Reply to Thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Dave70968" data-source="post: 3089292" data-attributes="member: 13624">I think I may have been unclear.&nbsp; I&#039;m saying those anti-discrimination statutes (on the basis of sexual orientation) were duly-enacted laws, and when the businesses in question discriminated against members of a protected class, they broke that law.Here, I see no law broken, because I don&#039;t see the protected class.&nbsp; Moreover, even if NRA membership were a protected class, I don&#039;t see where not giving them special treatment--that is, treating them exactly the same as those not in the class--would violate anti-discrimination laws.I do see potential problems with the government using the tax code as a punishment for taking a stance on a hot-button political issue, though.&nbsp; Not a guaranteed win, necessarily, but coming out and saying on the TV that &quot;we&#039;re going to raise your taxes because you offended people on a political issue&quot; is just plain dumb, and absolutely something the court can consider in any sort of challenge.I&#039;m sorry if I wasn&#039;t clear in my meaning.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Dave70968, post: 3089292, member: 13624"] I think I may have been unclear. I'm saying those anti-discrimination statutes (on the basis of sexual orientation) were duly-enacted laws, and when the businesses in question discriminated against members of a protected class, they broke that law. Here, I see no law broken, because I don't see the protected class. Moreover, even if NRA membership [I]were[/I] a protected class, I don't see where [I]not[/I] giving them special treatment--that is, treating them exactly the same as those not in the class--would violate anti-discrimination laws. I [I]do[/I] see potential problems with the government using the tax code as a punishment for taking a stance on a hot-button political issue, though. Not a guaranteed win, necessarily, but coming out and saying on the TV that "we're going to raise your taxes because you offended people on a political issue" is just plain dumb, and absolutely something the court can consider in any sort of challenge. I'm sorry if I wasn't clear in my meaning. [/QUOTE]

Verification