Page 306 of 320 FirstFirst ... 206256296304305306307308316 ... LastLast
Results 3,051 to 3,060 of 3196

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

  1. #3051
    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 ARealConservative View Post
    it might be what the citizens want, but it might not.

    our system isn't a direct democracy, so we can't concretely say the collective wants it.

    but when it comes to rights, we shouldn't be letting a group vote decide anyway
    I realize its not a direct democracy, nor would I want it to be. Suffice to say if its not, the next election will reflect that.

  2. #3052
    User Dem's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    NYC
    Last Seen
    04-24-15 @ 08:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    131

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

    The Indiana statute has two features the federal RFRA—and most state RFRAs—do not. First, the Indiana law explicitly allows any for-profit business to assert a right to “the free exercise of religion.” The federal RFRA doesn’t contain such language, and neither does any of the state RFRAs except South Carolina’s; in fact, Louisiana and Pennsylvania, explicitly exclude for-profit businesses from the protection of their RFRAs.

    The new Indiana statute also contains this odd language: “A person whose exercise of religion has been substantially burdened, or is likely to be substantially burdened, by a violation of this chapter may assert the violation or impending violation as a claim or defense in a judicial or administrative proceeding, regardless of whether the state or any other governmental entity is a party to the proceeding.” (My italics.) Neither the federal RFRA, nor 18 of the 19 state statutes cited by the Post, says anything like this; only the Texas RFRA, passed in 1999, contains similar language.

    What these words mean is, first, that the Indiana statute explicitly recognizes that a for-profit corporation has “free exercise” rights matching those of individuals or churches. A lot of legal thinkers thought that idea was outlandish until last year’s decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, in which the Court’s five conservatives interpreted the federal RFRA to give some corporate employers a religious veto over their employees’ statutory right to contraceptive coverage.

    Second, the Indiana statute explicitly makes a business’s “free exercise” right a defense against a private lawsuit by another person, rather than simply against actions brought by government. Why does this matter? Well, there’s a lot of evidence that the new wave of “religious freedom” legislation was impelled, at least in part, by a panic over a New Mexico state-court decision, Elane Photography v. Willock. In that case, a same-sex couple sued a professional photography studio that refused to photograph the couple’s wedding. New Mexico law bars discrimination in “public accommodations” on the basis of sexual orientation. The studio said that New Mexico’s RFRA nonetheless barred the suit; but the state’s Supreme Court held that the RFRA did not apply “because the government is not a party.”

    Remarkably enough, soon after, language found its way into the Indiana statute to make sure that no Indiana court could ever make a similar decision. Democrats also offered the Republican legislative majority a chance to amend the new act to say that it did not permit businesses to discriminate; they voted that amendment down.

  3. #3053
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Los Angeles area
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 12:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    9,868

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

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    A business owner should not be able to turn about blacks because he doesn't like black people or mexicans or gays or anyone else. They don't have to open a business. If they do....they have to abide by the laws of this land.
    What do you mean by "the laws of this land," if anything? There are hundreds of thousands of laws in the U.S., both state and federal. Congress used its power to regulate interstate commerce as the basis for the public accommodations provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Supreme Court first upheld those provisions in Katzenbach v. McClung and Heart of Atlanta Motel. But there is no constitutional basis for prohibiting discrimination in public accommodations on the basis of sexual orientation.

    Discrimination on that basis is prohibited by some, but not all, state laws. And even where it is, those laws may not violate the First Amendment. The Supreme Court held the Massachusetts and New Jersey public accommodations laws unconstitutional for just that reason in the Hurley and Dale cases. Homosexuals don't get to trample on the First Amendment rights of other people--and if they don't like that, too G--damned bad. The First Amendment isn't going anywhere.

  4. #3054
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    24,421

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

    Quote Originally Posted by humbolt View Post
    So I take it you don't have any violations, and I'm speaking of things that happened previously. None.
    What are you talking about. Anything that happened previously would be irrelevant. The law provided a legal basis to discriminate, whether or not people would take advantage of the law would be speculation. As it appears, there at least were a few that were lining up because they have been outspoken...but we won't know because Pence got busted and the law won't take effect in the form he had hoped for.

  5. #3055
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    24,421

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

    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    What do you mean by "the laws of this land," if anything? There are hundreds of thousands of laws in the U.S., both state and federal. Congress used its power to regulate interstate commerce as the basis for the public accommodations provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Supreme Court first upheld those provisions in Katzenbach v. McClung and Heart of Atlanta Motel. But there is no constitutional basis for prohibiting discrimination in public accommodations on the basis of sexual orientation.

    Discrimination on that basis is prohibited by some, but not all, state laws. And even where it is, those laws may not violate the First Amendment. The Supreme Court held the Massachusetts and New Jersey public accommodations laws unconstitutional for just that reason in the Hurley and Dale cases. Homosexuals don't get to trample on the First Amendment rights of other people--and if they don't like that, too G--damned bad. The First Amendment isn't going anywhere.
    LOL....you are in for a rude awakening my friend if you truly believe what you posted. Religion is not a shield that allows people to write their own rules. Sorry Charlie.

  6. #3056
    Sage


    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 11:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    17,445

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

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    What are you talking about. Anything that happened previously would be irrelevant. The law provided a legal basis to discriminate, whether or not people would take advantage of the law would be speculation. As it appears, there at least were a few that were lining up because they have been outspoken...but we won't know because Pence got busted and the law won't take effect in the form he had hoped for.
    Oh, c'mon. Tell me about all Indiana's civil rights violations, and discriminations cases that are of merit prior to this legislation. It's relevant. You're claiming that this legislation is a license to do something there's no evidence of ever have occurred in any significant manner.

  7. #3057
    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
    But the fact that a "solution" caused the unintended morale drop in a front line combat unit in the opening days of a war proves my point doesn't it?

    You served in the navy (thanks for that) I have friends who did/do as well, and I hear about the drama and pregnancies occurring while at sea. In some cases its a significant threat to military readiness because now the military has to rotate people, often in the middle of a deployment.
    It didn't cause the morale drop. The guy, who could just as easily entered with or without DADT in place, either pre-DADT or post-DADT, by simply lying, caused the drop in morale you mentioned. Sexually assaulting a person, male or female is still a crime.

    Most ships don't get that many pregnancies. We have a lot of people. I was on a carrier for 4 and 1/2 years. We did have pregnancies, but very few (this is why there is a mandatory pregnancy test given to all women 2 weeks after deploying). We also had people have family members die or get sick. We had people get hurt (heck had a guy get shot because he was playing quick draw, and a few more fall overboard, one simply didn't show back up from liberty in San Diego, but had his buddy claim he was there without verification, man overboards for 2 days straight, including calling GQ to try to find this guy til the buddy finally confessed that he covered for him). Stuff happens. That is life aboard ship. Most pregnancies do not occur because of sexual contact aboard ship or even in a liberty port, but rather in home port.
    "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.

  8. #3058
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 05:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,338

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Thorgasm View Post
    Hiding behind religion to practice bigotry is a crock of chit. If they held their religious convictions so strongly they wouldn't be open. They would have to refuse service to all "sinners".
    This is exactly what I thought of the moment I heard of Indiana's Religious Freedom law. Contrary to what was being reported, the Indiana law is slightly different from the federal law. The federal law, H.R. 1308, essentially keeps the government from intruding on an individual's right to practice his/her religion of choice as he/she sees fit as long as doing so doesn't intruded on another person's First Amendment rights nor violates existing laws. Indiana's religious freedom law, S. 568, is similar with one distinctive difference:

    Sec. 3. (a) As used in this chapter, "exercise of religion" means the practice or observance of religion.
    (b) The term includes a person's ability to: (1) act; or (2) refuse to act; in a manner that is substantially motivated by the person's sincerely held religious belief, regardless of whether the religious belief is compulsory or central to a larger system of religious belief.
    Sec. 4. As used in this chapter, "person" means an individual, an association, a partnership, a limited liability company, a corporation, a church, a religious institution, an estate, a trust, a foundation, or any other legal entity.
    In other words, if I (insert religion here) am convinced that you don't...say...hold the same religious beliefs as I do, I could choose not to serve you. Of course, we all know that opposing another person's religious belief isn't the real intent behind Indiana's religious freedom law. It's to provide cover for business owners on a completely different social and moral issue. Nonetheless, the law gives business owners cover not to be prosecuted on discriminatory grounds by virtue of hiding behind religion.

    Think of it this way...

    During the era of Jim Crow, if a White business owner refused to serve a Black customer, the rationale was "You're a Negro; I don't serve Negros." Despite being a socially accept practice in the South, the fact of the matter was a Black man can't change the pigment of his skin. Nonetheless, the business owner's refusal to serve the Black man ultimately came to be viewed as a discriminatory practice; you're singling out a person based on the color of their skin.

    Under Indiana's religious freedom law, a business owner can do much the same thing only this time such refusal is subjective. It's based on the business owner's belief that the customer doesn't hold the same religious beliefs or adheres to the same religious convictions. So, if I'm a pastor of a church, a cake maker, a florist, a wedding planner, a wedding photographer, a jeweler and I believe the customer before me is gay or an Atheist or a Muslim and I'm a Christian, I can refuse to sell to them or provide the desired service based strictly on my religious conviction because doing so violates my religious beliefs.

    To that, I have to ask, "How are you harmed?" by providing such services or selling a given products to someone you think might not hold the same religious beliefs as you? How does buying a product or service infringe on another person's religious rights? How does my buying a given product or services from a Christian, a Muslim or even a Buddhist as the proprietor interfere with said proprietor's ability to practice their religion of choice? To my way of thinking, if a person's religious believes are that strongly held that they refusal to sell me a product or provide a service, it's not the religion the person holds dear. It's their bias and bigotry.

    Now, I've danced around the true intent of Indiana's law and I've done so on purpose. So, I'll just come out with it here. It's clear that this is an attempt to protect business owners from selling a product or providing a service to gays and lesbians not merely anyone whose religious convictions aren't the same as the proprietor's. As such, that's discrimination, plain and simple.
    Last edited by Objective Voice; 04-01-15 at 08:21 PM.
    "A fair exchange ain't no robbery." Tupac Shakur w/Digital Underground

  9. #3059
    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 tres borrachos View Post
    WTF? I could not let this go. The "three men" raising "three little girls" were their widowed father, his dead wife's brother, and his childhood best friend. Not only did the childhood best friend never at ANY time claim to be father to any of those girls, including Stephanie - one of them WAS her father, and the other one would have had to impregnate his sister in order to be her father, so no, he never claimed it either. The show had nothing - zero - to do with sexuality at all - including incest, which you implied here. It was as pure and non-sexual as any show could be and still remain popular.
    Wrong. It was Season 1: Episode 3. They were in her Kindergarten class and the teacher asked who they were and both Joey and Jesse claimed to be "this sweet little girl's father". I love the series. Have every season on DVD.

    And I never implied incest at all. I can see where you might have assumed that, but that was not the implication. If anything, I implied a same sex parenting situation, where only one "parent" had ties to the children being raised by people of the same sex. I also didn't imply anything sexual going on. You are the one who went to sexual thoughts when I was referring to parenting, specifically same sex parenting situations and different family situations than what most people had been used to seeing on sitcoms.
    "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.

  10. #3060
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 05:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,338

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

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    What are you talking about. Anything that happened previously would be irrelevant. The law provided a legal basis to discriminate, whether or not people would take advantage of the law would be speculation. As it appears, there at least were a few that were lining up because they have been outspoken...but we won't know because Pence got busted and the law won't take effect in the form he had hoped for.
    Quote Originally Posted by humbolt View Post
    Oh, c'mon. Tell me about all Indiana's civil rights violations, and discriminations cases that are of merit prior to this legislation. It's relevant. You're claiming that this legislation is a license to do something there's no evidence of ever have occurred in any significant manner.
    I don't think that's exactly what DisneyDude was referring to. I think what he meant here...

    ...there at least were a few that were lining up because they have been outspoken...
    ...was that there likely were a few very powerful and influential business people who were pressuring the Indiana Governor/legislature (GOP) to enact a law that protected them against refusing to sell a product or provide a service to gays and lesbians without it being so obvious. Religious freedom provides such cover, i.e., "I don't have to provide a service to a gay couple because homosexuality is a sin and I'm a Christian. Therefore, I refuse to sell to you."

    Problem here is how would you know that a customer is, in fact, gay unless they told you? Sure, in some cases you can just look at a person and tell (i.e., mannerisms, behavior, voice inflection), but it's not quite so obvious with some people. So, unless they tell you how do you know?
    "A fair exchange ain't no robbery." Tupac Shakur w/Digital Underground

Posting Permissions

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