Sounds like several organizations need an audit! Good thing the IRS will be adding thousands of additional agents (over the next ten years).
Not quite at the âshenanigansâ level yet but I fucking hate this headline:
Ah, yes, both sides. On the one side, you might be made to offer the same goods and services you offer to the general public to people you donât like or donât think should exist.
On the other side, because of characteristics you have no control over, you might be legally refused goods and services that are offered to everyone else.
(Edited to replace the link with the AP version. Thanks, @smulder, for the not-so-subtle but much needed kick.)
But there are so many sides, headline writer.
If you can do this to LGBT people what stops you from doing it to Christians? Methodists, Catholics, Jews, based upon race, based upon ethnicity, etc, etc, etc.
Of course, thatâs what they want. So why not just say it?
FWIW the âVoice of Americaâ is explicitly a state propaganda outlet
⌠dunno if that makes it better or worse
Oh, it was a similar headline on the AP version in the local paper and a bunch of other outlets.
I didnât even notice which one I pasted, just that it didnât seem to have a paywall. I think it was AP through and through.
ah yes, I keep looking for a raw apnews rss feed but they donât seem to do that
Gotcha. Fixed the link. My initial search mustâve been faulty. Live and learn.
no i meant for my rss reader
not your problem, no need to do anything
âSCOTUS Arguments in Anti-Gay Marriage Web Designerâs Case Filled with Questions About âHamilton,â JDate, Black Santa, and Kids in KKK Outfitsâ
SCOGARBAGE
SCROTUS.
Christ, what an asshole. Iâm not even a judge, but I can tell the difference between a chosen characteristic and the others.
One doesnât choose to be a woman, or Black, or LGBTQ, one chooses to be a NAZI.
But - theyâre wise and very serious. /s
Dahlia Lithwick Marc Josef Stern says that the âfactsâ underlying the case are entirely speculative.
Hmmm, yes. Yes I think they are.
Theyâll say that fraud acceptable to them qualifies as free speech.
He really should try both for that opinion to be definitive. As of now, when heâs experienced neither, his opinion is worthless.
I havenât heard what she said, but I hope so. I hear Roberts was skeptical too.