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

humbolt said:

Nah. You're just making false outrage a full time job. The law in question did not invalidate other anti-discrimination statutes.

Click to expand...

It absolutely did. That is exactly how it differs from the Federal laws. Sorry.

disneydude said:

It absolutely did. That is exactly how it differs from the Federal laws. Sorry.

Click to expand...

Show me where.

Text of Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act

SenorXm/Sirius said:

Read the highlighted carefully.

Today in Politics: Indiana Law Deepens Strain Between Republicans and Business

Walmart, Apple, Eli Lilly and General Electric may be vastly different companies, but they have at least one thing in common: opposition to the Republican-backed legislation described by proponents as religious freedom laws that have brought a backlash to Indiana and Arkansas....

Jeffrey R. Immelt, the chief executive of General Electric and a frequent Republican donor,...

Cook Medical, which was founded by the billionaire Gayle Cook, a big Republican donor in Indiana, ... “We value diversity at all levels.”

Walmart’s foray into a social issue and its call for Gov. Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas to veto his state’s bill was the most surprising. Jim Walton, a son of the company’s founder, donated...

Click to expand...

That is a very curious reply to my comments. Recall that I explained that the (left-gay) lunatic axe-grinders are manipulating and misrepresenting the issue, and that its overdue that the critics be honest with themselves and the public. I pointed out that their claim of the law 'giving protection to discrimination' is a red herring. And I stated that their real motives are - the desire to remove religious exemptions from Americans for any reason and express rage that Indiana does not have a general law prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

Having exposed their lies and red herring, you eagerly quote the self-interested opinions (delusions) of either the spineless, ignorant, or dishonest corporate based donors to Republicans. Not only is it irrelevant to my claim, it seems that you are projecting.

Contrary to your (likely) image of conservatives, and unlike liberals, we are not awed by figures of social authority. We are not impressed with the left's adoration of "might makes right" or "we won" as the basis of a political philosophy. And we are not surprised at the cynical left's excoriation of corporations as "not people" and "greedy businesses that only care about profits at any cost" AND THEN their deftness in cynically trotting out these figures of hate - as if these same corporations were NOW comrades of disinterested altruism on behalf of the oppressed!

You have confirmed what conservatives already knew: big business does not give a hoot about religious liberty, and is always willing to sell the rope that will be used by the mob to hang them with.

Now do you have a real argument against the points I made, or is this it?

I think that Tammy Bruce has a number of pertinent points here.

In contrast, talk-radio host Tammy Bruce said Wednesday in a tweet: “As a gay woman, I’m appalled by GOP inability to defend religious freedom & disgusted by how liberal gays have turned into common bullies.”

On her radio show Wednesday, she commented on the report of the Indiana pizza shop owners.

“The left is trying to burn down businesses that do not comply,” Bruce told her radio listeners.

She pointed out that the businesses owned by religious believers that have been targeted in lawsuits have not turned away gays, “they’re just not going to cater or facilitate weddings.”

Bruce juxtaposed the outcry by the homosexual rights activists opposing the Indiana law with their virtual silence about atrocities against homosexuals in the Middle East.

“If you’re worried about whether someone is going to bake you a cake, because everything’s got to be about you, than you are about child weddings with terrorists, the flogging of rape victims and the murder of gays by the state, you’ve got your priorities a little screwed up,” she told her listeners.

Chastising the media, she wrote in a tweet: “Pizza shop that won’t cater a gay wedding is bigger news than Iranian official restating their intent to wipe Israel off the map. Got it.”

Click to expand...

‘'Gay'-rights advocates back Indiana law - 'Despite all the rhetoric, it's about religious freedom'

Seems the LGBT community isn't unified against this law at all. Just the extremists in that group.

So we have what amounts to the LGBT mafia, using bullying and propaganda aided by the Biased Lame Stream Media both being dishonest in the continued reporting of the false meme that this law enables businesses to discriminate against LGBT or anyone else. It does not.

This just limits what government can impose on someone in the face of their religious beliefs, a concept in and of itself which has been signed into law at the federal level for many years as well as the majority of states in one form or another.

Right makes might.

Has Tammy Bruce ever met an anti-gay argument she didn't agree with?

maxparrish said:

That is a very curious reply to my comments. I explained that the (left-gay) lunatic axe-grinders are manipulating and misrepresenting the issue, and that its overdue that the critics be honest with themselves and the public. I pointed out that their claim of the law 'giving protection to discrimination' is a red herring. And I stated the the real issue(s) are - the desire to remove religious exemptions from Americans for any reason and the resentment that Indiana does not have a general law prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

Having exposed the lies, you eagerly quote the self-interested opinions (delusions) of either the spineless, ignorant, or dishonest corporate based donors to Republicans. Might it be that you are projecting?

Contrary to your (likely) image of conservatives, and unlike liberals, we are not awed by figures of social authority. We are not impressed with the left's adoration of "might makes right" or "we won" as the basis of a political philosophy. And we are not are surprised at the cynical left excoriation of corporations as "not people" and "greedy businesses that only care about profits at any cost" AND THEN cynically trotting out them out as if these same corporations were NOW comrades of disinterested altruism on behalf of the oppressed.

You have confirmed what conservatives already knew: big business does not give a hoot about religious liberty, and is always willing to sell the rope that will be used by the mob to hang them with.

Now do you have a real argument against the points I made, or is this it?

Click to expand...

Ah yes. Anyone who disagrees is mindless and spineless. Is that what you're saying? The CEO's and their army of lawyers of Apple and Walmart are so stupid and spineless that they are being manipulated by the left? BTW the REPUBLICAN mayor of Indianapolis begged Pence BEFORE he signed to bill not to sign it. So it's not just the evil liberals and the spineless CEO's, but it's also some some Republican politicians right in the state who sees this bill for what it is.

Speaking of spineless. For once I would love to see a modern day conservative take the blame for something. Instead of always pointing fingers at the left, or the liberal media, it's always someone elses fault. Simply admit Pence and Hutchinson and the Republicans in the states governments screwed up. They wrote crappy bills that were too broad and vague and then tried to say their bills mirrored the Fed RFRA, but they do not mirror the Fed bill. And they got caught. They need to fix the bills and move on.

Somerville said:

Yep - the oppression of the bigots is somethin' fearful in this nation, what with the internment camps, forced labour and the requirement to wear badges or post signs stating who one hates.

Click to expand...

Maybe it won't be long before one has to bear a mark of identification in order to engage in business where only those ascribing to the liberal ideology will bear that mark

disneydude said:

It absolutely did. That is exactly how it differs from the Federal laws. Sorry.

Click to expand...

Yes, show us where. Can't find it...hmmmmmm?

Paperview said:

Well, we've been treated to just how that poster feels about that:

Originally Posted by Blemonds

The discrimination against blacks was codified in the law. Discrimination against blacks by a private party or business should be perfectly legal just as discrimination against any person should be."

Click to expand...

Discrimination is part of liberty. Not everyone is prepared to actually be free

The new fix seems to add sexual orientation to anti-discrimination laws.

This chapter does not:

(I) authorize a provider to refuse to offer or provide services,

facilities, use of public accommodations, goods, employment,
or housing to any member or members of the general public
on the basis of race, color, religion, ancestry, age, national
origin, disability, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or
United States military service;

(2) establish a defense to a civil action or criminal prosecution
for refusal by a provider to offer or provide services, facilities,
use of public accommodations, goods, employment, orhousing
to any member or members of the general public on the basis
of race, color, religion, ancestry, age, national origin,
disability, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or United
States military service;

Click to expand...

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1699997-read-the-updated-indiana-religious-freedom.html

Dragonfly said:

Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers - CNN.com



Wow. WTF Indiana????
You trying to out-religious the bible-belt states?
Is Indiana becoming Mississippi2.0 or something?

This is going to be interesting to watch.

Click to expand...

Wow, another thread that will bring out the gay and lesbian supporters in droves. What is wrong with you people? If you don't like a business, don't buy from them. Why is it you have to go to the courts to overturn the will of the people and force the courts to do what you have the right to do every day, the freedom to choose where to spend your money?

If a business owner spends his/her own money they should have the right to make stupid decisions and do make them every day. Seems that in today's world there are no consequences for making a bad choice. If business owners want to prevent customers from coming into their business why should the courts overturn that? Where is it in the Constitution that governs individual stupidity?

Come on, this is typical liberalism run amuck as they always do.

Paperview said:

Has Tammy Bruce ever met an anti-gay argument she didn't agree with?

Click to expand...

“The left is trying to burn down businesses that do not comply,” Bruce told her radio listeners.

Click to expand...

1 tweet directed at one pizzeria. ONE. Has turned into 'the left is trying to burn down businesses.......'?

This is why people who sit there all day listening to 1 point of view like these conservative pundits and AM radio entertainers like Limbaugh usually are less informed. People got to get their news from more then 1 source.

Jeez.

SenorXm/Sirius said:

1 tweet directed at one pizzeria. ONE. Has turned into 'the left is trying to burn down businesses.......'?

This is why people who sit there all day listening to 1 point of view like these conservative pundits and AM radio entertainers like Limbaugh usually are less informed. People got to get their news from more then 1 source.

Jeez.

Click to expand...

Less informed? You seem to believe that businesses don't have the right to make stupid decisions when they happen every day. If someone invests their own money into a business especially those that have competition why do you or anyone else give a damn about whether or not they choose not to serve someone with their opposite point of view? Don't buy from them, change the channel when there are programs you don't like. Let the market decide.

There is outrage here over conservative radio and the question is why are you so jealous? Why do you care what some conservative announcer says and why is it you nor others rather than changing the channel try to put these individuals out of business?

Blemonds said:

Maybe it won't be long before one has to bear a mark of identification in order to engage in business where only those ascribing to the liberal ideology will bear that mark

Click to expand...

Blemonds said:

Discrimination is part of liberty. Not everyone is prepared to actually be free

Click to expand...

Who is to be the judge then as to which persons are appropriately "prepared to actually be free"?

Now I think you aren't a fascist but you should realise that statements such as these of yours were certainly used in Europe a 'few' years ago as justification for what we see today as atrocities.

Paperview said:

Has Tammy Bruce ever met an anti-gay argument she didn't agree with?

Click to expand...

Don't think she's anti-gay, but she does have an interesting perspective.

Bruce's website describes her as a "gay, pro-choice, gun-owning, pro-death penalty, Tea Party Independent conservative" who "worked on a number of Democratic campaigns in 1990s, including the 1992 Boxer and Feinstein Senate races and the Clinton for President campaign" and "also has a history of supporting Republicans as well, including President Reagan, both Presidents Bush and, quite reluctantly, John McCain during the 2008 presidential campaign."[SUP][2][/SUP]

Click to expand...

Tammy Bruce - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A gay, pro-choice, TEA Party supporter. Guess that throws all the claims of the TEA Party being nothing but full of bigots right out the window.
More baseless left distortions.

SenorXm/Sirius said:

Ah yes. Anyone who disagrees is mindless and spineless. Is that what you're saying? The CEO's and their army of lawyers of Apple and Walmart are so stupid and spineless that they are being manipulated by the left?

Click to expand...

You needn't ask what I am saying - I already plainly said it.

If you read the bill, and the prior analysis I have given (and the links) ONLY an idiot or the cynically dishonest would conclude the bill was written differently in order to protect discrimination. It had to do with providing a religious exemption defense to a broader range of litigants, in a broader number of judicial proceedings. To the degree that ANY RFRA can apply in a discrimination complaint (which is usually not much) this law is no different.

And I am saying that the public is being manipulated, and that corporations (and most business) do not care about religious liberty; but do care about public image, employee image, and profits. Hence, they are either spineless, dishonest, benighted, or manipulated and therefore joined the bandwagon. How do we know this? BECAUSE there is no other explanation. IF YOU READ THE FRIGGIN BILL YOU WOULD SEE THAT IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THEIR PUBLIC MORAL POSTURING.

If so, why should they care what "their army of lawyers" think of the bill? They ONLY care about the social benefits of hurrying on stage to mouth social justice platitudes - especially important for Wallmart, who is deeply hated by, and frequently opposed by, some contingent of local left loons whenever it attempts to expand business.

BTW the REPUBLICAN mayor of Indianapolis begged Pence BEFORE he signed to bill not to sign it. So it's not just the evil liberals and the spineless CEO's, but it's also some some Republican politicians right in the state who sees this bill for what it is.

Click to expand...

It's impossible to 'see it for what it is' if some see it as evil, because the Bill is not what some of those individuals say it is. I've read it. Have you? Have you read any detailed extended analysis? Thought not.

You can quote another one billion people that also say 2 plus 2 equals 5. But it's just as false when one person says it.

Speaking of spineless. For once I would love to see a modern day conservative take the blame for something. Instead of always pointing fingers at the left, or the liberal media, it's always someone elses fault. Simply admit Pence and Hutchinson and the Republicans in the states governments screwed up. They wrote crappy bills that were too broad and vague and then tried to say their bills mirrored the Fed RFRA, but they do not mirror the Fed bill. And they got caught. They need to fix the bills and move on.

Click to expand...

More projecting? Why would you "love" to see a conservative take blame for a likely political loss? Is it a crime to lose? Is it a crime to cause controversy by trying to do something you believe in? Only someone who believes (as most liberals do) that political outcomes (winning) prove a moral proposition's truth might express your view.

There is nothing wrong with controversy, there is something morally wrong with unreasoning mobs and lying smears so as to polarize on a false premise. Until you honor reason and honesty, you will never see it for what it is (rather than what you and others want it to be).

wolfsgirl said:

The new fix seems to add sexual orientation to anti-discrimination laws.

Click to expand...

What this fix does is make clear that *the Indiana RFRA* cannot be used to discriminate against LGBT.

However, sexual-orientation/gender-identity is still not a statewide protected civil-rights class in the state of Indiana.

With this RFRA fix then, the potential for LGBT discrimination in Indiana has been lessened, but LGBT discrimination in Indiana is not yet illegal statewide as it is in neighboring Illinois.

eohrnberger said:

Don't think she's anti-gay, but she does have an interesting perspective.
Tammy Bruce - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A gay, pro-choice, TEA Party supporter. Guess that throws all the claims of the TEA Party being nothing but full of bigots right out the window.
More baseless left distortions.

Click to expand...

She was also the President of NOW in LA. The anti-gay and anti-woman shtick won't sell.

eohrnberger said:

Don't think she's anti-gay, but she does have an interesting perspective.
Tammy Bruce - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A gay, pro-choice, TEA Party supporter. Guess that throws all the claims of the TEA Party being nothing but full of bigots right out the window.
More baseless left distortions.

Click to expand...

I've been watching and reading Tammy Bruce for well over a decades. She's a bisexual who calls herself a lesbian and does nothing but disparage the people she claims to be a part -- she one mixed up, self-hating piece of work.

Paperview said:

I've been watching and reading Tammy Bruce for well over a decades. She's a bisexual who calls herself a lesbian and does nothing but disparage the people she claims to be a part -- she one mixed up, self-hating piece of work.

Click to expand...

Are you sure she's not disparaging the actions and not the people? There's a difference you know.

As to whether she's self-hating, how can you tell? I mean without a close and personal association with her? Has she publicly stated this self-hate?

Simpleχity;1064488069 said:

What this fix does is make clear that *the Indiana RFRA* cannot be used to discriminate against LGBT.

However, sexual-orientation/gender-identity is still not a statewide protected civil-rights class in the state of Indiana.

With this RFRA fix then, the potential for LGBT discrimination in Indiana has been lessened, but LGBT discrimination in Indiana is not yet illegal statewide as it is in neighboring Illinois.

Click to expand...

True, but some cities and counties do include sexual orientation in their local ordinances.
This may push more cities to add protections on the local level.

eohrnberger said:

Are you sure she's not disparaging the actions and not the people? There's a difference you know.

As to whether she's self-hating, how can you tell? I mean without a close and personal association with her? Has she publicly stated this self-hate?

Click to expand...

She writes prolifically, has a radio show, appears on Fox regularly, etc...

We kind of know what she thinks by her words.

She's Rush Limbaugh light with a vagina.

Conservative said:

There is outrage here over conservative radio and the question is why are you so jealous? Why do you care what some conservative announcer says and why is it you nor others rather than changing the channel try to put these individuals out of business?

Click to expand...

? I'm jealous? I didn't originally post this, someone else did. I was just commenting on the radio host exaggeration. Anyway I don't listen any of them, either side of the aisle. I learned a long time ago to get my news from multiple sources via the Internet.

But I know many people who only watch one station, or one news outlet and that's what they base their opinions on. And nowadays that's a mistake. This exaggeration by this Bruce person is a perfect example of why it is a bad idea.

Simpleχity;1064488069 said:

What this fix does is make clear that *the Indiana RFRA* cannot be used to discriminate against LGBT.

However, sexual-orientation/gender-identity is still not a statewide protected civil-rights class in the state of Indiana.

With this RFRA fix then, the potential for LGBT discrimination in Indiana has been lessened, but LGBT discrimination in Indiana is not yet illegal statewide as it is in neighboring Illinois.

Click to expand...

Stupid Republicans. Neither federal nor other states have this "fix". LOL... The gay rights lobby screams that this bill is different and needs fixed, and the pea-brained Republicans fix it by adding restrictive language that is actually different and not written anywhere else. Kudos to the gay rights lobby...sort of.

Because the Gay rights lobby is none to bright either. Had they suggested to the GOP pinheads that they would rather have Indiana adopt a state-wide law prohibiting discrimination of gays, in return for a some kind of religious exemption it would have been a win-win.

So - the bill's "fix" is to allow discrimination anyway, but if only there were a general law banning discrimination of gays THEN this bill could not be used as a defense. In short, you don't need a religious exemption IF there is no law against discrimination it to begin with.

Welcome to American politics.