The fact is that the "intent" of the bill was to clearly target gays, the "consequences" of the bill are that businesses owners would have been allowed to discriminate against blacks, Jews, Muslims, women, Hispanics, and the disabled and could hide behind "sincerely held religous beliefs" to do it. (Disabled? you might ask. Yes, Muslims find dogs an unclean animal and won't associate with them. Just as Muslim cab drivers in Minnesota were found in violation for refusing to take blind and disabled customers with service dogs. Under this law they could claim a religous exemption to serviceing disabled people.)
and these 9 others with a quick news search, could probably find 10 more lol
it was accurately described especially when one reads the bill, the motivation for it (cases about gay rights) and watches the legislative iprocedings which the news did.
Arizona anti-gay bill vetoed by governor - chicagotribune.com
Arizona governor vetoes anti-gay bill
Arizona Governor Jan Brewer Vetoes Anti-Gay Bill - NBC News
Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer vetoes so-called anti-gay bill - latimes.com
Arizona governor vetoes controversial bill allowing denial of service to gays
Arizona Governor Vetoes Bill Seen Discriminating Against Gays - Businessweek
Jan Brewer Announces Veto Of Arizona Anti-Gay Bill SB 1062
Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer vetoes anti-gay bill | MSNBC
Arizona governor vetoes anti-gay bill - Chicago Sun-Times
the reality is it was an ant-igay bill lol
"A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt
Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.
Please don't insult our intelligence by suggesting the driving force behind this bill wasn't to provide protections so that "religious" people so they could discriminate against the gays. The fact that it was poorly written with unintended consequences and came to national attention and people actually found out about it is beside the point.