Indiana House passes "religious freedom" bill

[TemplarKormac]

This bill should be called the "freedom to be a filthy ignorant bible thumping bigot" act

That's ironic coming from you. Bigotry isn't unique to anyone, and right now, you're just as much of a bigot as anyone else.

 

[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.

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

Sweet!

 

[BlindBoo]

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.

That depends. I'm okay with intolerance to murderers, rapist and thieves, if that's what you mean. Please, give some example of these secular sources.

 

[TemplarKormac]

It's so bigots can have a STRAIGHTS ONLY trade.

That's a bit much. There are and will always be places that don't institute such a policy.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Why would anyone have a problem with this?

You've asked for an opinion here and I'll provide mine.

I disagree with the bill because it provides special exemptions under the law to discriminate and be exempt from Public Accommodation laws if one hides behind a religious claim.

In other words if store owner says "I don't want to serve interracial couples", then he is in violation of the Public Accommodation law. However if the store owner says "I don't want to serve interracial couples because of my religious beliefs" then that store owner is exempt.

Better to repeal Public Accommodation laws, as applied to non-government entities, and allow ALL store owners the ability to exercise rights of property and association.


>>>>

 

[The Rabbi]

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.

That depends. I'm okay with intolerance to murderers, rapist and thieves, if that's what you mean. Please, give some example of these secular sources.

Sir William Blackstone legal definition of Sir William Blackstone

 

[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.


>>>>

Thankls.
What was your point?

The disconnect of what you claim and what the law actually says, in this case the law from your own state.


>>>>

 

[Hutch Starskey]

My home state doing it right, well done Indiana, well done

Indiana House passes "religious freedom" bill 63-31

INDIANAPOLIS -The debate over the Religious Freedom Restoration Act is now over. The Indiana House of Representatives overwhelmingly endorsed the bill in a 63-31 vote Monday afternoon.

It now goes back to the Senate to make sure everybody agrees with some changes. Then it heads to the governor's desk for his signature.

Governor Mike Pence says he is looking forward to signing the bill into law, but not everyone is happy about that.

Indiana House passes religious freedom bill 63-31 - 13 WTHR Indianapolis

Bummer. Gonna suck when it's struck down as unconstitutional.

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

That argument lost at the lunch counter.

 

[TemplarKormac]

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

Have you? All I have seen from leftists on this thread is "bigot" "Christian Taliban" or other invective. That isn't well thought-out now is it?

 

[The Rabbi]

Why would anyone have a problem with this?

You've asked for an opinion here and I'll provide mine.

I disagree with the bill because it provides special exemptions under the law to discriminate and be exempt from Public Accommodation laws if one hides behind a religious claim.

In other words if store owner says "I don't want to serve interracial couples", then he is in violation of the Public Accommodation law. However if the store owner says "I don't want to serve interracial couples because of my religious beliefs" then that store owner is exempt.

Better to repeal Public Accommodation laws, as applied to non-government entities, and allow ALL store owners the ability to exercise rights of property and association.


>>>>

I certainly agree with the last part.
The reason religion plays in is because traditionally gov't has given religious claims wide latitude. Rightfully so.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

My home state doing it right, well done Indiana, well done

Indiana House passes "religious freedom" bill 63-31

INDIANAPOLIS -The debate over the Religious Freedom Restoration Act is now over. The Indiana House of Representatives overwhelmingly endorsed the bill in a 63-31 vote Monday afternoon.

It now goes back to the Senate to make sure everybody agrees with some changes. Then it heads to the governor's desk for his signature.

Governor Mike Pence says he is looking forward to signing the bill into law, but not everyone is happy about that.

Indiana House passes religious freedom bill 63-31 - 13 WTHR Indianapolis

Bummer. Gonna suck when it's struck down as unconstitutional.

Doubtful, but keep hoping poofter. Also, for you homos? Don't like it don't go to Indiana, I doubt they are concerned about such a small minority and it's REALLY time for you all to understand how small you really are

Apparently just small enough to raise your ire.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

My home state doing it right, well done Indiana, well done

Indiana House passes "religious freedom" bill 63-31

INDIANAPOLIS -The debate over the Religious Freedom Restoration Act is now over. The Indiana House of Representatives overwhelmingly endorsed the bill in a 63-31 vote Monday afternoon.

It now goes back to the Senate to make sure everybody agrees with some changes. Then it heads to the governor's desk for his signature.

Governor Mike Pence says he is looking forward to signing the bill into law, but not everyone is happy about that.

Indiana House passes religious freedom bill 63-31 - 13 WTHR Indianapolis

Bummer. Gonna suck when it's struck down as unconstitutional.

Doubtful, but keep hoping poofter. Also, for you homos? Don't like it don't go to Indiana, I doubt they are concerned about such a small minority and it's REALLY time for you all to understand how small you really are

Apparently just small enough to raise your ire.

Oh look a newbie signs on and goes for the throat. Who are you, really LOL

 

[TemplarKormac]

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.

That depends. I'm okay with intolerance to murderers, rapist and thieves, if that's what you mean. Please, give some example of these secular sources.

Sir William Blackstone legal definition of Sir William Blackstone

I have all of his commentaries. I'm surprised anyone else knew about him.

 

[EricJ]

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.

 

[NYcarbineer]

My home state doing it right, well done Indiana, well done

Indiana House passes "religious freedom" bill 63-31

INDIANAPOLIS -The debate over the Religious Freedom Restoration Act is now over. The Indiana House of Representatives overwhelmingly endorsed the bill in a 63-31 vote Monday afternoon.

It now goes back to the Senate to make sure everybody agrees with some changes. Then it heads to the governor's desk for his signature.

Governor Mike Pence says he is looking forward to signing the bill into law, but not everyone is happy about that.

Indiana House passes religious freedom bill 63-31 - 13 WTHR Indianapolis

Bummer. Gonna suck when it's struck down as unconstitutional.

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

The Civil Rights Act of 1964. Upheld in SCOTUS case law.

 

[NYcarbineer]

This could get Indiana a requirement to install footbaths for Muslims in every state building in the state.

 

[NYcarbineer]

This could get Indiana a requirement to install footbaths for Muslims in every state building in the state.

Prove that it couldn't. It's hilarious that you think a religious 'freedom' bill would only apply to Christians. It would pave the way for pork products to have to be removed from employee lunchrooms as a religious accommodation. Or that places that ring church bells also do a Muslim call to prayer.

 

[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.

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

I'm taking you just about as seriously as I can. Which is not much, I'm afraid.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

This could get Indiana a requirement to install footbaths for Muslims in every state building in the state.

Prove that it couldn't. It's hilarious that you think a religious 'freedom' bill would only apply to Christians. It would pave the way for pork products to have to be removed from employee lunchrooms as a religious accommodation. Or that places that ring church bells also do a Muslim call to prayer.

 

[bodecea]

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

Have you? All I have seen from leftists on this thread is "bigot" "Christian Taliban" or other invective. That isn't well thought-out now is it?

Absolutely not true. I support this measure....and have said so in several posts. You apparently haven't bothered to look before posting.