) was set up, and a publicly owned freight railroad was established (Conrail)."
"Urban transit systems remain dominantly publically owned and operated. Intercity is mostly private, which brings the question about if city transportation would gain to be privatized."
So I stand by my claim that most urban public transportation services are publicly owned, and operated...
Did we clear that up, and can now move back on topic?
"I believe that man will not merely endure: he will prevail. He is immortal, not because he alone among creatures has an inexhaustible voice, but because he has a soul, a spirit capable of compassion and sacrifice and endurance." William Faulkner
"A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt
Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.
So if I believe that abortion on demand is immoral, the law says that I am required to cater a Planned Parenthood fundraiser? Is that what you're saying? I don't have the right of refusal?