• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Arkansas passes its own religious freedom bill despite uproar in Indiana

Nothing in any of the RFRA laws target anyone, and you are just projecting your incorrect views. Like myself & legal experts have stated, and the opponents of these laws won't accept, is the RFRA has NEVER been used to successfully discriminate by denying service. But keep beating that drum.

indiana's governor wrote to the lobbyists that the law would put a stop to the gay agenda and "cross dressing" (what he thinks of transgender) and it would protect christian. See, no mention of minority religions like the early 90s RFRA, no attempt to even pretend it's not anti gay.

Now the governor is trying to circle the wagons and pretend it was never about that, only because the hostility to his law is at epic levels. You are pulling this apologist crap on behalf of a scumbag politician, but you may as well just stop, cause i'll never fall for it.

The "RFRA" were never worded like this or conceived as an anti gay strategy until recently. It's way too early to know how many cases there'll be in the next few years, before federal courts get off their ass and put a stop to it. And rest assured this will be as loathed and conquered as "DOMA", "DADT", consensual sex laws, and every other attempt to oppress
 
Last edited:
Ah the 'unnamed' rights CON... except the Rights that the Feds do jump into, like equal treatment under the law, are very clearly FEDERAL. I admire how some CONs can shrug off 'fair' when it isn't their toad being squashed... you aren't being kept out of a diner, bus or hotel.... so you shrug and say oh well, it is what the Founders wanted... the states ignoring the CONSTITUTION for a century after a brutal Civil War that the South LOST! :doh

Love the bending of our history... the North PERIOD didn't want slaves, that the SOUTH treated as property, counted to gain the South more reps in Congress... try and get just a tad closer to the truth!

The majority needs no protection from Gays, the Gays are not demanding kisses from straight folks, just equal access... again try and stand a bit closer to the truth

In the discussion about the RFRA law here in Georgia the attorney representing the LGBT group that is opposed to the bill was specifically asked if he could point out a single specific instance where members of his constituency were discriminated against that this bill would have prevented. The answer was NO. This is the last I will say on this issue. Your denial of slavery in the north is enough evidence for me that you believe what you want instead of the truth. And your use of CON in all caps, appears to be a slur on either neocons (a small group who very few identify with) or conservatives in general. Regardless of your position, there are millions of conservatives who are proud of their position. The way you try to demonize those who don't agree with you makes you less likely to have someone engage in serious discussion with you. You come of as the very type of intolerant liberal that wants people with religious beliefs discriminated again simply because you don't agree with them. If you are against discrimination you should be against ALL discrimination, not just against you and yours. There are millions of conservatives who do not agree with a gay lifestyle who do not discriminate anyway. You are creating a problem where none exists.
 
That is nothing more than convenience. There was a time, back during the Prop 8 vote in California, that these same groups published information on businesses owned by those that supported the measure in boycott efforts.

This is what I am talking about with the mess we have made. Try the voter, do not like the results and rush to the courts. Try the courts, do not like the results and rush to the polls for an alternative try.

At the end of the day we have social conservatism that wants government on their side, social liberalism wants government on their side. We should have left government out the picture from the start, it is most unfortunate that we are so far past that now the only option left is government forced protections for some with question on Constitutionality.

This is another one of those subjects that the history books will not look to kind on, I suspect putting the anti-gay movement of today right up there with racists of the 50's and 60's.



Well, the Apple CEO kind of went mute when asked why he was doing business in the ME and China. Especially with the way they treat gays and others. Then its deflect and talk about profits and the benefits of what they do.
 
indiana's governor wrote to the lobbyists that the law would put a stop to the gay agenda and "cross dressing" (what he thinks of transgender) and it would protect christian. See, no mention of minority religions like the early 90s RFRA, no attempt to even pretend it's not anti gay.

Now the governor is trying to circle the wagons and pretend it was never about that, only because the hostility to his law is at epic levels. You are pulling this apologist crap on behalf of a scumbag politician, but you may as well just stop, cause i'll never fall for it.

The "RFRA" were never worded like this or conceived as an anti gay strategy until recently. It's way too early to know how many cases there'll be in the next few years, before federal courts get off their ass and put a stop to it. And rest assured this will be as loathed and conquered as "DOMA", "DADT", consensual sex laws, and every other attempt to oppress

That was a lot of words to explain that you don't know how this law works.
 
LOL - “If there are questions in two years, we can fix it.”

yeah who cares who suffers and gets screwed over in the meantime and how unconstitutional it is right. Why even have a ****ing government? This kind of madness makes me want to have all state governments removed and just have the fed courts take over

this is the same state with a senator who quipped "You don't have to pass an IQ test to be in the senate."

I have never been to a federal hearing or committee meeting, but I have been to several state legislative committee hearings and the interesting thing is almost all say that same thing - "If there are questions in two years we can fix it." Every time I have heard it, I have wanted to stand up and shout "No you won't. You have no intention to."
 
Isn't that great. Businesses allowed to openly lobby government.

Did Walmart indicate they would pull their businesses out of the 30 states with RFRA laws? Or are they jumping on the "sweet! Look at the good press I can get!" bandwagon?

Ahh what's the matter? You don't get to discriminate against gays. Such a shame. I think it's freaking hilarious. This primitive movement is blowing up in their faces.

There's some delicious irony right there.
 
Ahh what's the matter? You don't get to discriminate against gays. Such a shame. I think it's freaking hilarious. This primitive movement is blowing up in their faces.

There's some delicious irony right there.

Don't see anyway RFRA can be used to discriminate against the gays, the Oprah, or whomever. Want to try and explain that?
who28.jpg
 
Last edited:
It just goes to prove that all the ****holes in the world are run by dickheads.
 
Don't see anyway RFRA can be used to discriminate against the gays, the Oprah, or whomever. Want to try and explain that?

I can't explain the stupidity and intolerance of businesses that refuse to serve gays.
 
I have never been to a federal hearing or committee meeting, but I have been to several state legislative committee hearings and the interesting thing is almost all say that same thing - "If there are questions in two years we can fix it." Every time I have heard it, I have wanted to stand up and shout "No you won't. You have no intention to."

Well now it makes sense to me. They all want to move up the political ladder within those 2 years and someone else can deal with the ****storm they created. Repealing or even amending a law is an admission of failure, so that is the last thing a politician will attempt to do to his own law

Which is why the boycotts are necessary - force his base to get pissed when the state loses hundreds of millions and is humiliated, putting his own political future in jeopardy to the point that repeal is the more palatable option.
 
I can't explain the stupidity and intolerance of businesses that refuse to serve gays.

I'll give you the answer: the RFRA can't be used to override a States' interest in promoting public accommodation.
 
I have never been to a federal hearing or committee meeting, but I have been to several state legislative committee hearings and the interesting thing is almost all say that same thing - "If there are questions in two years we can fix it." Every time I have heard it, I have wanted to stand up and shout "No you won't. You have no intention to."

It's pretty much the equivalent of the "later" button when your computer tells you to update your software.
 
Isn't that great. Businesses allowed to openly lobby government.

Did Walmart indicate they would pull their businesses out of the 30 states with RFRA laws? Or are they jumping on the "sweet! Look at the good press I can get!" bandwagon?

Its like I have been saying.....now the left accepts business and corporations as being people. Just a few months ago they were running around and saying Businesses and Corporations weren't people.

See what happens when the Wonder Twins (Progressives & Liberals) get together and.....Activate. :lol:
 
I'll give you the answer: the RFRA can't be used to override a States' interest in promoting public accommodation.

And when the **** hits the fan, the rats will jump ship.
 
Isn't that great. Businesses allowed to openly lobby government.

Did Walmart indicate they would pull their businesses out of the 30 states with RFRA laws? Or are they jumping on the "sweet! Look at the good press I can get!" bandwagon?

What's disturbing is that if Arkansas does end up shooting down this bill it will be because of lobbying by businesses such as Walmart and not because of individuals' concerns, just as it was corporations who were really the cause of net neutrality being continued and not due to our yammering.
 
Not really, and in the history of RFRA's, not a single one has been successfully used to defend against discrimination, and if one DID the SCOTUS would shoot it down. So this is all inane tempest in a teapot stupidity.

How many such cases have appeared since the Hobby Lobby decision?
 
What's disturbing is that if Arkansas does end up shooting down this bill it will be because of lobbying by businesses such as Walmart and not because of individuals' concerns, just as it was corporations who were really the cause of net neutrality being continued and not due to our yammering.

This was a country founded by the merchant class. I think it is working exactly as intended.
 
Nothing in any of the RFRA laws target anyone, and you are just projecting your incorrect views. Like myself & legal experts have stated, and the opponents of these laws won't accept, is the RFRA has NEVER been used to successfully discriminate by denying service. But keep beating that drum.


Exactly, and lest anyone be fooled, this is all about the secular left hijacking (Really using the useful idiots of the homosexual gay lobby) as a rallying cry to stop what they (The secular left - read progressives) feel is empowering religious conviction more, which is something they along with the ACLU have been working so very hard to diminish, and with some success.

This isn't about gay rights and discrimination as much as it is about a very well funded and aggressive movement in America that wants religion to stay between the four walls of a church and nowhere else is it welcomed. THAT's what this is really about, and the MSM (Although complicit) and the gay lobby bought the meme hook-line-sinker. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure there are many in the gay lobby that really and honestly feel that protecting religious freedom in the language used in Indiana's law threatens them, but frankly, what should threaten them more is that currently there is no special protections for them in that state. Seems that the gay left, and the MSM attached themselves to the wrong issue, and that's just fine with the secular progressives!


Tim-
 
Its like I have been saying.....now the left accepts business and corporations as being people. Just a few months ago they were running around and saying Businesses and Corporations weren't people.

See what happens when the Wonder Twins (Progressives & Liberals) get together and.....Activate. :lol:

Your reputation for warrantless taunting proceeds you. You don't know, no one does, that progressives and liberals have switched positions. Your inference that the "Wonder Twins" now support Citizens United is unfounded and malicious.

Wrong is wrong, it doesn't matter who does it or why. I would be most surprised to discover that liberals and progressives would be at all willing to throw their opposition to Citizens United to hell all over legislation in Indiana. Certainly most liberals, progressives, independents and likely many conservatives do not support corporate personhood.

Do you really think for one second that Walmart has taken a position in Indiana to support of the common good of the citizens in Indiana? No, of course you don't. Neither do most liberals and progressives or anyone else for that matter.
 
Exactly, and lest anyone be fooled, this is all about the secular left hijacking (Really using the useful idiots of the homosexual gay lobby) as a rallying cry to stop what they (The secular left - read progressives) feel is empowering religious conviction more, which is something they along with the ACLU have been working so very hard to diminish, and with some success.

This isn't about gay rights and discrimination as much as it is about a very well funded and aggressive movement in America that wants religion to stay between the four walls of a church and nowhere else is it welcomed. THAT's what this is really about, and the MSM (Although complicit) and the gay lobby bought the meme hook-line-sinker. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure there are many in the gay lobby that really and honestly feel that protecting religious freedom in the language used in Indiana's law threatens them, but frankly, what should threaten them more is that currently there is no special protections for them in that state. Seems that the gay left, and the MSM attached themselves to the wrong issue, and that's just fine with the secular progressives!


Tim-

I would agree, except you can rest assured that tax-exempt status for religious institutions will be the next battle.
 
Exactly, and lest anyone be fooled, this is all about the secular left hijacking (Really using the useful idiots of the homosexual gay lobby) as a rallying cry to stop what they (The secular left - read progressives) feel is empowering religious conviction more, which is something they along with the ACLU have been working so very hard to diminish, and with some success.

This isn't about gay rights and discrimination as much as it is about a very well funded and aggressive movement in America that wants religion to stay between the four walls of a church and nowhere else is it welcomed. THAT's what this is really about, and the MSM (Although complicit) and the gay lobby bought the meme hook-line-sinker. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure there are many in the gay lobby that really and honestly feel that protecting religious freedom in the language used in Indiana's law threatens them, but frankly, what should threaten them more is that currently there is no special protections for them in that state. Seems that the gay left, and the MSM attached themselves to the wrong issue, and that's just fine with the secular progressives!


Tim-

11026000_1023109587718282_5932569880386484267_n.jpg
 
Your reputation for warrantless taunting proceeds you. You don't know, no one does, that progressives and liberals have switched positions. Your inference that the "Wonder Twins" now support Citizens United is unfounded and malicious.

Wrong is wrong, it doesn't matter who does it or why. I would be most surprised to discover that liberals and progressives would be at all willing to throw their opposition to Citizens United to hell all over legislation in Indiana. Certainly most liberals, progressives, independents and likely many conservatives do not support corporate personhood.

Do you really think for one second that Walmart has taken a position in Indiana to support of the common good of the citizens in Indiana? No, of course you don't. Neither do most liberals and progressives or anyone else for that matter.


Yeah I give as good as I get. All know this.

Well when you have the CEO of Apple talking cutting business in a state and is cheered on while not even checking with his own attorneys over this issue before speaking out. What do you think that says. Moreover when you have Pro Gay Rights attorneys talking about they favor the law. To not mischaracterize it. Then have those Conservatives and Republicans all saying the same thing as the Pro Gay Rights attorneys are.

It does put it in the perspective it is. But like mentioned.....Apple didn't want to speak up about doing Business in the ME nor China. Then they want to talk about the good they have done.
 
Back
Top Bottom