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

[Camp]

No matter how the story gets spinned. Some people are going to be made to feel uncomfortable and embarrassed when they are refused service and a very small minority of religious folks will feel they have made a great accomplishment. The citizens of Indiana, especially workers and small business owners will pay the real price. How many will suffer and to what extent is unknown. Time will tell.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

So......it appears that President obama is an anti gay bigot.....he signed the same legislation as a state senator when he didn't vote on a lot of other things here in Illinois.....

Don't forget Bill Clinton, he signed the Federal version

which is different from the Indiana law as it addresses conflicts between Government and individual...this is different ....it involves conflicts between individuals ........

Post some more silly images, at least they make some sort of sense, slaptrap

Nothing that you or the other wing nuttistas post ever makes any sense....

The Indiana Religious Freedom Restoration Act An Analysis of Its Controversy IN Advance
Every other Religious Freedom Restoration Act applies to disputes between a person or entity and a government. Indiana’s is the only law that explicitly applies to disputes between private citizens.* This means it could be used as a cudgel by corporations to justify discrimination against individuals that might otherwise be protected under law. Indiana trial lawyer Matt Anderson, discussing this difference, writes that the Indiana law is “more broadly written than its federal and state predecessors” and opens up “the path of least resistance among its species to have a court adjudicate it in a manner that could ultimately be used to discriminate…”

 

[PaintMyHouse]

So......it appears that President obama is an anti gay bigot.....he signed the same legislation as a state senator when he didn't vote on a lot of other things here in Illinois.....

Don't forget Bill Clinton, he signed the Federal version

which is different from the Indiana law as it addresses conflicts between Government and individual...this is different ....it involves conflicts between individuals ........

Post some more silly images, at least they make some sort of sense, slaptrap

Nothing that you or the other wing nuttistas post ever makes any sense....

The Indiana Religious Freedom Restoration Act An Analysis of Its Controversy IN Advance
Every other Religious Freedom Restoration Act applies to disputes between a person or entity and a government. Indiana’s is the only law that explicitly applies to disputes between private citizens.* This means it could be used as a cudgel by corporations to justify discrimination against individuals that might otherwise be protected under law. Indiana trial lawyer Matt Anderson, discussing this difference, writes that the Indiana law is “more broadly written than its federal and state predecessors” and opens up “the path of least resistance among its species to have a court adjudicate it in a manner that could ultimately be used to discriminate…”

Time to take this baby for a test drive. Start calling the bigots and let's get this sucker in front of a judge.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

This is what The Tea Party Religionist are really after...the Right to be blatant racists with impunity with legal protection ....

 

[Uncensored2008]

The bill consecrates bigotry, and rejects the bible:

See and consider:

BIBLE VERSES ABOUT GOLDEN RULE

Now, I'm off to the dog park, where the dogs are social and the people much more so than the Crazy Right Wingers. To those I say, have fun, post your personal attacks and Rabbi, don't forget to be vulgar and disgusting, otherwise some will not recognize a post as yours.

Make sure Obama doesn't find out, he likes to eat dogs....

 

[Uncensored2008]

Actually, it wasn't the "same thing"

Lying as always, eh shitflinger?

{(a) IN GENERAL- Government shall not substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, except as provided in subsection (b).



(b) EXCEPTION- Government may substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion only if it demonstrates that application of the burden to the person--

(1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and

(2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.}

Is that Indiana, or the Clinton bill, shitflinger?

 

[Uncensored2008]

This is what The Tea Party Religionist are really after...the Right to be blatant racists with impunity with leagl protection ....

In South Carolina, a BBQ restaurant owner claimed that he was within his rights to refuse service to blacks based on his religious beliefs. In the case brought before the Supreme Court, Maurice Bessinger stated that his religion required him to keep black people from eating in his restaurant, although he was perfectly OK with taking their money, so long as they ordered their food to-go. The attorney representing the petitioners suing Piggie Park also addressed in court the “First Amendment religious privilege claim that petitioner asserted that his religion required him” to deny service to black customers. “I’m just a fair man. I want to be known as a hard-working, Christian man that loves God and wants to further (God’s) work throughout the world as I have been doing throughout the last 25 years.” (Source)

Read more at: SC Restaurant Owner Refuses To Serve Blacks Cites Religious Beliefs

Because sexual acts are a race.

You Communists are so smart...

 

[jillian]

I understand that what you wrote is typical of what you generally post. And be assured, characters like you are a fiction, any resemblance to intelligent life is purely coincidental.

Your concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.

that's what the voices in your head told you he said?

okaaaaaaay

Thank you, that was exactly what I expected from you.

Your concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.

(Reader, understand that cohesive reasoning is not prerequisite among the Intellectually Less Fortunate. When the disembodied points of their feckless rants are challenged, they fold up like a $2 tent.

Proving once again that the key to "Defeating Leftist In Debate", rest upon to key fundamentals:

1- Find a Leftist.

2- Get them to speak.)

Challenge a lefty on any point he tries to make and you get deflection and insult. Every single time. They can't argue coherently because they cannot think coherently.

I didn't see Pence being able to answer either Yes or No

All we got was deflection

we know what the answer is. pence saying it or not is irrelevant. and they're cowards, so why would they answer?

 

[bripat9643]

Why should a merchant subject himself to the hostility of a swam of angry queer hornets? The sign you want is merely a target letting assholes like you know who to harass and vandalize. The Nazis did the same exact thing to the Jews.

 

[jillian]

Actually, it wasn't the "same thing"

Lying as always, eh shitflinger?

{(a) IN GENERAL- Government shall not substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, except as provided in subsection (b).



(b) EXCEPTION- Government may substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion only if it demonstrates that application of the burden to the person--

(1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and

(2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.}

Is that Indiana, or the Clinton bill, shitflinger?

quiet, hack. what religion requires that you discriminate against people?

you loons said the same thing when you were opposing desegregation.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Yep those tolerate freedom loving progressives only say it is freedom if they can force you to do something against your will.

Most equal rights/anti-discrimination legislation is designed to make people do something against their will.

True... like forcing people to associate with the sexual deviants and perverts we call the LGBT community...

Like not letting you kick the colored people out of your restaurant.

 

[Uncensored2008]

we know what the answer is. pence saying it or not is irrelevant. and they're cowards, so why would they answer?

Pence is on the opposite side of you and your party.

Pence is defending civil liberty and the Bill of Rights, you demagogues are dedicated to eradicating both.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Actually, it wasn't the "same thing"

Lying as always, eh shitflinger?

{(a) IN GENERAL- Government shall not substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, except as provided in subsection (b).



(b) EXCEPTION- Government may substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion only if it demonstrates that application of the burden to the person--

(1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and

(2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.}

Is that Indiana, or the Clinton bill, shitflinger?

quiet, hack. what religion requires that you discriminate against people?

you loons said the same thing when you were opposing desegregation.

They WANT the right to discriminate racially. That's what they mean when they say a business should have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason.

They are not comfortable living in modern American, to put it another way.

 

[NYcarbineer]

we know what the answer is. pence saying it or not is irrelevant. and they're cowards, so why would they answer?

Pence is on the opposite side of you and your party.

Pence is defending civil liberty and the Bill of Rights, you demagogues are dedicated to eradicating both.

Bringing back racial discrimination is a step forward in civil liberties?

 

[Uncensored2008]

quiet, hack. what religion requires that you discriminate against people?

you loons said the same thing when you were opposing desegregation.

As a pretend lawyer with many hours of studious "Law & Order" rerun watching, you should be able to point out the distinction between the Indiana law and the Clinton law, and perhaps even recognize which one I posted...

Or maybe not.

"It's only wrong when the hated opposition does it." Demagogue party motto.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

we know what the answer is. pence saying it or not is irrelevant. and they're cowards, so why would they answer?

Pence is on the opposite side of you and your party.

Pence is defending civil liberty and the Bill of Rights, you demagogues are dedicated to eradicating both.

Pence is codifying reactionary religious discrimination. In their version of the faith, Jesus says get thee behind me, faggot.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

we know what the answer is. pence saying it or not is irrelevant. and they're cowards, so why would they answer?

Pence is on the opposite side of you and your party.

Pence is defending civil liberty and the Bill of Rights, you demagogues are dedicated to eradicating both.

Bringing back racial discrimination is a step forward in civil liberties?

Adjusted for the flyover:

 

[NYcarbineer]

Why is Pence claiming this law doesn't allow discrimination, while the RWnuts around here claim it does,

and not only do they claim it does, they are thrilled that it does...

who's right? Pence, or you people?

 

[bripat9643]

Please explain without calling names why having a sign up is such a bad idea. How is that a bad thing?

Having a sign up will hurt their business. People will see that here is a merchant who does not believe in equal rights.

But by not having a sign warning customers of their policy, the business can go on discriminating without the public blow back.

I'd like to see two stickers around a lot. The We Don't Discriminate on the store windows, and the This Person Buys From Bigots slapped on the car bumpers of those who do.

The later would be a illegal, moron. Store owners are free to put whatever sign the like in their windows. That is, they are for the moment.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Why should a merchant subject himself to the hostility of a swam of angry queer hornets? The sign you want is merely a target letting assholes like you know who to harass and vandalize. The Nazis did the same exact thing to the Jews.

The ironic part of this, most of the florists and bakeries there are soon going to make this look like somebody forget to being enough rainbows: