Indiana Legalizes Discrimination Against Gays

[White Eagle]

You just cannot go anywhere on the web without finding something new about this law. Go Subaru!

http://www.hrc.org/blog/entry/subaru-comes-out-against-indianas-discriminatory-religious-refusal-act

Subaru Comes Out Against Indiana’s Discriminatory Religious Refusal Act

March 30, 2015 by Maureen McCarty, HRC Associate Director of Digital Media

Moments ago, Subaru threw its weight behind the growing movement of corporations, celebrities, politicians, civil rights leaders and allies standing against Indiana’s recently passed Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).

 

[rareboy]

Re: So no one is posting about Indiana? Homosexual discrimination legalized

Equal to whom? Restaurants, motels, bars, etc. can refuse service to straights as well. Gays can refuse any restaurant, motel, or bar, they chose. If the owners also can refuse then both have equal rights. But, if owners are forced to serve gays, then gays have superior rights. I agree that the denial of service would be wrong, but I don't think it happens often enough to be a problem, and forcing owners can make the problem worse. Do you really want to eat food served by someone who resents being forced? Do you want to work for an employer who resents being forced to hire you? Do we really want a law against everything unfair or not nice?

Do you even read the crap you write????

It doesn't matter if it 'doesn't happen that often'. Wrong is wrong. what the fuck is your problem that you can't stand up for equal rights for all homos?????

Jesus.

 

[Benvolio]

Re: So no one is posting about Indiana? Homosexual discrimination legalized

,

Do you even read the crap you write????

It doesn't matter if it 'doesn't happen that often'. Wrong is wrong. what the fuck is your problem that you can't stand up for equal rights for all homos?????

Jesus.

B
Where we disagree is that you think the government should regulate every detail of or lives lest some tiny unfairness occur.

 

[belamyi]

I have even changed my opinion of Miley Cyrus. Somewhere in my travels I saw she was outspoken on the law and wants to boycott Ind also. Still don't like her music but i like her attitude now.

She has shown the same "leftist" attitude for all the time she has been reborn as an independent liberated pop hag... maybe you just needed this Indiana gay-bashing bang to notice her little flash in the big pan.

 

[belamyi]

Re: So no one is posting about Indiana? Homosexual discrimination legalized

,
B
Where we disagree is that you think the government should regulate every detail of or lives lest some tiny unfairness occur.

But it's precisely because there has been a government in Indiana, USA, which has taken on as their/its sacred duty to regulate a detail which concerns, not even a minority of the population of the state, but an exception inside that whole: and when an unfairness has "occurred" by overregulation, you accept that overregulation but object the redress of the wrong caused by it, and dismiss only the latter, but not the former and starter of the whole overregulation mess, as the true overregulation.

 

[Ganymede4]

Read this article

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/31/indiana-religious-freedom_n_6977170.html

 

[belamyi]

Read this article

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/31/indiana-religious-freedom_n_6977170.html

What we posted above: did any state in the USA really need, and so desperately, a law to preserve religious freedom, when it's precisely the right to make up whatever wacky sect or mere set of beliefs you call religion what for most Americans constitute the essence of America, even above the whole legal system of which that religious freedom is only a secondary, rather anecdotal derivation?

 

[TX-Beau]

"I don't believe for a minute that it was the intention of the General Assembly to create a license to discriminate, or a right to deny services to gays, lesbians or anyone else in this state. And it certainly wasn't my intent," - Pence

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/31/indiana-religious-freedom_n_6977170.html

What liars these people are.

 

[TX-Beau]

What we posted above: did any state in the USA really need, and so desperately, a law to preserve religious freedom, when it's precisely the right to make up whatever wacky sect or mere set of beliefs you call religion what for most Americans constitute the essence of America, even above the whole legal system of which that religious freedom is only a secondary, rather anecdotal derivation?

Of course not. If you look at the history of the FED laws, they were in response to a situation where the Fed was interfering in the practice of religion.

The rest of this is about Fundamentalist bullshit. No religious people were being discriminated against, they just wanted to hate on some faggots and thought the rest of the world agreed. I can't stress enough that the people the politicians are pandering to, live on Planet Conservabot where reality is NOT what you think it is. They don't watch news that comes from reality, they don't read newspapers usually and if they do, it's all propaganda, they get group emails channeling them to sites like Breitbart, or the Freepers, and they simply won't listen if you try to get them to question any of that.

They hate Obamacare because he's a n***** in the White House, they pass these laws because they hate us, they hate abortion because nasty sluts should be punished, and they are terrified of a U.S.A. where there are more of the illegal brown HORDE than nice white upstanding members.

I'm related to these people, I hear what they say when no one is listening, and I've long since stopped trying to reason with them, the only consolation is that most of them will be dead in the next ten years.

At it's core, these are all symptoms of their absolute inability to give up their privilege and bigotry, and move forward. Some conservative - George Will I think - once said something like "...a conservative is a person who stands astride the path of history yelling stop..." but that needs changing, these days a conservative is a person who tries to drag us all back to a world where Christianity was unquestioned and white people were happy in the American Apartheid State, where nasty faggots hid in the dark, rape victims were asking for it, and unmarried, pregnant women slunk off to back alleys covered in the shame they so richly deserved.

And we haven't even gotten to actual public policy stupidity.

Fuck that.

 

[TX-Beau]

errata - just Googled it, it was Buckley who said that.

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/William_F._Buckley,_Jr.

 

[belamyi]

There is nothing wrong in being conservative, the wrong is in the crooked liars who parade as "conservatives": a conservative is someone merely prudent before the obvious realization that things must change and are changing, but needs to be sure they are doing so in the right direction; it's someone aware of all the implications of change, who has a global view of things in the world: it's someone who actually thinks. Not only there is nothing wrong, but it is even quite desirable: the British are the conservative nation par excellence, but people only see it in their silly wigs in the court rooms and drag queens on the throne.

A reactionary is what is usually mistook for a conservative, but the sort we are dealing with here are not even that: they are just like the Spaniards who take themselves as elite and as conservative, the good-for-nothing, ignorant idlers who are a spoke in the wheels of the Western world by holding a high position they didn't actually earn, let alone deserve, but merely crept into, justified with but a small fraction of the merits and skills others left outside possess, and who will therefore be in position and invested with the authority to defend a system they do not actually understand, for the reasons said above: they just climbed to the position and, most importantly, the benefits, of a system already set by others and on which they only needed to sit, but that they wouldn't and couldn't know how to drive.

 

[White Eagle]

She has shown the same "leftist" attitude for all the time she has been reborn as an independent liberated pop hag... maybe you just needed this Indiana gay-bashing bang to notice her little flash in the big pan.

You're right. I have paid little attention to her and her doings.

 

[belamyi]

You're right. I have paid little attention to her and her doings.

I have paid as much as I have paid to this last headlines, which is all I have been tracking from her in the past couple of years or so...

 

[Benvolio]

There is nothing wrong in being conservative, the wrong is in the crooked liars who parade as "conservatives": a conservative is someone merely prudent before the obvious realization that things must change and are changing, but needs to be sure they are doing so in the right direction; it's someone aware of all the implications of change, who has a global view of things in the world: it's someone who actually thinks. Not only there is nothing wrong, but it is even quite desirable: the British are the conservative nation par excellence, but people only see it in their silly wigs in the court rooms and drag queens on the throne.

A reactionary is what is usually mistook for a conservative, but the sort we are dealing with here are not even that: they are just like the Spaniards who take themselves as elite and as conservative, the good-for-nothing, ignorant idlers who are a spoke in the wheels of the Western world by holding a high position they didn't actually earn, let alone deserve, but merely crept into, justified with but a small fraction of the merits and skills others left outside possess, and who will therefore be in position and invested with the authority to defend a system they do not actually understand, for the reasons said above: they just climbed to the position and, most importantly, the benefits, of a system already set by others and on which they only needed to sit, but that they wouldn't and couldn't know how to drive.

The Communists called dissenters "reactionary". They would agree with you.

 

[belamyi]

The Communists called dissenters "reactionary". They would agree with you.

Like self-proclaimed "conservative" and "decent and moral" people call dissenters "communists", among such other niceties as "perverts", "traitors" and "evil people": that's why politics is ultimately not about ideas, law and well-being, but what party is apparently taking over a bigger authority to defend its own privileges, and who is getting crushed in the middle.

That is the reason why Muslim and Christians, sometimes even Jews, fundamentally *pun* agree in the name of their respective deities and dissenting religions... a different thing is when Jews, Christian and Muslims come to agree in the name of reason, law and well-being.

And for anyone being scared by that word "reason", linking it to the French Revolution who would spell it with a capital "R", what they did is to create a deity and a religion out of the debasing of the exercise of reasoning, that is, they were counterfeiting reason, mimicking traditional religions and doing what religions have ULTIMATELY always done in the name of whatever name they have pleased.

 

[rareboy]

Re: So no one is posting about Indiana? Homosexual discrimination legalized

,
B
Where we disagree is that you think the government should regulate every detail of or lives lest some tiny unfairness occur.

No.

Like all your ilk...you don't get it.

I don't think that the government has any right passing laws that limit the rights of anyone and enable unfairness to occur. Which is what they've done here.

You want them to pass laws against abortion. and against homo rights.

You lose.

 

[Benvolio]

Re: So no one is posting about Indiana? Homosexual discrimination legalized

No.

Like all your ilk...you don't get it.

I don't think that the government has any right passing laws that limit the rights of anyone and enable unfairness to occur. Which is what they've done here.

You want them to pass laws against abortion. and against homo rights.

You lose.

Ah, but you want laws limiting the rights of employers, restaurant owners etc. Worse, anti discriminatin laws in effect become quota laws and preferences, limiting the rights of employers to hire the person they consider best, and the rights of qualified applicants. The extreme example is the Dobbs Frank law requiring the hiring of women and minorities "to the maximum extent possible" , in effect, white males need not apply. I suppose if gay are a minority, straight white males need not apply. Giving a right to some people diminishes the rights of others. Democrat burdens area already driving jobs out of the country.

 

[chrisrobin]

Re: So no one is posting about Indiana? Homosexual discrimination legalized

Ah, but you want laws limiting the rights of employers, restaurant owners etc. Worse, anti discriminatin laws in effect become quota laws and preferences, limiting the rights of employers to hire the person they consider best, and the rights of qualified applicants. The extreme example is the Dobbs Frank law requiring the hiring of women and minorities "to the maximum extent possible" , in effect, white males need not apply. I suppose if gay are a minority, straight white males need not apply. Giving a right to some people diminishes the rights of others. Democrat burdens area already driving jobs out of the country.

Religious Freedom Restoration Act = hatred of gays.

Please read 14th Amendment, U.S. Constitution.
Read it again.

It doesn't diminish the rights of anyone.

 

[chrisrobin]

Re: So no one is posting about Indiana? Homosexual discrimination legalized

From the law itself:

Religious freedom?

Sec. 9. 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. If the relevant governmental entity is not a party to the proceeding, the governmental entity has an unconditional right to intervene in order to respond to the person's invocation of this chapter.

The governor hasn't read the bill (he signed) or he's just lying. Seems like discrimination to me, regardless of the governor's protestation.

 

[Benvolio]

Re: So no one is posting about Indiana? Homosexual discrimination legalized

Religious Freedom Restoration Act = hatred of gays.

Please read 14th Amendment, U.S. Constitution.
Read it again.

It doesn't diminish the rights of anyone.

Actually, the due process and equal protection clauses of the 14th Amentment, as applied by the Supreme Court, has diminished our democratic ability to self govern, while allowing the Supreme Court to usurp much of the legislative power. The has enabled the democrats to impose their agenda upon the rest of us outside the democratic process. Remember when kids sang Christmas Carols in school? The court relying on the 14th Amendment enacted a law against it. They have pretended to rely on the 14th to kill 70 million or so babies. Out course applaud the destruction of our democracy but it shows that giving some rights diminishes others. Ultimately the 14th amendment has given the democrats the ability to destroy one people and culture and replace them with another.