Gov. Hutchinson caves into intolerant homosexual radicals

[johnwk]

SEE: Arkansas governor says he won’t sign religious liberty bill, asks lawmakers to change it


”Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson (R) said Wednesday morning he will not sign a controversial religious liberty bill, saying he wants lawmakers to recall the bill and change it so that it more closely resembles federal law.


“This is a bill that in ordinary times would not be controversial,” he said during a news conference. “But these are not ordinary times.”



Of course he didn't want to sign it. He's afraid of an intolerant loudmouth radical group who wants to force themselves upon people who feel uncomfortable around them and are offended by homosexual activities.


Why are so many homosexuals determined to use government to force themselves upon people who feel uncomfortable around them or are offended by homosexual activities? Why are so many homosexuals intolerant of those whose only crime, if it really is a crime, want make their own decisions with regard to who they do business with, and who they associate with? What is the big freaken deal? Why is this small intolerant and radical group so opposed to people being free to make their own choices and decisions in life?


Why do our politicians cave into this small intolerant loud mouthed radical group who wants to use government force to impinge upon the American People's right to be free to mutually agree in their contracts and associations?




JWK

 

[zeke]

Ah well. I guess ole Asa just doen't have the courage of your convictions. Maybe he likes his job and wants to keep it. Maybe you could get elected and show him and Pence how it's done? Can you do that?

 

[Skylar]

Why are so many homosexuals determined to use government to force themselves upon people who feel uncomfortable around them or are offended by homosexual activities?

And by 'force themselves upon people', you mean seeking to be treated equally and with simple human dignity? Its not unreasonable to order a cake from a cake baker. Or order pizza from a pizzeria. It is unreasonable to deny both because of the sexual orientation of the customer.

Why do our politicians cave into this small intolerant loud mouthed radical group who wants to use government force to impinge upon the American People's right to be free to mutually agree in their contracts and associations?

Probably because the 'loud mouthed group' is the majority. And because they're right.

 

[johnwk]

Why are so many homosexuals determined to use government to force themselves upon people who feel uncomfortable around them or are offended by homosexual activities?

And by 'force themselves upon people', you mean seeking to be treated equally and with simple human dignity? Its not unreasonable to order a cake from a cake baker. Or order pizza from a pizzeria. It is unreasonable to deny both because of the sexual orientation of the customer.

Why do our politicians cave into this small intolerant loud mouthed radical group who wants to use government force to impinge upon the American People's right to be free to mutually agree in their contracts and associations?

Probably because the 'loud mouthed group' is the majority. And because they're right.

Are you really suggesting the majority of American People do not want to retain their inalienable right to mutually agree in their contracts and associations?


JWK

 

[johnwk]

Ah well. I guess ole Asa just doen't have the courage of your convictions. Maybe he likes his job and wants to keep it. Maybe you could get elected and show him and Pence how it's done? Can you do that?

I can't imagine a majority of the American people appreciate a law being imposed upon them which impinges upon their inalienable right to mutually agree in their contracts and associations.

Unfortunately the homosexual lobby is always there to protest in the streets while the Tea Party has lost its momentum and no longer counters this loudmouthed intolerant radical group. The homosexual lobby couldn't get the Equal Rights Amendment passed in the 1980s which would have made them a constitutionally recognized "protected class" which would have forced unwilling Americans to associate with them and enter into unwanted contracts. So now they are intimidating State Politicians into caving in to adopting state laws which in fact impinges upon the people's inalienable right to mutually agree in their contracts and associations.

And our the GOP is caving into this loudmouthed intolerant and radical group. But why is the Tea Party not protesting in the streets and demanding that every American's rights must be protected which means the people must be left free to willingly agree in their contracts and associations?

Why are so many homosexuals determined to use government to force themselves upon people who feel uncomfortable around them or are offended by homosexual activities? Why are so many homosexuals intolerant of those whose only crime, if it really is a crime, who want make their own decisions with regard to who they do business with, and who they associate with? What is the big freaken deal? Why is this small intolerant loudmouthed and radical homosexual group so opposed to people being free to make their own choices and decisions in life?


JWK

 

[zeke]

Let me ask you this John. If an avowed Christian who really won't do business with a gay person, in fact ends up doing business with a gay person, by accident or any other way, will God smite the Christian dead?

Where in the Christian Bible does it say do not do any business transactions with gays?

And finally, are you good with the idea that Christians can be the ones discriminated against?

Is that what you want in the world of commerce. Anytime you want to buy something, you have to not only check on price and service and availability, you also have to check and see if the business will do business with the type of person you are. Is that what you want?

Just think of the possibility in the market place. Maybe a grocery store owner don't like tattoos. Should he be able to refuse to sell groceries to people with tattoos?

How about gay blacks. Are you able to refuse to serve them because they are gay. Or refuse them because they are black? Or do you get to pick and choose?

You "Christians" think you are the ones being discriminated against. Right? How well would you like it if you were REALLY being discriminated against in the market place?

I am sure you will say that's perfectly ok.

 

[johnwk]

Let me ask you this John. If an avowed Christian who really won't do business with a gay person, in fact ends up doing business with a gay person, by accident or any other way, will God smite the Christian dead?

Where in the Christian Bible does it say do not do any business transactions with gays?

........

I am not interested in discussing the religious aspect of this. My concern is to protect the right of people being free to mutually agree in their contracts and associations. Unfortunately, there is a small loudmouthed intolerant radical group which is determined to use government force to interfere with the people's inalienable right to be free to mutually agree in their contracts and associations. Why does this crowd have such a problem with people being free to make their own decisions and choices in life?


JWK

 

[johnwk]

Why are our politicians so willing to cave in and use government force to impinge upon the inalienable right of people being free to mutually agree in their contracts and associations?


Have our politicians, especially Republican Politicians, forgotten the Equal Rights Amendment of the 1980s was rejected by the American People and one of the reasons for its rejection was it would have made homosexuals a constitutionally protected class and have allowed the force of government to be used to compel the American People to associate with and engage in unwanted contracts with homosexuals? Why are our Republican Politicians trying to force the American People to associate with homosexuals and engage in unwanted contracts with them without their consent? What do Republican Politicians have against people being free to choose?


JWK

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Ever notice when people get caught on the wrong side of things it's "they caved in?" Not, "they got caught trying to legalize something bad."

 

[TheOldSchool]

Why are so many homosexuals determined to use government to force themselves upon people who feel uncomfortable around them or are offended by homosexual activities?

And by 'force themselves upon people', you mean seeking to be treated equally and with simple human dignity? Its not unreasonable to order a cake from a cake baker. Or order pizza from a pizzeria. It is unreasonable to deny both because of the sexual orientation of the customer.

Why do our politicians cave into this small intolerant loud mouthed radical group who wants to use government force to impinge upon the American People's right to be free to mutually agree in their contracts and associations?

Probably because the 'loud mouthed group' is the majority. And because they're right.

Are you really suggesting the majority of American People do not want to retain their inalienable right to mutually agree in their contracts and associations?


JWK

"retain their inalienable right to mutually agree in their contracts and associations"

Lol is that it? It's funny how the language conservatives use to defend illegal discrimination seems to get more flowery every day.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Good on the guv.

Gov. Hutchinson defies heterofascist reactionaries

 

[johnwk]

Why are our politicians so willing to cave in and use government force to impinge upon the inalienable right of people being free to mutually agree in their contracts and associations?


Have our politicians, especially Republican Politicians, forgotten the Equal Rights Amendment of the 1980s was rejected by the American People and one of the reasons for its rejection was it would have made homosexuals a constitutionally protected class and have allowed the force of government to be used to compel the American People to associate with and engage in unwanted contracts with homosexuals? Why are our Republican Politicians trying to force the American People to associate with homosexuals and engage in unwanted contracts with them without their consent? What do Republican Politicians have against people being free to choose?


JWK

Ever notice when people get caught on the wrong side of things it's "they caved in?" Not, "they got caught trying to legalize something bad."

Huh?

JWK

 

[Moonglow]

They could not pay me enough to put up with humans as an elected official. no matter what you do, someone will be unhappy.....

 

[tinydancer]

Hutchinson and Pence both realized that the media had their lies aka narrative that RFRA was a discriminatory piece of legislation. That the media was turning a simple law previously passed by some 20 other states into an anti LGBT law.

Which is of course a complete lie, but that never stops the media or the activists does it now?

Instead of allowing the media and the left wing whackos to turn the issue of RFRA into another "Hands up, don't shoot" debacle based on a lie that tore up the country for months on end, they wisely asked for the lawmakers to go back and add clarifying language.

They didn't cave. Both Governors saw where the lies were leading and corrected the situation before their states were turned into "Fergusons".

Bravo to both Governors for heading this bullshit off at the pass.

 

[johnwk]

Hutchinson and Pence both realized that the media had their lies aka narrative that RFRA was a discriminatory piece of legislation. That the media was turning a simple law previously passed by some 20 other states into an anti LGBT law.

Which is of course a complete lie, but that never stops the media or the activists does it now?

Instead of allowing the media and the left wing whackos to turn the issue of RFRA into another "Hands up, don't shoot" debacle based on a lie that tore up the country for months on end, they wisely asked for the lawmakers to go back and add clarifying language.

They didn't cave. Both Governors saw where the lies were leading and corrected the situation before their states were turned into "Fergusons".

Bravo to both Governors for heading this bullshit off at the pass.

This fight is about homosexuals being made a protected class in spite of the Equal Rights Amendment of the 1980s being rejected. And one of the reasons for its rejection was it would have made homosexuals a constitutionally protected class and have allowed the force of government to be used to compel the American People to associate with and engage in unwanted contracts with homosexuals.


Why do so many have a problem with people being free to mutually agree in their contracts and associations?


JWK

 

[Skylar]

Hutchinson and Pence both realized that the media had their lies aka narrative that RFRA was a discriminatory piece of legislation. That the media was turning a simple law previously passed by some 20 other states into an anti LGBT law.

Which is of course a complete lie, but that never stops the media or the activists does it now?

Instead of allowing the media and the left wing whackos to turn the issue of RFRA into another "Hands up, don't shoot" debacle based on a lie that tore up the country for months on end, they wisely asked for the lawmakers to go back and add clarifying language.

They didn't cave. Both Governors saw where the lies were leading and corrected the situation before their states were turned into "Fergusons".

Bravo to both Governors for heading this bullshit off at the pass.

This fight is about homosexuals being made a protected class in spite of the Equal Rights Amendment of the 1980s being rejected. And one of the reasons for its rejection was it would have made homosexuals a constitutionally protected class and have allowed the force of government to be used to compel the American People to associate with and engage in unwanted contracts with homosexuals.


Why do so many have a problem with people being free to mutually agree in their contracts and associations?


JWK

Romer v. Evans recognizes gays as being protected under the equal protection clause of the constitution.

 

[rightwinger]

I guess Hutchinson saw Pence have the legislation stuffed down his throat in Indiana and have the legislature nowhere to be found while he took the flack for it

 

[tinydancer]

I guess Hutchinson saw Pence have the legislation stuffed down his throat in Indiana and have the legislature nowhere to be found while he took the flack for it

Well the RFRA legislation stands in both states now with the clarifications.

Smart move to counter act the mega lies being told about the legislation.

 

[Skylar]

I guess Hutchinson saw Pence have the legislation stuffed down his throat in Indiana and have the legislature nowhere to be found while he took the flack for it

Well the RFRA legislation stands in both states now with the clarifications.

Smart move to counter act the mega lies being told about the legislation.

With discrimination restrictions, it should stand. Religion is worthy of protection. But not as a justification for exemption from PA laws.

 

[tinydancer]

I guess Hutchinson saw Pence have the legislation stuffed down his throat in Indiana and have the legislature nowhere to be found while he took the flack for it

Well the RFRA legislation stands in both states now with the clarifications.

Smart move to counter act the mega lies being told about the legislation.

With discrimination restrictions, it should stand. Religion is worthy of protection. But not as a justification for exemption from PA laws.

Well here's where it is going to get interesting. When the Supremes ruled in favor of Hobby Lobby they effectively expanded RFRA to include "closely held for profits". We'll have to wait and see what is going to come before the States courts.

Gay rights isn't the only deal here. From what I've been reading the courts have seen all sorts of cases. Some really wild and crazy ones.
Amish buggies, hunting moose for First Nation funeral rituals etc.

Actually the original Federal law was passed to protect First Nations religious use of land and peyote. And that bill in 1993 came about with huge bi partisan support not just politically but the ACLU teaming up with Evangelicals.

What I learned on the internet last week