Az gov vetoes bill

[JakeStarkey]

TK, no person if engaged in a business that involves public accommodation can discriminate against others because of personal religious beliefs.

In no way is that business owner prevented to privately associate with those with whom he wishes to associate.

 

[bodecea]

Homophobes fail massively.

They are so out of touch with America and our culture.

Reminds me of a story when I was stationed in Texas. Had a YN2 who I knew was gay...he came in one day laughing his ass off...I asked him what was funny. He told that when he parked in the squadron parking lot, he was listening to Streisand....as he got out, the sailors in the next car called him a "fag"........they were listening to Village People.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The old fool didn't see the statement.

Is it the same as TK's post #26? Is that what all republicans will be parroting tomorrow?

No. Even someone like me knows when his efforts have been wasted on small things. Overall, I support equal rights for homosexuals, simply because of what the Constitution says. What I have an issue with is when the Constitution is used to give rights to one group at the expense of another.

And what do you believe to be the correct decision when 2 groups, as you call them, each claim a certain right that neither one can have without it being at the expense of the other?

 

[Sallow]

You guys should run her against Hillary.

You could spout your fake bullshit about Vince Foster.

We could spout reality..

Arizona Death Panel Claims Another Victim - Forbes

Tucson University Medical Center has confirmed that a patient who was refused a liver transplant due to Arizona Governor Jan Brewer’s decision to cut the state benefit that would have made the transplant possible, has died. The patient had been scheduled for the needed transplant but was dropped from the waiting list on October 1st when the cuts went into effect.

Please allow the preceding paragraph to sink into your consciousness for a moment.

The Arizona budget that previously provided transplants to people in need was $1.4 million. As there were 99 people on the waiting list for transplants at the time the cuts went into effect, the net result is that the State of Arizona valued each of these lives at something less than $14,000 a person.

Today, there are only 97 on the waiting list as two have passed away.

Can this really be happening in the United States?

Arizona Death Panel Claims Another Victim - Forbes

 

[Plasmaball]

I think Brewer did the right thing.

She gave a reasonable rationale for her decision...the law was superfluous and bigger issues are at hand....

uh huh, or you know her state was going to lose millions from companies not staying or building things there.

 

[TemplarKormac]

TK, no person if engaged in a business that involves public accommodation can discriminate against others because of personal religious beliefs.

In no way is that business owner prevented to privately associate with those with whom he wishes to associate.

Perhaps we can apply the 9th Amendment here. We are using the constitutional rights of one group (and subsequently the Constitution itself) to disparage others of their rights.

9th Amendment to the United States Constitution:

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

 

[deltex1]

The whining continues unabated.

 

[Geaux4it]

Party time for the sickos

-Geaux

 

[Plasmaball]

lol this bro is a sore loser

Uh no. I'm sore, from watch people be so easily distracted by issues that don't shape the future of this country. It's what we call an epiphany. I'm beginning to see why liberals distract with social issues so much, they don't want you to notice the REAL issues they have.

Is that why you started a few threads on gays and gay marriage a few days ago?

this is like when he discovered we fight to much and are really partisan. Sometime around Nelson's death. The next day he was back to trolling. maybe if he had a job he could focus better

 

[TemplarKormac]

You guys should run her against Hillary.

You could spout your fake bullshit about Vince Foster.

We could spout reality..

Arizona Death Panel Claims Another Victim - Forbes

Tucson University Medical Center has confirmed that a patient who was refused a liver transplant due to Arizona Governor Jan Brewer’s decision to cut the state benefit that would have made the transplant possible, has died. The patient had been scheduled for the needed transplant but was dropped from the waiting list on October 1st when the cuts went into effect.

Please allow the preceding paragraph to sink into your consciousness for a moment.

The Arizona budget that previously provided transplants to people in need was $1.4 million. As there were 99 people on the waiting list for transplants at the time the cuts went into effect, the net result is that the State of Arizona valued each of these lives at something less than $14,000 a person.

Today, there are only 97 on the waiting list as two have passed away.

Can this really be happening in the United States?

Arizona Death Panel Claims Another Victim - Forbes

Until Obama atones for the malfeasance that caused the death of four people in Benghazi, you are unable to claim the high ground on this issue.

 

[Plasmaball]

Uh no. I'm sore, from watch people be so easily distracted by issues that don't shape the future of this country. It's what we call an epiphany. I'm beginning to see why liberals distract with social issues so much, they don't want you to notice the REAL issues they have.

Is that why you started a few threads on gays and gay marriage a few days ago?

That was a few days ago. Then it hit me. This issue is superfluous. You have millions of people losing their healthcare, people not looking for work, you have serious shit going on in the Ukraine and Venezuela, and we're over here more worried about gay marriage? What was I thinking!? What are we thinking?!

they have vacations to worry about

 

[Plasmaball]

Wow, the GOP realized what a PR nightmare this would've been.

Yea, the left's insistence that religious freedom be denied reached a fever pitch and Brewer caved.

Will this trampling of religious freedom apply to all religions?

you still have the right to be retarded.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If Governor Brewer was swayed by pressure from the business community,

why aren't conservatives cheering that? Given their reverence for the 'free markets'...

 

[hazlnut]

Whole lot of buggery goin' on tonite...

He better treat you right.

 

[Plasmaball]

TK, no person if engaged in a business that involves public accommodation can discriminate against others because of personal religious beliefs.

In no way is that business owner prevented to privately associate with those with whom he wishes to associate.

Perhaps we can apply the 9th Amendment here. We are using the constitutional rights of one group (and subsequently the Constitution itself) to disparage others of their rights.

9th Amendment to the United States Constitution:

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

that actually works against you. If we take into account the recent SCOTUS decision.

 

[Dutch]

Geez, you know it just hit me... all that arguing I did was pointless. I've come to the conclusion that there are bigger issues that gay marriage out there. Why are we so easily distracted by social issues? Same goes for legalizing pot. While I want that legalized, there are simply more serious issues on the table than these. Seriously folks, lets get our priorities straight here.

Then why in the hell did you start two threads on homosexuals?

 

[bodecea]

The whining continues unabated.

Well, yes. We've seen the OP.

 

[rightwinger]

Great day to be a Republican as a Republican Governor stands up for the rights of gays


Republicans should be very proud

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The old fool didn't see the statement.

Is it the same as TK's post #26? Is that what all republicans will be parroting tomorrow?

No. Even someone like me knows when his efforts have been wasted on small things. Overall, I support equal rights for homosexuals, simply because of what the Constitution says. What I have an issue with is when the Constitution is used to give rights to one group at the expense of another.

Obviously you’ve decided to not address the issue of your crippling ignorance.

The Constitution doesn’t ‘give’ rights to anyone.

Our rights are inalienable, they manifest as a consequence of our humanity, neither taken nor bestowed by any government, constitution, or man.

And although inalienable our rights are not absolute, and are subject to reasonable restrictions. The Constitution codifies the process by which the state may – or may not – limit our civil liberties.

An example of an un-Constitutional law would be those designed to deny same-sex couples their right to access marriage law.

An example of a Constitutional law would be public accommodations measures, which are predicated on settled and accepted Commerce Clause jurisprudence, and in no way ‘violate’ any person’s religious liberty.

That you might perceive public accommodations laws as such is subjective, irrelevant, and wrong.

 

[johnwk]

Is it the same as TK's post #26? Is that what all republicans will be parroting tomorrow?

No. Even someone like me knows when his efforts have been wasted on small things. Overall, I support equal rights for homosexuals, simply because of what the Constitution says. What I have an issue with is when the Constitution is used to give rights to one group at the expense of another.

Obviously you’ve decided to not address the issue of your crippling ignorance.

The Constitution doesn’t ‘give’ rights to anyone.

Our rights are inalienable, they manifest as a consequence of our humanity, neither taken nor bestowed by any government, constitution, or man.

And although inalienable our rights are not absolute, and are subject to reasonable restrictions. The Constitution codifies the process by which the state may – or may not – limit our civil liberties.

An example of an un-Constitutional law would be those designed to deny same-sex couples their right to access marriage law.

An example of a Constitutional law would be public accommodations measures, which are predicated on settled and accepted Commerce Clause jurisprudence, and in no way ‘violate’ any person’s religious liberty.

That you might perceive public accommodations laws as such is subjective, irrelevant, and wrong.

The very intentions for which the 14th Amendment was adopted was to prohibit state legislation to discriminate based upon race, color or previous condition of slavery. It was never intended to interfere with the people's fundamental right to mutually agree in their contracts and associations. The intention of the 39th Congress which drafted the 14th Amendment is summarized as follows:



“Its whole effect is not to confer or regulate rights, but to require that whatever of these enumerated rights and obligations are imposed by State laws shall be for and upon all citizens alike without distinctions based on race or former condition of slavery…It permits the States to say that the wife may not testify, sue or contract. It makes no law as to this. Its whole effect is to require that whatever rights as to each of the enumerated civil (not political) matters the States may confer upon one race or color of the citizens shall be held by all races in equality…It does not prohibit you from discriminating between citizens of the same race, or of different races, as to what their rights to testify, to inherit &c. shall be. But if you do discriminate, it must not be on account of race, color or former conditions of slavery. That is all. If you permit a white man who is an infidel to testify, so you must a colored infidel. Self-evidently this is the whole effect of this first section. It secures-not to all citizens, but to all races as races who are citizens- equality of protection in those enumerated civil rights which the States may deem proper to confer upon any race.” ___ SEE: Rep. Shallabarger, Congressional Globe, 1866, page 1293


JWK



If the America People do not rise up and defend their existing Constitution and the intentions and beliefs under which it was adopted, who is left to do so but the very people it was designed to control and regulate?