NASCAR joins backlash over Indiana religious freedom law

[M14 Shooter]

View attachment 38807

^^^
More mindless partisan bigotry.

 

[jc456]

I see so punish the people.

If the people are being punished because of their government's actions, it's the peoples job to elect a new government. Apple, or any other corporation, can move into or leave any state they want for any reason.

typical leftist view, the hell with those who are not the majority again. See, as I've continued to say, the left does not like the minorities.

Oh yeah? Who's the one trying to legalize discrimination against a minority group again?

Obama?

You stoned again?

I have all my faculties thank you very much. See you really are blinded by him.

 

[chikenwing]

I think it is interesting that corporations or institutions would use their power of the purse to pursue pointless division politics in order to present the image they care about the irrelevant. It seems to me that it would go further to threaten withdrawal if Indiana does not establish "sexual orientation" as a protected anti-discrimination class ... Than to withdraw as a knee-jerk response to provisions not supplied in the text of the legislation ... In order to run and hide from accountability as far as actually accomplishing anything worthwhile.

.

PC is like Ebola it can infect anyone at anytime and most often fatal

 

[M14 Shooter]

I think it is interesting that corporations or institutions would use their power of the purse to pursue pointless division politics in order to present the image they care about the irrelevant. It seems to me that it would go further to threaten withdrawal if Indiana does not establish "sexual orientation" as a protected anti-discrimination class ... Than to withdraw as a knee-jerk response to provisions not supplied in the text of the legislation ... In order to run and hide from accountability as far as actually accomplishing anything worthwhile.

.

I think it's great when businesses consider the local climate before opening up offices/moving there.

Like if Roe were overturned and states got to vote on women's civil rights...you'd have states that kept Roe in tact and states that overturned it. The thing is that if you're Bank of America or Wal*Mart and you want to transfer a female to a state that outlawed Roe...you may not be able to entice her to take a pass on civil rights in the interest of managing a branch or store. It not only makes the playing field unlevel for the people involved, it makes the playing field more treacherous for businesses who now have to consider the local ordinances.

The real hilarity behind the Indiana law is that religious freedoms are not under attack. The law was needless and Indiana stands to lose tens of millions of dollars for something nobody needed or wanted outside of the political class.

Businesses will be vary weary of setting up shop if they have to recruit people from out of state, educated people aren't and don't want to brig their families to that type of environment

That type of environment... Like the entire USA, which has the same -federal- law?

No it doesn't.

Explain, in detail, the objectionable difference between the federal law and the IN law.
Be sure to cite the text of the relevant laws.

 

[jc456]

I think it is interesting that corporations or institutions would use their power of the purse to pursue pointless division politics in order to present the image they care about the irrelevant. It seems to me that it would go further to threaten withdrawal if Indiana does not establish "sexual orientation" as a protected anti-discrimination class ... Than to withdraw as a knee-jerk response to provisions not supplied in the text of the legislation ... In order to run and hide from accountability as far as actually accomplishing anything worthwhile.

.

I think it's great when businesses consider the local climate before opening up offices/moving there.

Like if Roe were overturned and states got to vote on women's civil rights...you'd have states that kept Roe in tact and states that overturned it. The thing is that if you're Bank of America or Wal*Mart and you want to transfer a female to a state that outlawed Roe...you may not be able to entice her to take a pass on civil rights in the interest of managing a branch or store. It not only makes the playing field unlevel for the people involved, it makes the playing field more treacherous for businesses who now have to consider the local ordinances.

The real hilarity behind the Indiana law is that religious freedoms are not under attack. The law was needless and Indiana stands to lose tens of millions of dollars for something nobody needed or wanted outside of the political class.

Businesses will be vary weary of setting up shop if they have to recruit people from out of state, educated people aren't and don't want to brig their families to that type of environment

That type of environment... Like the entire USA, which has the same -federal- law?

No it doesn't. Stop listening to that conservative radio crap. They are misleading you and making you sound foolish. The federal law is not the same as the Indiana law. The federal law does not include interactions between private business and customers. That is the whole point of the controversy. Indiana law is allowing private business to interact with private citizens and determine if discrimination is justified or not. It will take a law suite and years of litigation to determine the legitimacy on a case by case basis.

me believes you are wrong.

 

[jc456]

If the people are being punished because of their government's actions, it's the peoples job to elect a new government. Apple, or any other corporation, can move into or leave any state they want for any reason.

Apple's job is to provide their customers with the best products to suit their customers' needs ... Not necessarily to decide the politics of any given state.
Where I see no reason to suggest that they cannot move their corporate facilities to whatever location they desire ... That doesn't mean that their political stance should overshadow their responsibilities to their customers.

To suggest that Apple should involve themselves in division politics in order to make politics more important than the services they offer ... Would qualify them as a lobbying organization or agency more than a business.

.

Umm Apple's only job is to make a profit. They can take whatever stance they want. Most corporations have already taken a pro gay stance. Some, like Chick Fil A, have taken the opposite stance. It's up to the people to support ir not support them.

yep, funny how our freedoms work. See no one from the right is forcing anyone to do anything, yet vice versa, well....no.

 

[BlackSand]

Umm Apple's only job is to make a profit. They can take whatever stance they want. Most corporations have already taken a pro gay stance. Some, like Chick Fil A, have taken the opposite stance. It's up to the people to support ir not support them.

Umm, Duh ... The simple idea that anyone would take Apple's comments concerning whatever perceived objections they may have towards Indiana seriously ... While they don't relocate facilities or complain about equal if not worse injustices in China where a huge amount of their production and sells take place is ludicrous.

The idea you have been duped into swallowing the division politics they hope to progress ... Is just another sign they can use you as a tool all hook, line and sinker.

.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

The real hilarity behind the Indiana law is that religious freedoms are not under attack.

People in other states have been sued by these attacks that never happened, hence the reason Indiana passed this law.

I don't agree with the law or disagree with it. The whole affair is straight out of Idiocracy. If people would simply live and let live none of this would be an issue. If the bakers would accept the fact that gay people exist and baking a cake for their wedding isn't going to send them to some mythical Hell inferno then none of this would be a problem. Likewise, if gays would accept the fact there is nothing special about themselves and there will be some people out there who will not approve of their lifestyle and not want to do business with them (why would they want to give their money to someone who hates them anyway?) then this would also not a be a problem. Both sides are behaving badly on this issue.

Freedom isn't forcing someone to accept you nor is it discriminating against someone because they are different than you.

 

[TheOldSchool]

If the people are being punished because of their government's actions, it's the peoples job to elect a new government. Apple, or any other corporation, can move into or leave any state they want for any reason.

Apple's job is to provide their customers with the best products to suit their customers' needs ... Not necessarily to decide the politics of any given state.
Where I see no reason to suggest that they cannot move their corporate facilities to whatever location they desire ... That doesn't mean that their political stance should overshadow their responsibilities to their customers.

To suggest that Apple should involve themselves in division politics in order to make politics more important than the services they offer ... Would qualify them as a lobbying organization or agency more than a business.

.

Umm Apple's only job is to make a profit. They can take whatever stance they want. Most corporations have already taken a pro gay stance. Some, like Chick Fil A, have taken the opposite stance. It's up to the people to support ir not support them.

yep, funny how our freedoms work. See no one from the right is forcing anyone to do anything, yet vice versa, well....no.

Like how America and the founding fathers forced the British to accept our freedom.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Umm Apple's only job is to make a profit. They can take whatever stance they want. Most corporations have already taken a pro gay stance. Some, like Chick Fil A, have taken the opposite stance. It's up to the people to support ir not support them.

Umm, Duh ... The simple idea that anyone would take Apple's comments concerning whatever perceived objections they may have towards Indiana seriously ... While they don't relocate facilities or complain about equal if not worse injustices in China where a huge amount of their production and sells take place is ludicrous.

The idea you have been duped into swallowing the division politics they hope to progress ... Is just another sign they can use you as a tool all hook, line and sinker.

.

I'll remind you that conservatives are the most vocal proponents of exporting jobs to slave labor conditions in China.

And pointing out that your idiocy will hurt Indiana's economy is not the same as supporting a company.

 

[Camp]

I think it is interesting that corporations or institutions would use their power of the purse to pursue pointless division politics in order to present the image they care about the irrelevant. It seems to me that it would go further to threaten withdrawal if Indiana does not establish "sexual orientation" as a protected anti-discrimination class ... Than to withdraw as a knee-jerk response to provisions not supplied in the text of the legislation ... In order to run and hide from accountability as far as actually accomplishing anything worthwhile.

.

I think it's great when businesses consider the local climate before opening up offices/moving there.

Like if Roe were overturned and states got to vote on women's civil rights...you'd have states that kept Roe in tact and states that overturned it. The thing is that if you're Bank of America or Wal*Mart and you want to transfer a female to a state that outlawed Roe...you may not be able to entice her to take a pass on civil rights in the interest of managing a branch or store. It not only makes the playing field unlevel for the people involved, it makes the playing field more treacherous for businesses who now have to consider the local ordinances.

The real hilarity behind the Indiana law is that religious freedoms are not under attack. The law was needless and Indiana stands to lose tens of millions of dollars for something nobody needed or wanted outside of the political class.

Businesses will be vary weary of setting up shop if they have to recruit people from out of state, educated people aren't and don't want to brig their families to that type of environment

That type of environment... Like the entire USA, which has the same -federal- law?

No it doesn't.

Explain, in detail, the objectionable difference between the federal law and the IN law.
Be sure to cite the text of the relevant laws.

theweek.com/articles/547127/how-indianas-religious-freedom-law-empowers-businesses-expense-everyday-americans

theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/03/what-makes-indiana-religious-freedom-law-different/388997/

 

[BlackSand]

I'll remind you that conservatives are the most vocal proponents of exporting jobs to slave labor conditions in China.

And pointing out that your idiocy will hurt Indiana's economy is not the same as supporting a company.

What idiocy would that be ... Since I suggested it would be better if Indiana introduced anti-discrimination protections for sexual orientation over bitching about what isn't identified in the law?

What does anything your ideas on what you think Conservatives do or think ... Have to do with the outright hypocrisy involved in Apple making comments about Indiana while they use China for a cash cow and ignore the same if not worse conditions?

Trip over your dick some more if you feel like it ... Must be painful.

.

 

[Camp]

I think it is interesting that corporations or institutions would use their power of the purse to pursue pointless division politics in order to present the image they care about the irrelevant. It seems to me that it would go further to threaten withdrawal if Indiana does not establish "sexual orientation" as a protected anti-discrimination class ... Than to withdraw as a knee-jerk response to provisions not supplied in the text of the legislation ... In order to run and hide from accountability as far as actually accomplishing anything worthwhile.

.

I think it's great when businesses consider the local climate before opening up offices/moving there.

Like if Roe were overturned and states got to vote on women's civil rights...you'd have states that kept Roe in tact and states that overturned it. The thing is that if you're Bank of America or Wal*Mart and you want to transfer a female to a state that outlawed Roe...you may not be able to entice her to take a pass on civil rights in the interest of managing a branch or store. It not only makes the playing field unlevel for the people involved, it makes the playing field more treacherous for businesses who now have to consider the local ordinances.

The real hilarity behind the Indiana law is that religious freedoms are not under attack. The law was needless and Indiana stands to lose tens of millions of dollars for something nobody needed or wanted outside of the political class.

Businesses will be vary weary of setting up shop if they have to recruit people from out of state, educated people aren't and don't want to brig their families to that type of environment

That type of environment... Like the entire USA, which has the same -federal- law?

No it doesn't. Stop listening to that conservative radio crap. They are misleading you and making you sound foolish. The federal law is not the same as the Indiana law. The federal law does not include interactions between private business and customers. That is the whole point of the controversy. Indiana law is allowing private business to interact with private citizens and determine if discrimination is justified or not. It will take a law suite and years of litigation to determine the legitimacy on a case by case basis.

me believes you are wrong.

Some links to help you educate yourself on the subject have been posted. They are in post #71.

 

[M14 Shooter]

I think it's great when businesses consider the local climate before opening up offices/moving there.

Like if Roe were overturned and states got to vote on women's civil rights...you'd have states that kept Roe in tact and states that overturned it. The thing is that if you're Bank of America or Wal*Mart and you want to transfer a female to a state that outlawed Roe...you may not be able to entice her to take a pass on civil rights in the interest of managing a branch or store. It not only makes the playing field unlevel for the people involved, it makes the playing field more treacherous for businesses who now have to consider the local ordinances.

The real hilarity behind the Indiana law is that religious freedoms are not under attack. The law was needless and Indiana stands to lose tens of millions of dollars for something nobody needed or wanted outside of the political class.

Businesses will be vary weary of setting up shop if they have to recruit people from out of state, educated people aren't and don't want to brig their families to that type of environment

That type of environment... Like the entire USA, which has the same -federal- law?

No it doesn't.

Explain, in detail, the objectionable difference between the federal law and the IN law.
Be sure to cite the text of the relevant laws.

theweek.com/articles/547127/how-indianas-religious-freedom-law-empowers-businesses-expense-everyday-americans
theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/03/what-makes-indiana-religious-freedom-law-different/388997/

Chuckle.
The complaint rests on the protection of the business owner rather than the patron?
How is that so obnoxious?

 

[WinterBorn]

If the people are being punished because of their government's actions, it's the peoples job to elect a new government. Apple, or any other corporation, can move into or leave any state they want for any reason.

Apple's job is to provide their customers with the best products to suit their customers' needs ... Not necessarily to decide the politics of any given state.
Where I see no reason to suggest that they cannot move their corporate facilities to whatever location they desire ... That doesn't mean that their political stance should overshadow their responsibilities to their customers.

To suggest that Apple should involve themselves in division politics in order to make politics more important than the services they offer ... Would qualify them as a lobbying organization or agency more than a business.

.

It is funny to me that you insist Apple's main responsibility is to their customers. And yet, you seem in favor of this legislation that allows business owners to discriminate against certain customers.

 

[TheOldSchool]

I'll remind you that conservatives are the most vocal proponents of exporting jobs to slave labor conditions in China.

And pointing out that your idiocy will hurt Indiana's economy is not the same as supporting a company.

What idiocy would that be ... Since I suggested it would be better if Indiana introduced anti-discrimination protections for sexual orientation over bitching about what isn't identified in the law?

What does anything your ideas on what you think Conservatives do or think ... Have to do with the outright hypocrisy involved in Apple making comments about Indiana while they use China for a cash cow and ignore the same if not worse conditions?

Trip over your dick some more if you feel like it ... Must be painful.

.

Apple was a totally arbitrary choice of company brought up for a debate with the fool I was talking to earlier. My stance on Apple has nothing to do with how terrible I think this law is.

 

[BlackSand]

It is funny to me that you insist Apple's main responsibility is to their customers. And yet, you seem in favor of this legislation that allows business owners to discriminate against certain customers.

Feel free to point out where I mentioned I favored the legislation ... Otherwise, direct your unfounded assumptions elsewhere.

.

 

[BlackSand]

Apple was a totally arbitrary choice of company brought up for a debate with the fool I was talking to earlier. My stance on Apple has nothing to do with how terrible I think this law is.

I don't really care why you brought Apple up ... It was stupid to do so.
No matter what you think about the law ... There are better ways to provide better protections for the people you seem to wish to protect than resorting to division politics.

.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Wow there is no where for the thumpers to run
NASCAR joins backlash over Indiana religious freedom law - Mar. 31 2015

Bill Clinton singed the same law into effect back in 1993.
Where were you mindless partisan bigots back then?

No he didn't. You should probably read the laws before saying something stupid next time.

As usual, you do not have any idea of what you're talking about, or you do and simply choose to lie.

This is a repost. M14 Shooter

Since you didn't respond last time:

The Clinton law affected disputes between people and the government. It allowed things like letting Muslims keep trimmed beards in jail and allowing Churches to feed the homeless in public spaces. The Indiana law affects disputes between private citizens. Effectively legalizing discrimination based on whatever the hell religious beliefs you claim to have.

Do you understand the difference now? And will you stop rahshing the nonsense about "19 other states?"

 

[M14 Shooter]

Wow there is no where for the thumpers to run
NASCAR joins backlash over Indiana religious freedom law - Mar. 31 2015

Bill Clinton singed the same law into effect back in 1993.
Where were you mindless partisan bigots back then?

No he didn't. You should probably read the laws before saying something stupid next time.

As usual, you do not have any idea of what you're talking about, or you do and simply choose to lie.

This is a repost.

This is a repost
Chuckle.
The complaint rests on the protection of the business owner rather than the patron?
How is that so obnoxious?