Indiana House passes "religious freedom" bill

[SassyIrishLass]

Should have never targeted Christians...now you have the blow back, stupid people

You really don't think it is over do you?

Yeah, it's Indiana, invariably for some reason that state gets what it wants

I suppose we will see soon enough. Care to make a little wager on the final outcome?

Illinois's law remains untouched....careful

Care to make a little wager on the final outcome?

Nah, our extra cash is tied up in the markets. Let it play out, so far none have been overturned

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Typical right-wing hypocrisy. Less government control mandated by more government control. Epic. And incredibly stupid.

How Christian it is to discriminate!

Have you ever made an intelligent, well thought-out reply?

You wouldn't grasp it if I did Kiddie avatar

 

[martybegan]

Where does the constitution force a person to bake a cake they don't want to bake? Isn't that involuntary servitude?

NO

Ah, the " it's not wrong because its fucking over people I don't like" retort.

Nothing but a cowardly bully, letting government push people around instead of having the balls to do it yourself.

Pussy.

WOW.......you got all that out of a one word answer? You need to learn to separate what is said in the real world and what the voices in your head say.

All I need to ID a fucking asshole who likes to let others do his dirty work.

Bwock Bwock Bwock.

You need a lot more than that, but sadly you aren't capable of figuring that out.

Its simple to figure out, you just don't like being called a statist asshat.

 

[martybegan]

So when oppression you agree with comes from the SC, its OK then, right?

I don't believe that Christians should legally be oppressing or discriminating against gay couples in the public arena. Yes I believe it will take a SC ruling to force some states to stop allowing that form of oppression/discrimination.

But its OK to oppress Christians? Despite the constitutional right to free exercise of Religion?

and how is having to go to another baker or photographer "oppression"?
Its more oppressive than saying a person has to submit to the state or lose their ability to make a living?

Anyone "oppressing" Christians? What businesses are not serving Christians? They would have to put up a sign too.

Simple question. Do you see government forcing of a person to provide a service against their beliefs as oppression or not?

If the government forced you to do something you don't want to do are you not oppressed by them?

If the service is part of the regular business service that the business provides to the public and the person or persons seeking service do not share the same sexual orientation as the business owners then I believe that is discrimination.

The government forces me to do stuff all the time that I don't want to do. I don't want to come to a full and complete stop at every stop sign. I want to be able to go to a bar and drink and smoke at the same time. I want to go 70 in a 55 on the freeway..........I don't want to be subject to a fine if I don't buckle up or I forget to wear a helmut.....

Find me a verifiable religious belief that prevents you from following any of those laws.

Also, none of those prevent you from making a living if you don't conform.

But a nice attempt at equivocation, a bad one, but nice.

 

[BULLDOG]

You really don't think it is over do you?

Yeah, it's Indiana, invariably for some reason that state gets what it wants

I suppose we will see soon enough. Care to make a little wager on the final outcome?

Illinois's law remains untouched....careful

Care to make a little wager on the final outcome?

Nah, our extra cash is tied up in the markets. Let it play out, so far none have been overturned

As expected another tea person spouting crap but scared to back it up. We can make the wager in teabags and funny hats if that will make it easier for you.

 

[The Rabbi]

Conducting business in the public arena is not oppression.

A person's leased premises are not the public arena.

Do you know where this comes from ""Places of public accommodation, resort or amusement" includes any place, store or other establishment, either licensed or unlicensed, that supplies goods or services to the general public or that solicits or accepts the patronage or trade of the general public, or that is supported directly or indirectly by government funds..."?


>>>>

It could be Heart of Atlanta. Frankly I dont care. People have property rights as well as rights of association.

 

[BULLDOG]

NO

Ah, the " it's not wrong because its fucking over people I don't like" retort.

Nothing but a cowardly bully, letting government push people around instead of having the balls to do it yourself.

Pussy.

WOW.......you got all that out of a one word answer? You need to learn to separate what is said in the real world and what the voices in your head say.

All I need to ID a fucking asshole who likes to let others do his dirty work.

Bwock Bwock Bwock.

You need a lot more than that, but sadly you aren't capable of figuring that out.

Its simple to figure out, you just don't like being called a statist asshat.

Call me what you want.....doesn't make it true unless you can prove it.

 

[The Rabbi]

I don't believe that Christians should legally be oppressing or discriminating against gay couples in the public arena. Yes I believe it will take a SC ruling to force some states to stop allowing that form of oppression/discrimination.

But its OK to oppress Christians? Despite the constitutional right to free exercise of Religion?

and how is having to go to another baker or photographer "oppression"?
Its more oppressive than saying a person has to submit to the state or lose their ability to make a living?

Anyone "oppressing" Christians? What businesses are not serving Christians? They would have to put up a sign too.

Simple question. Do you see government forcing of a person to provide a service against their beliefs as oppression or not?

If the government forced you to do something you don't want to do are you not oppressed by them?

If the service is part of the regular business service that the business provides to the public and the person or persons seeking service do not share the same sexual orientation as the business owners then I believe that is discrimination.

The government forces me to do stuff all the time that I don't want to do. I don't want to come to a full and complete stop at every stop sign. I want to be able to go to a bar and drink and smoke at the same time. I want to go 70 in a 55 on the freeway..........I don't want to be subject to a fine if I don't buckle up or I forget to wear a helmut.....

Find me a verifiable religious belief that prevents you from following any of those laws.

Also, none of those prevent you from making a living if you don't conform.

But a nice attempt at equivocation, a bad one, but nice.

It sucked as equivocation. Both for the reason you mentioned and because none of those things involve private property.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Yeah, it's Indiana, invariably for some reason that state gets what it wants

I suppose we will see soon enough. Care to make a little wager on the final outcome?

Illinois's law remains untouched....careful

Care to make a little wager on the final outcome?

Nah, our extra cash is tied up in the markets. Let it play out, so far none have been overturned

As expected another tea person spouting crap but scared to back it up. We can make the wager in teabags and funny hats if that will make it easier for you.

Oh gawd, more tea bagging. One more time and off to ignore you go, I'm weary of that nonsense. You're OCD, eh?

 

[BlindBoo]

That verbage is reserved for the SC ruling

So when oppression you agree with comes from the SC, its OK then, right?

I don't believe that Christians should legally be oppressing or discriminating against gay couples in the public arena. Yes I believe it will take a SC ruling to force some states to stop allowing that form of oppression/discrimination.

But its OK to oppress Christians? Despite the constitutional right to free exercise of Religion?

and how is having to go to another baker or photographer "oppression"?
Its more oppressive than saying a person has to submit to the state or lose their ability to make a living?

Conducting business in the public arena is not oppression.

Why does a person give up their rights to conduct a business? Nice attempt at a dodge, but as usual, it fails.

You are giving a person a choice: go against your morals or go out of business. That is oppression any way you look at it, but its oppression you agree to.

at least have the balls to admit it.

Yes I think it is just for society to no longer tolerate that form of intolerance, especially when that intolerance is base on religious morals. Next thing you know some religionist will be wanting to toss them off of tall buildings.........

 

[The Rabbi]

So when oppression you agree with comes from the SC, its OK then, right?

I don't believe that Christians should legally be oppressing or discriminating against gay couples in the public arena. Yes I believe it will take a SC ruling to force some states to stop allowing that form of oppression/discrimination.

But its OK to oppress Christians? Despite the constitutional right to free exercise of Religion?

and how is having to go to another baker or photographer "oppression"?
Its more oppressive than saying a person has to submit to the state or lose their ability to make a living?

Conducting business in the public arena is not oppression.

Why does a person give up their rights to conduct a business? Nice attempt at a dodge, but as usual, it fails.

You are giving a person a choice: go against your morals or go out of business. That is oppression any way you look at it, but its oppression you agree to.

at least have the balls to admit it.

Yes I think it is just for society to no longer tolerate that form of intolerance, especially when that intolerance is base on religious morals. Next thing you know some religionist will be wanting to toss them off of tall buildings.........

So you're OK with intolerance that stems from secular sources but not intolerance that stems from religious ones. OK, you're hypocrisy is noted.

 

[Moonglow]

Done deal...well done

Governor Mike Pence issued a statement Monday saying, "The legislation SB 101 is about respecting and reassuring Hoosiers that their religious freedoms are intact. I strongly support the legislation and applaud the members of the General Assembly for their work on this important issue. I look forward to signing the bill when it reaches my desk."

I am sure the Muslim's are happy also...

 

[BULLDOG]

I don't believe that Christians should legally be oppressing or discriminating against gay couples in the public arena. Yes I believe it will take a SC ruling to force some states to stop allowing that form of oppression/discrimination.

But its OK to oppress Christians? Despite the constitutional right to free exercise of Religion?

and how is having to go to another baker or photographer "oppression"?
Its more oppressive than saying a person has to submit to the state or lose their ability to make a living?

Anyone "oppressing" Christians? What businesses are not serving Christians? They would have to put up a sign too.

Simple question. Do you see government forcing of a person to provide a service against their beliefs as oppression or not?

If the government forced you to do something you don't want to do are you not oppressed by them?

If the service is part of the regular business service that the business provides to the public and the person or persons seeking service do not share the same sexual orientation as the business owners then I believe that is discrimination.

The government forces me to do stuff all the time that I don't want to do. I don't want to come to a full and complete stop at every stop sign. I want to be able to go to a bar and drink and smoke at the same time. I want to go 70 in a 55 on the freeway..........I don't want to be subject to a fine if I don't buckle up or I forget to wear a helmut.....

Find me a verifiable religious belief that prevents you from following any of those laws.

Also, none of those prevent you from making a living if you don't conform.

But a nice attempt at equivocation, a bad one, but nice.

You don't think that not conforming to the laws can prevent you from making a living? What log do you live under?

 

[BULLDOG]

I suppose we will see soon enough. Care to make a little wager on the final outcome?

Illinois's law remains untouched....careful

Care to make a little wager on the final outcome?

Nah, our extra cash is tied up in the markets. Let it play out, so far none have been overturned

As expected another tea person spouting crap but scared to back it up. We can make the wager in teabags and funny hats if that will make it easier for you.

Oh gawd, more tea bagging. One more time and off to ignore you go, I'm weary of that nonsense. You're OCD, eh?

Do what you want. Your silly posts are still funny.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Find me a verifiable religious belief that prevents you from following any of those laws.

Under the law, the belief need not be "verifiable" to use your words, they simply need to be the individuals beliefs they do not need to be part of a larger collection of beliefs of others.

"Sec. 5. As used in this chapter, "exercise of religion" includes any exercise of religion,whether or not compelled by, or centralto, a system of religious belief.​

https://iga.in.gov/static-documents/5/5/c/f/55cfd293/SB0101.04.COMH.pdf


>>>>

 

[WorldWatcher]

Conducting business in the public arena is not oppression.

A person's leased premises are not the public arena.

Do you know where this comes from ""Places of public accommodation, resort or amusement" includes any place, store or other establishment, either licensed or unlicensed, that supplies goods or services to the general public or that solicits or accepts the patronage or trade of the general public, or that is supported directly or indirectly by government funds..."?


>>>>

It could be Heart of Atlanta. Frankly I dont care. People have property rights as well as rights of association.

Actually it's your state law passed by the TN legislature.


>>>>

 

[TemplarKormac]

Typical right-wing hypocrisy. Less government control mandated by more government control. Epic. And incredibly stupid.

How Christian it is to discriminate!

It has come to my attention that I somewhat agree with Barry Goldwater (emphasis on somewhat): Government shouldn't force businesses to serve who they don't want to. I don't agree with government mandating anything to otherwise law abiding citizens. But I must also disagree with discrimination as well.

This might sound like a conflict of views to some of you, but I support individual liberty on both ends. I still hold the contention that people who have money (gay or otherwise) should be permitted to spend it at any store or business who sells products of any kind, however, religious beliefs are important too. There needs to be some sort of balance struck here.

 

[BlindBoo]

Why would anyone have a problem with this?

I don't believe that Christians should legally be oppressing or discriminating against gay couples in the public arena. Yes I believe it will take a SC ruling to force some states to stop allowing that form of oppression/discrimination.

But its OK to oppress Christians? Despite the constitutional right to free exercise of Religion?

and how is having to go to another baker or photographer "oppression"?
Its more oppressive than saying a person has to submit to the state or lose their ability to make a living?

Anyone "oppressing" Christians? What businesses are not serving Christians? They would have to put up a sign too.

Simple question. Do you see government forcing of a person to provide a service against their beliefs as oppression or not?

If the government forced you to do something you don't want to do are you not oppressed by them?

If the service is part of the regular business service that the business provides to the public and the person or persons seeking service do not share the same sexual orientation as the business owners then I believe that is discrimination.

The government forces me to do stuff all the time that I don't want to do. I don't want to come to a full and complete stop at every stop sign. I want to be able to go to a bar and drink and smoke at the same time. I want to go 70 in a 55 on the freeway..........I don't want to be subject to a fine if I don't buckle up or I forget to wear a helmut.....

Find me a verifiable religious belief that prevents you from following any of those laws.

Also, none of those prevent you from making a living if you don't conform.

But a nice attempt at equivocation, a bad one, but nice.

Those were but a few off the cuff examples as an answer to your unqualified question.

 

[The Rabbi]

Conducting business in the public arena is not oppression.

A person's leased premises are not the public arena.

Do you know where this comes from ""Places of public accommodation, resort or amusement" includes any place, store or other establishment, either licensed or unlicensed, that supplies goods or services to the general public or that solicits or accepts the patronage or trade of the general public, or that is supported directly or indirectly by government funds..."?


>>>>

It could be Heart of Atlanta. Frankly I dont care. People have property rights as well as rights of association.

Actually it's your state law passed by the TN legislature.


>>>>

Thankls.
What was your point?

 

[The Rabbi]

Typical right-wing hypocrisy. Less government control mandated by more government control. Epic. And incredibly stupid.

How Christian it is to discriminate!

It has come to my attention that I somewhat agree with Barry Goldwater (emphasis on somewhat): Government shouldn't force businesses to serve who they don't want to. I don't agree with government mandating anything to otherwise law abiding citizens. But I must also disagree with discrimination as well.

This might sound like a conflict of views to some of you, but I support individual liberty on both ends. I still hold the contention that people who have money (gay or otherwise) should be permitted to spend it at any store or business who sells products of any kind, however, religious beliefs are important too. There needs to be some sort of balance struck here.

You condemn discrimination while affirming people have a right to engage in it. I dont see a conflict at all.