re: If you're wondering what's going on in Minnesota

quote:

---

I think it's stupid and don't agree with their decision, and this is coming from an outspoken atheist and would not shop at a place that did this, but if you believe in private property, idiot property owners should have the ability to do dumb things on it and shoppers can then determine if they want to shop there.

---

And we should know about it and punish them for it as buyers. We don't have to ignore their stupidity.

So the 1st Amendment only applies when one is not a Christian.

Got it.

The mall is private property so it is their call...

Have you never read one sentence of actual law?
Civil rights of 1964?
Ku Klux Klan act of 1871?

You have the right to full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services,
facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of
public accommodation.

What is a public accommodation?
While a facility may be owned privately, does not automatically make it an independent law making body, that can deny equal access, enjoyment, and use of the facility.

You would do well to educate yourself on what actually is law, and what is actually supposition.

While hospitals, nothing else appearing, would appear not to be within the meaning of the term "public accommodation" as used in the statute1 prohibiting discrimination or segregation in public accommodations,2 a hospital that contained a snack bar was held to be a covered establishment under the Title II provision3 prohibiting discrimination or segregation in noncovered establishments which either contain or are contained within covered establishments.4


Rogers v. Provident Hospital, 241 F. Supp. 633 (N.D. Ill. 1965).
As to public accommodations under the Americans with Disabilities Act, see Am. Jur. 2d, Americans with Disabilities Act §§ 627 to 647.

You can be an atheist all you want, that doesn't resolve you from actually knowing the law or the responsibility thereof.

Way too many people in current society believe they know something, when in fact they no nothing...kinda like your assertion that you are an atheist that believes in nothing, however, you have an inner held conviction of atheism, which is a protected activity...

The Free Exercise Clause does not merely extend to the protection of orthodox religious beliefs and practices but also protects unorthodox religious beliefs and most practices13 and the right to hold no religious belief, as well.14

U.S. v. Ballard, 322 U.S. 78, 64 S. Ct. 882, 88 L. Ed. 1148 (1944); Follett v. Town of McCormick, S.C., 321 U.S. 573, 64 S. Ct. 717, 88 L. Ed. 938, 152 A.L.R. 317 (1944); Murdock v. Com. of Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105, 63 S. Ct. 870, 87 L. Ed. 1292, 146 A.L.R. 81 (1943).
City ordinances which regulated the practice of animal sacrifice but which effectively prohibited only animal sacrifice as practiced by the Saneria religion were violative of the Free Exercise Clause. Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. City of Hialeah, 508 U.S. 520, 113 S. Ct. 2217, 124 L. Ed. 2d 472 (1993).