Page 255 of 320 FirstFirst ... 155205245253254255256257265305 ... LastLast
Results 2,541 to 2,550 of 3196

Thread: Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

  1. #2541
    Traveler

    Jack Hays's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Reston, Virginia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,288
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

    Quote Originally Posted by JasperL View Post
    LOL. He's buddies with anti-SSM/gay orgs. His voting record is 100% or 0% on the issues important to them, which include opposing any attempt to extend rights to gays, and a dedicated and vocal effort to oppose SSM. What you're saying is the LGBT community should trust him and the GOP.... I assume you're joking. If not it's still
    There has been no case brought about discrimination against LGBT in Indiana.
    "It's always reassuring to find you've made the right enemies." -- William J. Donovan

  2. #2542
    Sage

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,515

    Re: Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    Hmm didn't realize Obama was a part of the topic...
    He is now.

  3. #2543
    Sage

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,515

    Re: Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

    Quote Originally Posted by polgara View Post
    Greetings, humbolt.

    Don't bring facts into this discussion, humbolt. It just confuses people who have their minds made up.
    Yeah. Pence is discriminating because he's conservative. Obama wasn't because he's a liberal. Huge difference. Huge.

  4. #2544
    Sage

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,515

    Re: Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

    Quote Originally Posted by zip98053 View Post
    The text of the laws is very close but the effect is completely different. Illinois has other laws that include LGBT as a protected class. Indiana does not. This means that, even if the text of the RFRA in Illinois and Indiana were exactly the same, businesses in Illinois could not refuse service to someone just because they are gay. In Indiana, they can and the people who wrote the law in Indiana knew that. That is what makes the "we didn't mean to discriminate against anyone" spin coming from Pence so disingenuous. The religious bigots in Indiana thought they could get away with this and they are stunned by the backlash. Now, they are going to lie about their intent.
    Protected class? I wanna be a protected class. I want a Humbolt class. I didn't realize that gays should be a protected class, and I see nothing in the Indiana text that discriminates. I think it's largely in your mind, which I might add seems suspect of some kind of discrimination itself. Where's all the tolerance I've heard so much about? Why, it's no where to be seen.

  5. #2545
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 08:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    Re: Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

    Quote Originally Posted by polgara View Post
    Greetings, humbolt.

    Don't bring facts into this discussion, humbolt. It just confuses people who have their minds made up.





  6. #2546
    Student
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    98053
    Last Seen
    04-19-15 @ 02:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    264

    Re: Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

    Quote Originally Posted by humbolt View Post
    Yeah. Pence is discriminating because he's conservative. Obama wasn't because he's a liberal. Huge difference. Huge.
    No, Pence is discriminating because it was his intent to allow discrimination and also the intent of the Indiana legislature. Obama's intent wasn't. Illinois already had laws that make LGBT a protected class. Indiana doesn't. When this was discussed as part of the legislative process, it was pointed out that the legislation in Indiana would allow discrimination against LGBTs unless the law was changed to prevent it. The legislature chose not to change it. So, yes, huge difference.
    Last edited by zip98053; 03-31-15 at 07:29 PM.

  7. #2547
    Traveler

    Jack Hays's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Reston, Virginia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,288
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

    The crux of the matter:

    A Perfect Storm of Hysteria and Legal Ignorance - Rich Lowry, NRO

    ". . . The religious-freedom laws once were associated with minorities that progressives could embrace or tolerate ó Native Americans who smoke peyote as part of religious ceremonies, Amish who drive their buggies on the roads, and the like. That was fine. It is the specter of Christian small-business people ó say, a baker or a florist ó using the laws to protect themselves from punishment for opting out of gay-wedding ceremonies that drives progressives mad.

    Why? Itís a large, diverse country, with many people of differing faiths and different points of view. More specifically, the country has an enormous wedding industry not known for its hostility to gays. The burgeoning institution of gay marriage will surely survive the occasional florist who doesnít want to provide flowers for a same-sex wedding for religious reasons.
    As a practical matter, such a dissenting florist doesnít make a difference; the affected couple might be offended but can take its business elsewhere. But for the Left, itís the principle of the thing. For all its talk of diversity, it demands unanimity on this question ó individual conscience be damned. So it isnít bothered when religious wedding vendors are sued or harassed under anti-discrimination laws for their nonparticipation in ceremonies they morally oppose.
    Itís not clear that Religious Freedom Restoration Acts will shield these kinds of business people (they havenít, to this point). It might be that more specific exemptions are necessary. But the mere possibility that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act might protect a baker opposed to gay marriage is enough to create a furious, unhinged reaction.
    Yes, there is intolerance afoot in the debate over Indiana, but itís not on the part of Indianans."

    Even this is overstated IMHO. There has been no recorded case of denial of service to LGBT in Indiana.
    "It's always reassuring to find you've made the right enemies." -- William J. Donovan

  8. #2548
    Living in Gods country


    JANFU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    13,733

    Re: Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    My position should be obvious to you after the last few days, but since you asked, my position is that everyone has the right to decide on who they will commence in commerce with. It is my position based on the facts of the situation that refusing someone service does not harm them, but simply does not give them the assistance that the goods or services that were refused could have provided. It is my position that the government has no constitutional authority to demand people provide each other their labor, provide someone service, give up their property for the benefit of someone else, associate with someone against their will, or to force them into contracts with other citizens.
    Sorry large number of posts to read.

    Does not harm them?
    Creates an underclass of citizens does it not?
    Could you please define no harm?
    Quote Originally Posted by RickJames3000 View Post
    You need to revisit the chain of association... you only insisted you were a Trump-supporter after you figured out that made you a pederast as well. If I were you. I'd be more discreet about it... but I guess it's your dime.

  9. #2549
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    56,661

    Re: Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

    Quote Originally Posted by JANFU View Post
    Sorry large number of posts to read.

    Does not harm them?
    Creates an underclass of citizens does it not?
    Depends on how bad it is in society as a whole, but individually, no.

    Could you please define no harm?
    Harm: physical or mental damage or injury : something that causes someone or something to be hurt, broken, made less valuable or successful, etc.

    There is nothing about being refused service that causes physical or mental damage or any sort of injury at all. Sure, someone might die if they don't get medical care, and sure, someone might starve if they don't get food, but that was not caused by someone refusing to provide a service, but in the case of medical care, some sort of ailment, and in the case of food, hunger.

    Yes, the position is insensitive, and yes, it is rather cold, but it is the truth, and in this case that is all that matters.

  10. #2550
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    23,734

    Re: Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hays View Post
    Yes, he would need to change the law because the lies were successful.
    Dude....why don't you stop. Take a second...and stand back and look at what you are saying. Let's assume for a second that you are correct...that the "liars have won". What have they won? If the law didn't do what they claimed it did (their lies)...then a change in the law gets them nothing. They have won nothing. Right?

    On the otherhand...if you are wrong about their lies.....then your statement "They have won" would have more meaning. Because they will have won something. If their attacks were truthful....then what they have won is a change in the law changing the law from being discriminatory.


    So what is it? Why are you concerned about them "winning" if you really believe that what they have won is nothing? Its all about logic.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •