Page 300 of 320 FirstFirst ... 200250290298299300301302310 ... LastLast
Results 2,991 to 3,000 of 3196

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

  1. #2991
    Sage
    Fletch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Mentor Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    13,571

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

    Quote Originally Posted by AGENT J View Post
    1.) yes it is a definition of intolerance, again by definition
    Opposing gay marriage is not in and of itself an example of intolerance. So you are wrong. But what else is new. The rest of your post is just your usual childish gibberish.

  2. #2992
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    07-22-17 @ 10:01 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,259

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
    Opposing gay marriage is not in and of itself an example of intolerance. So you are wrong. But what else is new. The rest of your post is just your usual childish gibberish.
    If it is not an example of intolerance then what is it?

  3. #2993
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Between Athens and Jerusalem
    Last Seen
    05-18-16 @ 06:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    33,522

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Paperview View Post
    And FYI: DOMA was passed by a veto proof majority - which threatened to override, and pushed by the conservatives. So it would have been law no matter what he did.

    He *should not* have signed it - and regrets he did...some saw it as a stop gap measure - as it was in direct response to a Hawaii 1993 ruling in favor of same sex marriage, and other states feared it could happen in their states.

    As it turned out - DOMA actually encouraged more litigation, pushed what *might* have taken SSM proponents a bit longer - to achieve what we have today, 3/4 of the country legally able to marry -- and soon a SCOTUS ruling likely in favor -- for something no one could have imagined would have happened so quick.

    DOMA! - unintended consequently - helped push it along.

    Thanks Unconstitutional D o Ma!
    Bill not only signed it into law, he bragged about it in election commercials during the 98 midterms. He also implemented dont ask dont tell, all on his own. Don't ask, don't tell - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


    I dont see the left calling him a bigot, wonder why?

    The Bill Clinton Hypocrisy on Gay Marriage - Heather Ginsberg

  4. #2994
    Educator
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Last Seen
    06-21-17 @ 12:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    667

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

    RFRA Continued from post 2932.

    There are differences with federal law, and some other state laws. But these differences are not directly related to the hysteria over discrimination (which is really a trojan horse for left wing hysteria over any kind of religious exemption for any reason). And they are NOT, contrary to fox, different from all 19 states and the federal RFRA

    They are: (see: Comparing the Federal RFRA and the Indiana RFRA | Josh Blackman's Blog)

    - [1] It explicitly protects the exercise of religion by entities as well as individuals. Its enumeration of entities includes “a corporation”, without limiting this to closely-held companies.

    - [2] The bill’s protections may be invoked when a person’s exercise of religion is “likely” to be substantially burdened by government action, not just when it has been burdened.

    - [3] The bill also permits the assertion of free exercise rights as a claim or defense in judicial or administrative proceedings even if the government is not a party to the proceedings. The relevant governmental entity has a right to intervene in such cases to respond to the RFRA claim. A remedy under the bill is only available against the government; suits by employees or applicants invoking the law against private employers are precluded.

    As any sane person can read, this has nothing to do with the evils of discrimination. It has to do with defining religious rights protection for more entities, permitting defensive legal action when it is likely they will be burdened (not after the fact), and the unambiguous assertion of protection of rights in any judicial proceeding, even if government is not the one suing or being counter-sued.

    EVEN SO, NONE OF THIS IS CONSISTENTLY DIFFERENT FROM RFRA APPLICATION FEDERAL AND/OR SOME OTHER STATES.

    First, remember that the legal dictionary act, which already applies to RFRA's. A “corporation” is treated as "a person". Seven of nine SCOTUS justices also agreed in that at least for closely held corporations, such as Hobby Lobby, that is true. Indiana's Section 7.3 portion tracks the closely held federal standard. But it also permits a broader corporation to protect its exercise of religion - for example, a Christian book publisher.

    Second, Section 9 provides protections for “A person whose exercise of religion has been substantially burdened, or is likely to be substantially burdened.” While it is true that the “is likely to” language does not appear in the federal RFRA, I does not add anything of concern. It’s effectively asking if there will be a likelihood of success on the merits. In the case of Hobby Lobby a pre-enforcement challenge was brought, claiming that they were likely to have a substantial burden. No burden was ever inflicted.

    Third, and most significantly, the law provides a defense in a private suit where the government is not a party. In other words, the law provides a defense against a both a government or private suit. It might, in some cases, provide an RFRA defense. If Biff and Bruce sue a photographer for failing to photograph their wedding under a local non-discrimination ordinance, the photographer than raises the state RFRA as a defense. Even though the government is not a party, RFRA can be raised as a defense in the judicial proceeding. The court would have to determine whether the application of the non-discrimination ordinance substantially burdens the photographers exercise of religion.

    Mind you, this is STILL NOT consistently different that current law. Because of ambiguity in the wording of federal law, whether or not a person can use RFRA defense in private suits is split. In four circuits (CA2, CA9, CA8, CADC) they hold that RFRA can be raised as a defense in citizen suits. Other circuits (CA6, CA7) do not permit private defendants to raise RFRA as a defense in private suits.

    The US Government has taken the position that the RFRA can be raised as a defense in lawsuits brought by private parties.

    Finally, Indiana, as well as Arizona’s RFRAs are very similar to the Federal RFRA. In contrast, Mississippi’s RFRA, which only requires a “burden,” not a “substantial” one, deviates significantly from the federal statute.

    So no, the RFRA does not provide immunity. It only allows a defendant in either a government or private suit to raise a defense which judge must consider, like any other defense under Title VII or the ADA. It is not an authorization to discriminate.

    And the claim that Indiana's RFRA is different than 19 other States and the federal RFRA, and is tailored to make it easy to discriminate is obvious horse-poo.
    Last edited by maxparrish; 04-01-15 at 03:31 PM.

  5. #2995
    Left the building
    Fearandloathing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Vancouver, Canada Dual citizen
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    17,429

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
    Opposing gay marriage is not in and of itself an example of intolerance. So you are wrong. But what else is new. The rest of your post is just your usual childish gibberish.
    I would say it is a great example of intolerance AND moralism
    "I will kill these people if I have to." Christopher Cantwell, White Nationalist leader, August 2017

  6. #2996
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 04:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

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

    Quote Originally Posted by US Conservative View Post
    Many voters admit to being taken in by the rhetoric of ads for Obama.
    Those are the rules, you can't play by them until it doesn't suit you.
    Hence the lolz about the butthurt.

    When the left uses the govt to coerce everyone, its "progress".
    When the left isn't happy with the result of govt actions, its time to shriek.

    You have to see how silly that looks.
    There's a difference between voting for a person based on lies and voting to restrict access to government rights, benefits, recognition for a relationship based on lies.

    But since such a restriction violates the Equal Protection Clause (as I'm almost certain the SCOTUS will rule as well in a few months), it doesn't matter. As was demonstrated by the California case, you can't win if you can't show how you are harmed if a law isn't in place but someone else is harmed by the law.
    "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.

  7. #2997
    Educator
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Last Seen
    06-21-17 @ 12:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    667

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Fearandloathing View Post
    I would say it is a great example of intolerance AND moralism
    It is intolerance of gay marriage. Just as the gay protection law is an intolerance of religious practice.

  8. #2998
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Between Athens and Jerusalem
    Last Seen
    05-18-16 @ 06:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    33,522

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

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    There's a difference between voting for a person based on lies and voting to restrict access to government rights, benefits, recognition for a relationship based on lies.

    But since such a restriction violates the Equal Protection Clause (as I'm almost certain the SCOTUS will rule as well in a few months), it doesn't matter. As was demonstrated by the California case, you can't win if you can't show how you are harmed if a law isn't in place but someone else is harmed by the law.
    Im in California. My 2nd amendment protected rights are violated every day because of lefty rhetoric. Its hard to get a CCW, I can't own magazines over 10 rounds, and my AR15 has to have a funny grip installed. When the federal AWB expired, lefties shrieked that teens would be "machine gunning" each other down in the streets. Not only did that not happen, but crime dropped. The left claimed CCW would turn people into cowboys-not only did that NOT happen, crime dropped.

    NONE of those restrictions are based in any FACT regarding safety but rather lefty rhetoric. If the left could get away with it-it would ban guns in my state-the lefts legislators have said as much.



    So excuse me if I find your appeal to be lacking.
    Last edited by US Conservative; 04-01-15 at 03:46 PM.

  9. #2999
    Sage
    Paperview's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    The Road Less Travelled
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    8,636

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

    Quote Originally Posted by US Conservative View Post
    Bill not only signed it into law, he bragged about it in election commercials during the 98 midterms. He also implemented dont ask dont tell, all on his own. Don't ask, don't tell - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


    I dont see the left calling him a bigot, wonder why?
    Here's why: Why Bill Clinton Signed the Defense of Marriage Act - The New Yorker

    But you won't read it.

  10. #3000
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    42,605

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
    1._Opposing gay marriage is not in and of itself an example of intolerance.
    2.) So you are wrong. But what else is new.
    3.) The rest of your post is just your usual childish gibberish.
    1.) i agree good thing i never made that claim, if you disagree simply qoute me saying otherwise you will fail . . .in fact there are quotes of me saying your exact phrase
    2.) see #1 since your premise/strawman is based on a lie i never said the only thing wrong is your claim
    3.) translation: facts proved your post wrong so now you are deflecting. Ill be sticking with facts over your proven wrong biased pinon, thanks

    please let us know when you have ONE fact that supports your failed and proven wrong claim . . .one . . . . thank you
    your post fails and facts wins aagin
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

Posting Permissions

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