Login or register


Last status update:
Gender: male
Date Signed Up:9/09/2010
Last Login:7/30/2016
FunnyJunk Career Stats
Comment Ranking:#14304
Highest Comment Rank:#5874
Comment Thumbs: 878 total,  1351 ,  473
Content Level Progress: 6.77% (4/59)
Level 0 Content: Untouched account → Level 1 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 40% (4/10)
Level 168 Comments: Soldier Of Funnyjunk → Level 169 Comments: Soldier Of Funnyjunk
Total Comments Made:335
FJ Points:661

latest user's comments

#21 - He attacked someone you idiot 07/09/2016 on Listen Here, Whitey +14
#49 - That is a Lebel. Not a Springfield. 05/11/2016 on War Never Changes +1
#41 - Talkin **** on sweet tea you limey **** I'll put you in the **… 04/22/2016 on RIP in peace +5
#5 - IM just going to point out that the religious freedom law enac…  [+] (9 new replies) 04/04/2016 on Insanity has a face... +96
User avatar
#37 - murpmurp (04/04/2016) [-]
wait!!! did the religious freedom bill enact in GA?
User avatar
#33 - thelastamerican (04/04/2016) [-]
We have the same laws in Kentucky. If a person can prove that they were denied service because of discrimination, they have a case, but if you go to a bakery and ask for a cake and the owner says, sorry we can't, there isn't anything you can do about it.
User avatar
#40 - reginleif (04/04/2016) [-]
I think if they suspect something they tend to send a bunch of people in to your store, some meeting the discriminated class and others being "normal" (not discriminated) they then sue you based off that.

I'm not entirely sure.
User avatar
#42 - thelastamerican (04/04/2016) [-]
I forget the term, but that could easily be thrown out due to(something like) entrapment unless the entire process is filmed. The plaintiff has control over the setting that they send in their people in order to 'prove' that he business is discriminating. They can flood the place with orders, then send in the bait customer, and guarantee a predictable outcome for instance.
User avatar
#8 - dangler (04/04/2016) [-]
Same in Mississippi.

It also protects business owners from being forced to operate under conditions which go against their religious beliefs.
User avatar
#14 - vortexrain (04/04/2016) [-]
What if serving an inter-racial couple is against their religious beliefs?
Is it not illegal to not serve based on a person's race?
User avatar
#38 - dangler (04/04/2016) [-]
The idea is that capitalism will take care of discrimination now that racism is no longer prolific. People have the right to refuse service for whatever reason; they'll be the ones losing the business.
User avatar
#27 - lean (04/04/2016) [-]
The burden of proof then remains upon the person who was refused service to prove discrimination was a factor. It's a fine line
#7 - tankthefrank (04/04/2016) [-]
fucking THANK YOU
#18 - As an american i have to say my guns are never in the kitchen.… 03/15/2016 on Breakfast +1
#8 - Want to drink some Bailey's out of a boot. 11/30/2015 on Struck by lightning 0
#13 - Gonna* 11/11/2015 on So this is a thing now 0
#12 - Comment deleted 11/11/2015 on So this is a thing now 0
#11 - I feel like a lot of stupid upper middle class white kids are …  [+] (1 new reply) 11/11/2015 on So this is a thing now 0
User avatar
#13 - cheezbrgr (11/11/2015) [-]
#825 - I recently moved to Arkansas. Left the friends I've had since … 11/07/2015 on hey FJ, how's your life... 0

user's friends