- Joined
- Jul 21, 2005
- Messages
- 51,719
- Reaction score
- 35,498
- Location
- Washington, DC
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
The Civil Rights Act keeps a local government from doing that. There is no similar act that is specific to supporting a political or ideological movement.
The equal protection clause does however protect Religious discrimination at an equal level as Racial discrimination, and at the very least an argument can be made here that the issue is at least in part motivated due to a desire to punish for a RELIGIOUS belief (for example, note the outrage over the fact he suggested it'd cause "god's wrath").
As fun as it is for some people, such as in this thread, to degrade and deride those that believe in a "sky-fairy"....being discriminated against for religious beliefs is no more lawful than discriminating against one for the color of their skin.
Now, you could say that "Well, they may have issues with his religious views, but it's ultimately his stance on a political issue / support of a group that's a problem".
In which case, change the other individuals statement from "because he's black" to "because he supports affirmative action laws" or "because he supports the naacp" or something else that's not DIRECTLY because of his race but rather because of his political view / support for a group.
Now, I agree with your latter post abou tnot knowing how it'd be ruled in court. I can see the argument. And I think on a technicality you could easily work it where the government could do a work around where their motivation is to punish due to political/religious views but does so through legitimate means. That doesn't change the fact that I would find that unethical, regardless if it was Chick-Fil-A in Chicago/Boston or the Mosque near ground zero.
Pressure by people is one thing....the use of government force, to me, is something entirely different
Last edited: