Will Republicans ever learn? Indiana governor to sign bill allowing business not to serve gays

[2aguy]

and of course...lefties are talking out of their asses again...exploiting a lie to attack their enemies....
See, the federal version was meant to protect who in the original case....a Native American who lost his job because he used peyote in a religious ceremony.........you morons....

Video Protests over Indiana version of RFRA seem to miss one important point Hot Air

CNN’s announcer doesn’t get around to mentioning until almost at the end of the segment that other states have similar laws, and never mentions that the federal government does as well. Senators Orrin Hatch and Ted Kennedy sponsored the original Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) after the Supreme Court’s Smith decision that failed to protect a Native American who was denied employment benefits after having tested positive for peyote. Bill Clinton signed that RFRA into law in 1993 after it passed unanimously in the Senate.

Since then, 19 other states have passed similar legislation to apply RFRA to their own jurisdictions:


so...just like "hands up don't shoot" was a lie...so to is this left wing crap about this law in Indiana...

 

[Stephanie]

SNIP:
Remember When Democrats Used To Support Religious Freedom?

March 26, 2015 By Bill Clinton
Remarks on Signing the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993
November 16, 1993

Thank you very much, Mr. Vice President, for those fine remarks and to the Members of Congress, the chaplains of the House and the Senate, and to all of you who worked so hard to help this day become a reality. Let me especially thank the Coalition for the Free Exercise of Religion for the central role they played in drafting this legislation and working so hard for its passage.

ALL of it here with video.
Remember When Democrats Supported Religious Freedom

 

[Seawytch]

People have a right to ban muslims and child molesters from their business.

Yeah? Try it. Try banning Muslims from your establishment, bigot.

you're the biggest bigot on this board. so stop with the chest thumping

Really? Who am I intolerant against except bigots? And I don't even want to take away a single right the racist or anti gay bigot has...unlike the anti gay bigot who would like to take rights away from me.

 

[Seawytch]

SNIP:
Remember When Democrats Used To Support Religious Freedom?

March 26, 2015 By Bill Clinton
Remarks on Signing the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993
November 16, 1993

Thank you very much, Mr. Vice President, for those fine remarks and to the Members of Congress, the chaplains of the House and the Senate, and to all of you who worked so hard to help this day become a reality. Let me especially thank the Coalition for the Free Exercise of Religion for the central role they played in drafting this legislation and working so hard for its passage.

ALL of it here with video.
Remember When Democrats Supported Religious Freedom

So Steph...explain Indiana's law if there is already Federal law. Can you also explain to us why the Governor of Indiana now feels that his bill needs to be amended for clarification?

Can you tell us why this happened in Georgia with the same kind of bill?

As in Indiana, proponents of Georgia’s bill have tried to argue that it has nothing to do with discrimination. Rep. Mike Jacobs, an LGBT-friendly Republican, decided to test this theory by introducing an amendment that would not allow claims of religious liberty to be used to circumvent state and local nondiscrimination protections. Supporters of the bill, like Rep. Barry Fleming (R), countered that the amendment “will gut the bill.” Nevertheless, the House Judiciary Committee approved the amendment with a 9-8 vote, three Republicans joining the Democrats in supporting it.​

 

[Wildman]

Are you stupid?

you do not know Deanie very well do you ? Stupid is his middle name.

 

[Flash]

Libtards hate the idea of freedom of choice except when it comes to killing children on demand.

They really hate the idea of freedom of association and religion. Those things pisses them off.

 

[Wildman]

take rights away from me.

admitting you are a BIGOT ?? or a bigoted
in reality..,

 

[Seawytch]

take rights away from me.

admitting you are a BIGOT ?? or a bigoted
in reality..,

Yes, I admitted to being intolerant of intolerant people. Quite a conundrum for me isn't it?

 

[Flash]

Really? Who am I intolerant against except bigots? And I don't even want to take away a single right the racist or anti gay bigot has...unlike the anti gay bigot who would like to take rights away from me.

If I don't want to associate with you because of my religious beliefs then what right do you have to force me?

Do you think you are entitled or something just because you are alive?

Why don't you believe in freedom? Is that concept alien to you?

How I feel about queers is of no concern to you. Just mind your own business and I will do the same. I don't need your approval and I sure as hell don't need the filthy ass government telling me what to do.

 

[Dana7360]

I seriously don't see the problem with this new law. It goes along the lines of "we have the right to refuse service to anyone", doesn't it? If businesses do not want to cater to homosexuals or muslims or green skinned aliens....then that is on the businesses' heads...and pocket book. Businesses should not be FORCED to do business with those that go against their own freedom of choice.

Here's what's wrong with your views:

A person could be having a heart attack and the doctor or hospital would refuse to help them because they are of the wrong skin color or of who they love. So the person dies.

Or the one and only store in an area refuses to sell food to a person because of the color of their skin or who they love. So the person starves to death or has to finds a way to move to a place that will have a store that will sell them food.

A person shouldn't be denied life saving help or basic food to live just because another person says their religion doesn't approve of that person's lifestyle or what that person looks like.

A person shouldn't have to leave their home, all the people they love and their job just because someone says their religion doesn't approve of them and refuses to sell them food.

If a person goes in business to serve the public, then that person serves all the public. Not just those they say their religion approves of.

 

[Seawytch]

Really? Who am I intolerant against except bigots? And I don't even want to take away a single right the racist or anti gay bigot has...unlike the anti gay bigot who would like to take rights away from me.

If I don't want to associate with you because of my religious beliefs then what right do you have to force me?

Do you think you are entitled or something just because you are alive?

Why don't you believe in freedom? Is that concept alien to you?

How I feel about queers is of no concern to you. Just mind your own business and I will do the same. I don't need your approval and I sure as hell don't need the filthy ass government telling me what to do.

When you are licensed to operate a business in a state, you must abide by that state's laws governing the operation of that business. In some states and localities, Public Accommodation protections (which have been in effect since the 60s protecting race, religion and country of origin), protect gays and lesbians against discrimination. If you don't want to follow the LOCAL laws (not Federal laws like those that protect religion from discrimination in Public Accommodation), then you don't operate your business in that locality.

If a state wants to pass these types of "let's discriminate against gays" bills, they can...they can also be challenged in court...and in the meantime, people can protest and boycott the state if they want to.

I just wish when states pass these bills, they'd also pass the amendment requiring a business post a sign saying that they won't serve gays...that way I don't waste my time or money in their establishment.

And if these bills are so great, why do they have private signing ceremonies in the dark of night?

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Angie's List Cancels $40 Million 1000 Jobs Indiana Expansion Over Anti-Gay 'Religious Freedom' Law
Angie s List Cancels 40 Million 1000 Jobs Indiana Expansion Over Anti-Gay Religious Freedom Law - The New Civil Rights Movement

The decision by Angie's List to pull back its investment in Indiana is part of a huge and growing negative response from businesses and other financial interests across the country that do business or are based in Indiana, and other public individuals and entities, including the world's largest and most-respected corporation, Apple, Inc., the City of San Francisco, the White House, Broadway's Audra McDonald, $4 billion software firm Salesforce, $50 million annual gaming convention Gen Con, Fortune 500 member Cummins, Eskenazi Health, Eli Lilly and Co., Yelp, Hillary Clinton, George Takei, Pat McAfee, Jason Collins, Ashton Kutcher, Miley Cyrus, James Van Der Beek, Sophia Bush, Dustin Lance Black, Mara Wilson, Jack Antonoff, the Mayor of Indianapolis, and the State of Indiana's own tourism board.

 

[Seawytch]

I seriously don't see the problem with this new law. It goes along the lines of "we have the right to refuse service to anyone", doesn't it? If businesses do not want to cater to homosexuals or muslims or green skinned aliens....then that is on the businesses' heads...and pocket book. Businesses should not be FORCED to do business with those that go against their own freedom of choice.

Here's what's wrong with your views:

A person could be having a heart attack and the doctor or hospital would refuse to help them because they are of the wrong skin color or of who they love. So the person dies.

Or the one and only store in an area refuses to sell food to a person because of the color of their skin or who they love. So the person starves to death or has to finds a way to move to a place that will have a store that will sell them food.

A person shouldn't be denied life saving help or basic food to live just because another person says their religion doesn't approve of that person's lifestyle or what that person looks like.

A person shouldn't have to leave their home, all the people they love and their job just because someone says their religion doesn't approve of them and refuses to sell them food.

If a person goes in business to serve the public, then that person serves all the public. Not just those they say their religion approves of.

Yeah...well in more than half the states you can be fired or denied housing or basic services just for being gay. That's right, it's not just in "right to work" states where you can be fired for being gay, but in 30 out of 50 states. And yeah, can you believe it, but gays can actually be denied housing because they are gay.

Can you imagine coming back from your honeymoon to find out you've been fired and kicked out of your home?

People that say we don't need Public Accommodation laws anymore think only of urban areas where there is often another vendor or service provider. They forget about the rural living gay or Muslim (the last minority groups it's "okay" to discriminate against) Where is the rural dwelling Muslim or gay family supposed to buy food or fuel?

 

[rightwinger]

Angie's List Cancels $40 Million 1000 Jobs Indiana Expansion Over Anti-Gay 'Religious Freedom' Law
Angie s List Cancels 40 Million 1000 Jobs Indiana Expansion Over Anti-Gay Religious Freedom Law - The New Civil Rights Movement

The decision by Angie's List to pull back its investment in Indiana is part of a huge and growing negative response from businesses and other financial interests across the country that do business or are based in Indiana, and other public individuals and entities, including the world's largest and most-respected corporation, Apple, Inc., the City of San Francisco, the White House, Broadway's Audra McDonald, $4 billion software firm Salesforce, $50 million annual gaming convention Gen Con, Fortune 500 member Cummins, Eskenazi Health, Eli Lilly and Co., Yelp, Hillary Clinton, George Takei, Pat McAfee, Jason Collins, Ashton Kutcher, Miley Cyrus, James Van Der Beek, Sophia Bush, Dustin Lance Black, Mara Wilson, Jack Antonoff, the Mayor of Indianapolis, and the State of Indiana's own tourism board.

1000 jobs?

That's more than Keystone

 

[Seawytch]

It goes along the lines of "we have the right to refuse service to anyone", doesn't it?

You don't actually have that right and haven't since the 60s.

The Right to Refuse Service
The Federal Civil Rights Act guarantees all people the right to "full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin."

The right of public accommodation is also guaranteed to disabled citizens under the Americans with Disabilities Act, which precludes discrimination by businesses on the basis of disability.

In addition to the protections against discrimination provided under federal law, many states have passed their own Civil Rights Acts that provide broader protections than the Federal Civil Rights Act. For example, California's Unruh Civil Rights Act makes it illegal to discriminate against individuals based on unconventional dress or sexual preference.​

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

We have reaction from Indianapolis to Governor Pence's signing of the Religion bill

 

[Dana7360]

BRIPAT9643 SAID:

'BTW, the law on that issue is totally illegitimate. The Constitution does not grant the federal government authority to regulate private business. FDR intimidated the SC into agreeing to it. It's the same as a mugger holding a gun to his victims head and demanding money. Then he calls the money "mine." It still isn't his.'

At least you're consistent at being ignorant and wrong.

Articles III and VI of the Constitution authorize the Supreme Court to determine what the Constitution means, its rulings are the law of the land.

That you and others on the right disagree with those rulings as a consequence of your ignorance and hate is thankfully irrelevant.

It is a fact of Constitutional law that the Commerce Clause authorizes Congress, as well as state and local governments, to enact regulatory policy concerning the markets, including public accommodations laws, and to regulate private business.

I always scroll right by that person's posts. It has nothing intelligent to contribute so I don't waste my time.

I read what it posted since you reposted it and replied to it.

Anyone who says that the constitution doesn't give congress the authority to regulate business obviously never read or understood the constitution.

Here's the commerce clause:
Article I, Section 8, Clause 3:[3]

[The Congress shall have Power] To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

The words of the clause are clear and short. The congress can regulate business.

Anyone who doesn't believe that business should be regulated is violating the constitution.

 

[bodecea]

Pence signed the bill during a private ceremony in his Statehouse office just before 10 a.m. Thursday. He was joined by supportive lawmakers, Franciscan monks and nuns, orthodox Jews, and some of the state's most powerful lobbyists on conservative social issues.

The event was closed to the public and the press.

That picture just screams Separation of Church and State, doesn't it?

 

[Flash]

Really? Who am I intolerant against except bigots? And I don't even want to take away a single right the racist or anti gay bigot has...unlike the anti gay bigot who would like to take rights away from me.

If I don't want to associate with you because of my religious beliefs then what right do you have to force me?

Do you think you are entitled or something just because you are alive?

Why don't you believe in freedom? Is that concept alien to you?

How I feel about queers is of no concern to you. Just mind your own business and I will do the same. I don't need your approval and I sure as hell don't need the filthy ass government telling me what to do.

When you are licensed to operate a business in a state, you must abide by that state's laws governing the operation of that business. In some states and localities, Public Accommodation protections (which have been in effect since the 60s protecting race, religion and country of origin), protect gays and lesbians against discrimination. If you don't want to follow the LOCAL laws (not Federal laws like those that protect religion from discrimination in Public Accommodation), then you don't operate your business in that locality.

If a state wants to pass these types of "let's discriminate against gays" bills, they can...they can also be challenged in court...and in the meantime, people can protest and boycott the state if they want to.

I just wish when states pass these bills, they'd also pass the amendment requiring a business post a sign saying that they won't serve gays...that way I don't waste my time or money in their establishment.

And if these bills are so great, why do they have private signing ceremonies in the dark of night?

So what you bitching about? It is the law of the state now in Indiana.

Freedom of religion is in the Bill of Rights and trumps any federal law. As far as I know the 1964 Civil Rights Acts does not protect queers.

In Indiana the state has afforded the people the right of free association and that includes telling somebody that you don't want to do business with them. That is a good thing. It is called freedom and it is protected by the state in this case and should be elsewhere.

The concept of the state or federal government telling you who you have to associate with is one of the worse ideas this country ever come up with. It is against freedom.

I am quite capable of determining who I want to business with and I don't need the filthy ass government telling me what to do.

 

[RKMBrown]

lets say the Bakery gets a request for a Jewish wedding and says oh no I am anti Semitic ....

The the Jewish couple should go to a Jewish Baker that wants their business.
When the government starts saying who can do what with their business, then the government can pay the overhead, the electricity, the water, the internet, the bags, the register tape, the employees wages, the building insurance and the taxes of all goods sold....in my opinion.
I, myself, would love to have their business. And Blacks can sit at my counter IF I had one at the time. I am there to sell. I don't give a rats ass about the customers beliefs. I just want to make a profit on goods I sell. Period.

The Government provided the infrastructure the roads , the Banking system the internet and all else that supports business activities ....no one should be free to discriminate ....unless they announce they discriminate ...

Stickers touting "This business serves everyone" have been appearing on business windows in many Indiana cities.

That is good business sense. "The business serves everyone". No problems, no lawsuits, no crying and whining. It says up front and in yer face that business is in BUSINESS. Period.

and the wing nuts who support the law should put up a signs like Westboro Baptist "God hates Fags"

I don't support it or dis support it. I just don't get it.
Why go to a business and DEMAND they serve you when other businesses would love to have you? Demanding and having to pass a law to force a business to service you is just as bad as the business demanding you do business with them. Where is THAT law?

It's just stupid.

If you allow one public business the right to throw them out, you'll end up with entire towns that throw them out, then counties, then states as the moderates run and hide and the radicals start using peer pressure to effect social change.