Thanks for remaining CIVIL. I know you think this is being cordial, but it is actually merely CIVIL... We could get to the "cordial" level, but I do not see that happening for a number of reasons, many of which are not in my control.
You will need to "quote" that post, as the member is on Digital Ignore status with me. I ignored those comments, by reading past them, as long as seemed reasonable, and now do not see them, nor do I desire to see them.
Having seen other replies, however, I know there are things people recognize as ILLEGAL that have nothing to do with expressing offensive political, or religious oriented speech. That is a "strawman" though, because it is not what any of the "free speech" issues we were discussing were related to.
I am responding to the point of equating the religious freedom afforded by the law instituted under Clinton #42, and the Indiana law, to people with no religious standing or position.