Indiana Religious Liberties law....

24567…12

Comments

  • hedonist
    hedonist Posts: 24,524
    Jason P said:

    The one good thing about this is that Pence pretty just much set his hut on fire. He is the reason I voted for this guy to be my governor ...

    image

    Monsieur P (if that is your real name!)
    image
    You have been missed.
    Also, I believe I've previously mentioned my love of Rupert. What a good guy. Need more of him.

    (not literally, but still...)
  • josevolution
    josevolution Posts: 31,827
    BS44325 said:

    Yeah...you're right...my bad. Let's put sanctions on Indiana but let's lift them on Iran.

    But why do you have to bring Iran into this discussion again Iran has zero to do with Indiana & this law ...
    jesus greets me looks just like me ....
  • BS44325
    BS44325 Posts: 6,124
    josevolution said:

    BS44325 said:

    Yeah...you're right...my bad. Let's put sanctions on Indiana but let's lift them on Iran.

    But why do you have to bring Iran into this discussion again Iran has zero to do with Indiana & this law ...
    Because gay rights should be fought for everywhere not just where it is convenient
  • josevolution
    josevolution Posts: 31,827
    BS44325 said:

    josevolution said:

    BS44325 said:

    Yeah...you're right...my bad. Let's put sanctions on Indiana but let's lift them on Iran.

    But why do you have to bring Iran into this discussion again Iran has zero to do with Indiana & this law ...
    Because gay rights should be fought for everywhere not just where it is convenient
    I agree but this is about this law in Indiana , just start another thread about Iran ok so tell me what do you think about this law
    jesus greets me looks just like me ....
  • rgambs
    rgambs Posts: 13,576
    BS44325 said:

    josevolution said:

    BS44325 said:

    Yeah...you're right...my bad. Let's put sanctions on Indiana but let's lift them on Iran.

    But why do you have to bring Iran into this discussion again Iran has zero to do with Indiana & this law ...
    Because gay rights should be fought for everywhere not just where it is convenient
    That is a huge stretch right there. This is a domestic situation of interstate commerce and you can't legitimately compare that to the inner workings of a sovereign nation. The negotiations taking place have nothing to do with the Indiana problem, unless you live in Hannityland.
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • rgambs
    rgambs Posts: 13,576
    If the US boycotted all nations with unsatisfactory civil rights there wouldn't be much commerce happening.
    There is also a huge difference in a private business boycotting a state and the government doing so. I doubt Salesforce does much business with Iran.
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • Drowned Out
    Drowned Out Posts: 6,056
    rgambs said:

    If the US boycotted all nations with unsatisfactory civil rights there wouldn't be much commerce happening.
    There is also a huge difference in a private business boycotting a state and the government doing so. I doubt Salesforce does much business with Iran.

    This^. It's so obvious I didn't bother with the reply yesterday. Sanctions against rival nations are purely political and have nothing to do with fighting for rights. Warmongers and their double standards... phony righteousness. Thanks gambs
  • BS44325
    BS44325 Posts: 6,124
    Drowned Out said:

    rgambs said:

    If the US boycotted all nations with unsatisfactory civil rights there wouldn't be much commerce happening.
    There is also a huge difference in a private business boycotting a state and the government doing so. I doubt Salesforce does much business with Iran.

    This^. It's so obvious I didn't bother with the reply yesterday. Sanctions against rival nations are purely political and have nothing to do with fighting for rights. Warmongers and their double standards... phony righteousness. Thanks gambs
    Yeah again my bad. Phony Righteousness. Let's lift all sanctions and give these guys nukes.

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/08/12/iran-s-new-gay-executions.html

  • rgambs
    rgambs Posts: 13,576
    Did you read that before posting?
    "when Iran persecutes gay people, conservatives in the United States suddenly become enamored of gay rights—and bash the Obama administration for not doing enough to defend them."
    "Even as conservatives fight LGBT equality at home, Puar says, they champion it overseas—as long as it serves their interests to do so."
    "For all these reasons, don’t expect the Obama administration, or the LGBT movement, to raise a hue and cry over this latest travesty of justice. As horrifying as this tragedy is, we might only be able to make it worse."

    Seems like the article is pointing out some of the phony righteousness you are denying...?
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • Asterisk on the Street
    Asterisk on the Street Posts: 850
    Bentleyspop said:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2015/03/26/gay-rights-groups-criticize-indiana-religious-liberties-law/

    Indiana Gov. Mike Pence (R) signed a religious liberties bill into law Thursday that has been criticized by gay rights groups as a “license to discriminate.”

    The Religious Freedom Restoration Act will prevent state and local governments from imposing a “substantial burden” on a person’s free exercise of religion, unless the government can prove that there is a compelling reason to do so. It mirrors a federal law enacted in 1993, and similar statutes on the books in 19 states.

    But critics say it could pave the way for open discrimination against gay, bisexual and transgender people, giving business owners, landlords and others the right to refuse service to gays under the guise of religious protection.
    ...
    “This bill is not about discrimination, and if I thought it legalized discrimination in any way in Indiana, I would have vetoed it,” Pence said in a statement, adding that it will “ensure that Indiana will continue to be a place where we respect freedom of religion.”

    This law IS discrimination in its purest form. It is legally allowing one person at his/her discretion to allow or deny service to another person. The fact that the decision to allow or deny is based solely on the first person’s religious beliefs does not change that it is, indeed, discrimination.


  • bootlegger10
    bootlegger10 Posts: 16,263
    Personally, I think the governor of Indiana should spend his time on job creation, education, infrastructure, public safety and a balanced budget.

    Have there been a lot of discrimination issues with the federal law and the state laws in 20 other states, or is just political grandstanding on both sides?
  • Last-12-Exit
    Last-12-Exit Charleston, SC Posts: 8,661
    Religion once again dictating policy. If people would just leave their fucking religion at home, this world would be a better place.
  • Smellyman
    Smellyman Asia Posts: 4,528
    Weirdo republicans would love a theocracy.
  • BS44325
    BS44325 Posts: 6,124
    rgambs said:

    Did you read that before posting?
    "when Iran persecutes gay people, conservatives in the United States suddenly become enamored of gay rights—and bash the Obama administration for not doing enough to defend them."
    "Even as conservatives fight LGBT equality at home, Puar says, they champion it overseas—as long as it serves their interests to do so."
    "For all these reasons, don’t expect the Obama administration, or the LGBT movement, to raise a hue and cry over this latest travesty of justice. As horrifying as this tragedy is, we might only be able to make it worse."

    Seems like the article is pointing out some of the phony righteousness you are denying...?

    Except I am not one of those conservatives and the phony righteousness finger is being pointed at me. I am a strong defender of equal rights but not just where it's convenient. I think this type of discrimination needs to be fought at home and abroad.
  • Drowned Out
    Drowned Out Posts: 6,056
    edited March 2015
    Except that you advocate for the sanctions and military actions abroad...so do you really want to fight for gay rights equally? you're using a domestic issue as a platform to promote your agenda abroad...

    Amusing because you're the one who made the original observation and called out people who want peace with Iran as hypocrites. you KNOW that the same people you're attacking support lgbt rights in Iran as well. Just not thru sanctions and military actions that hurt them and their countrymen more than they help.
    Nice tangent.

    Anyway...sorry folks, carry on.
    Post edited by Drowned Out on
  • BS44325
    BS44325 Posts: 6,124
    I guess I am just confused when international boycotts because of discrimination are acceptable. All I read on here is how the world must boycott Israel because of apparent discrimination towards Palestinians but when it comes to Iran's persecution of Gays...shhhh....who are we to impose our beliefs on another culture.
  • BS44325
    BS44325 Posts: 6,124
    josevolution said:

    BS44325 said:

    josevolution said:

    BS44325 said:

    Yeah...you're right...my bad. Let's put sanctions on Indiana but let's lift them on Iran.

    But why do you have to bring Iran into this discussion again Iran has zero to do with Indiana & this law ...
    Because gay rights should be fought for everywhere not just where it is convenient
    I agree but this is about this law in Indiana , just start another thread about Iran ok so tell me what do you think about this law
    I don't like this law. I don't like that 19 other states passed a similar law. I don't like the federal version that was co-sponsored by Ted Kennedy and signed by Bill Clinton. I also don't like the johnny-come-lately's who only care about gay rights when it gives them an opportunity to bash a red state and/or a republican governor yet couldn't care a less when worse is done by the Ayatollah and Putin.
  • Drowned Out
    Drowned Out Posts: 6,056
    BS44325 said:

    I guess I am just confused when international boycotts because of discrimination are acceptable. All I read on here is how the world must boycott Israel because of apparent discrimination towards Palestinians but when it comes to Iran's persecution of Gays...shhhh....who are we to impose our beliefs on another culture.

    BS44325 said:

    josevolution said:

    BS44325 said:

    josevolution said:

    BS44325 said:

    Yeah...you're right...my bad. Let's put sanctions on Indiana but let's lift them on Iran.

    But why do you have to bring Iran into this discussion again Iran has zero to do with Indiana & this law ...
    Because gay rights should be fought for everywhere not just where it is convenient
    I agree but this is about this law in Indiana , just start another thread about Iran ok so tell me what do you think about this law
    I don't like this law. I don't like that 19 other states passed a similar law. I don't like the federal version that was co-sponsored by Ted Kennedy and signed by Bill Clinton. I also don't like the johnny-come-lately's who only care about gay rights when it gives them an opportunity to bash a red state and/or a republican governor yet couldn't care a less when worse is done by the Ayatollah and Putin.
    Seriously, you need to stop projecting onto people you disagree with. What are you not understanding here? Who has said they couldn't care less, or shhh about iran's persecution of the gay community? Are you accusing me of that, BS?
    Let me repeat: the same people you're attacking support lgbt rights in Iran as well. Just not thru sanctions and military actions that hurt them and their countrymen more than they help.
  • JM12271
    JM12271 Posts: 211
    edited March 2015
    PJ_Soul said:

    rr165892 said:

    Can't we move past all this nonsense.
    Live and let live.

    The same freedoms afforded to those seeking religious freedoms should be exactly the same as the ones offered to those who choose an alternate lifestyle.Why does one belief carry more weight then the other.Stupido.

    I mean it is Indiana.......

    It's not a choice.
    There is no difference between refusing service to a gay person because they're gay and refusing it to a black person because of the colour of their skin.
    Face-palm. There is a difference, simply, if one man wants to shove his penis in another man's anus or wave it in his face, I as a small business owner should have the ability and freedom to refuse service. Am I wrong for having moral convictions based on what my religion considers a taboo behavior? So then, you will discriminate against me for my belief system? What taboo behavior is a black man exhibiting? They are not the same, the argument that being black and being gay have the same discrimination is straw-man argument.

    You speak of choice - does anyone else see the irony in this - many pro-choice liberals are up in arms at the conservatives over their freedom to choose and refuse service based on moral convictions. Seriously - c'mon Pro-choice people - have a backbone! This is what you stand for.

    That is pretty fucked up.

    Seriously, if a man put's his penis in another man's anus - still won't make a baby. That is what we are really talking about here and how many in society have a problem with that. It is not discrimination if you disagree with it, it is a personal conviction - so which is greater - a personal conviction based on freedom of religion or personal conviction of a man waving his penis in another man's face or shoving it in his anus?

    So then, are you discriminating against me as a religious person who may have a belief system with moral convictions? I would say yes.
    Post edited by JM12271 on
  • Asterisk on the Street
    Asterisk on the Street Posts: 850
    JM12271 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    rr165892 said:

    Can't we move past all this nonsense.
    Live and let live.

    The same freedoms afforded to those seeking religious freedoms should be exactly the same as the ones offered to those who choose an alternate lifestyle.Why does one belief carry more weight then the other.Stupido.

    I mean it is Indiana.......

    It's not a choice.
    There is no difference between refusing service to a gay person because they're gay and refusing it to a black person because of the colour of their skin.
    Face-palm. There is a difference, simply, if one man wants to shove his penis in another man's anus or wave it in his face, I as a small business owner should have the ability and freedom to refuse service. Am I wrong for having moral convictions based on what my religion considers a taboo behavior? So then, you will discriminate against me for my belief system? What taboo behavior is a black man exhibiting? They are not the same, the argument that being black and being gay have the same discrimination is straw-man argument.

    You speak of choice - does anyone else see the irony in this - many pro-choice liberals are up in arms at the conservatives over their freedom to choose and refuse service based on moral convictions. Seriously - c'mon Pro-choice people - have a backbone! This is what you stand for.

    That is pretty fucked up.

    Seriously, if a man put's his penis in another man's anus - still won't make a baby. That is what we are really talking about here and how many in society have a problem with that. It is not discrimination if you disagree with it, it is a personal conviction - so which is greater - a personal conviction based on freedom of religion or personal conviction of a man waving his penis in another man's face or shoving it in his anus?

    So then, are you discriminating against me as a religious person who may have a belief system with moral convictions? I would say yes.
    I would say no. You are not being discriminated against in the context of this thread topic. No one is refusing service to you. No one is refusing to rent a home to you. No one is refusing job opportunities to you.

    You have the freedom of religion which is not synonymous with the freedom to refuse service to others who fail your belief system litmus test. Refusing service to anyone based on your religious beliefs is discrimination, plain and simple.

Categories