3 ms·
1 & 2 is a tired rhetorical trick. That's like arguing with a judge: "yeah, I was speeding 40 over the limit, but my friend's brother regularly goes 2x over the
by akomtu 5y ago
1 & 2 is a tired rhetorical trick. That's like arguing with a judge: "yeah, I was speeding 40 over the limit, but my friend's brother regularly goes 2x over the limit!"
3 & 4 - I'm not sure if 1A applies to businesses. Does it mean businesses have right to petition the gov and demand change? Does it apply to businesses owned by foreign entities? I doubt it. On paper, nobody retaliated: legislature simply reconsidered some old statute.
My opinion is that Disney crossed the line here, but Florida's response is awkward and doesn't achieve much.
- olliej 5y ago1 & 2 is not, That's like arguing with a judge: "I don't believe it is fair for me to have got a ticket because my car had a bumper sticker with a pride flag" 3 & 4 - The GOP has consistently stated that the 1st amendment applies to businesses, which is why laws forcing news to, for example, be fair and balanced, are illegal. The GOP has also argued businesses have religious freedom, and so can fire people for being LGBTQ if it goes against the owners "sincerely held religious beliefs".