Arizona Governor vetoes discrimination bill

[jamil]

No, not really.

Do you support forcing businesses to provide services to protected classes of people? Do you support forcing businesses to allow carry on their property? Do you support forcing businesses to allow people to lock firearms in their cars on the business' lots? I could accuse you of the same, without regard to the specific reason for each answer, if you don't answer the same for all 3 questions. But I wouldn't accuse you of such because that would be a form of intellectual dishonesty.

 

[nawainwright]

Meh, we're only a few years from being forced to share spouses with those who don't have them. It's only fair. Because to exclusively have sex with one other person is unfair, other people might want the opportunity. Clearly its discrimination.

More seriously, the Bible will soon be "hate-speech". I'm waiting to be sued for refusing to perform a homosexual wedding (already happened/happening in UK and Canada). Flat out, you should be able to discriminate who you conduct business with and how. Forced commerce is immoral. Apparently you all would be perfectly fine forcing a Black baker to make cakes for KKK parties. Maybe we should sue Kosher and Halal butchers so they stock bacon. I've seen a couple posts that say ridiculous things like "thats different" or "that wouldn't happen" maybe just dismissing me as a kook, crazy person. Thats how these tactics work right? Marginalize, comfort those that you intend to go after next until its time to push the knife in. I remember when gay couples "just wanted" to be free to associate. Then they "just wanted" "equality" of benefits. Then it was they "just wanted" to be able to be "married". Now its "we just want to have everyone bow before our every demand". I could go on, but its probably futile. Like a plague or virus, some groups will continue to push until the host is destroyed.

I check back in here every couple months now. Started with leftists suddenly pounding out tons of posts early 2012. I've watched the tone of this board change profoundly over the last 2 years.....odd.

 

[BigBoxaJunk]

I feel so more damaged by the insults wrought upon the institution of marriage by heterosexual couples every day, that it barely seems possible for that to be equaled, let alone exceeded by anything that same-sex couples could ever do.

But it does seem troubling that a business owner is not allowed to choose who they provide services to.

 

[IndyGal65]

Muslims are, generally, not "murderous". It is hard for us in the West to understand that Islam is a complete system that includes religion, a political ideology and culture. Thus the problems we have had have been with the political wing of Islam. Political Islam is called al Islameen in Arabic (Islamists). The closest we have had something like that in the West in the last 100 years is the Irish Republican Army's Sinn Fein movement. In Ireland catholic and protestant were not religious labels but references to political parties.

Islamism is a political ideology in the same vein as communism was. But, as we see so often here in the West, communism and socialism have had religious aspects for many who followed those ideologies. And progressivism is based on the teachings of Nietzsche thus a strong neo-pagan religious element as well as politics. The religious aspects of these ideologies is why so many are so passionate about their beliefs.


So for the average Muslim it is just a religion and they do not engage in the political ideology.

All that said, what I was trying to get to is that the left treats various groups as victims. Then uses that victimhood to beat conservatives and libertarians with. Thus women have a victimhood (ever been around feminists who always are seeing life through how they were victimized) over men. Blacks are victims due to white oppression. Hispanics are bigger victims than blacks. But gays have been victimized by whites, blacks, Hispanics so have higher status. And in some circles Muslims are the highest level of victim. Thus the left has a problem when various groups are in conflict with each other.

Oh, the comparison that gays are born that way and Islam is a choice, that is not the way Muslims are taught. Their belief is that everyone is born Muslim but in most of the world the parents corrupt the child away from Islam. Thus they are born that way.

Um, I have no idea how murderers and Islam got tangled together. That wasn't the intent of my post. Perhaps I misunderstood what you meant the first time.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Meh, we're only a few years from being forced to share spouses with those who don't have them. It's only fair. Because to exclusively have sex with one other person is unfair, other people might want the opportunity. Clearly its discrimination.

More seriously, the Bible will soon be "hate-speech". I'm waiting to be sued for refusing to perform a homosexual wedding (already happened/happening in UK and Canada). Flat out, you should be able to discriminate who you conduct business with and how. Forced commerce is immoral. Apparently you all would be perfectly fine forcing a Black baker to make cakes for KKK parties. Maybe we should sue Kosher and Halal butchers so they stock bacon. I've seen a couple posts that say ridiculous things like "thats different" or "that wouldn't happen" maybe just dismissing me as a kook, crazy person. Thats how these tactics work right? Marginalize, comfort those that you intend to go after next until its time to push the knife in. I remember when gay couples "just wanted" to be free to associate. Then they "just wanted" "equality" of benefits. Then it was they "just wanted" to be able to be "married". Now its "we just want to have everyone bow before our every demand". I could go on, but its probably futile. Like a plague or virus, some groups will continue to push until the host is destroyed.

I check back in here every couple months now. Started with leftists suddenly pounding out tons of posts early 2012. I've watched the tone of this board change profoundly over the last 2 years.....odd.

From several on this forum, it's already in full force. If you do not fully and happily endorse homosexual "marriage", you are, among other things, a "bigot". This is exactly part of the formula to shut down idealogical opponents.

 

[IndyGal65]

Do you support forcing businesses to provide services to protected classes of people? Do you support forcing businesses to allow carry on their property? Do you support forcing businesses to allow people to lock firearms in their cars on the business' lots? I could accuse you of the same, without regard to the specific reason for each answer, if you don't answer the same for all 3 questions. But I wouldn't accuse you of such because that would be a form of intellectual dishonesty.

On a personal note, if someone were to deny me goods and services due to simply who I am, I wouldn't like it one bit. (After all, there is freedom of religion and freedom from religion.) And sorry, I guess it would hurt my widdle feelings. However, although I would think that that business owner is a total jack wagon, I would simply spend my money elsewhere.

In trying to look at this in a much bigger picture, if I was a business owner, I would want the right to refuse service. I don't mean to sound hypocritical, though. I guess for me, if they would have just presented a bill that allows business owners the right to refuse service for any reason, instead of singling out a particular segment of society, perhaps it would have faired a little better. Maybe, maybe not...just throwing that out there. It all sounds a bit like the proverbial slippery slope.

 

[jamil]

On a personal note, if someone were to deny me goods and services due to simply who I am, I wouldn't like it one bit. (After all, there is freedom of religion and freedom from religion.) And sorry, I guess it would hurt my widdle feelings. However, although I would think that that business owner is a total jack wagon, I would simply spend my money elsewhere.

In trying to look at this in a much bigger picture, if I was a business owner, I would want the right to refuse service. I don't mean to sound hypocritical, though. I guess for me, if they would have just presented a bill that allows business owners the right to refuse service for any reason, instead of singling out a particular segment of society, perhaps it would have faired a little better. Maybe, maybe not...just throwing that out there. It all sounds a bit like the proverbial slippery slope.

Have you read the actual bill? Google "arizona bill 1062". This isn't a bill about LGBTs, though what happened in Colorado inspired it. It basically makes it so that business owners have some defense against discrimination claims when they refuse to do things against their religion.

I am disappointed that this bill failed for the reason it failed. Arizona is its own state. The people of Arizona elected the people who passed the bill. If the had bill failed without outside influence, fine. That's the process. But were it not for the fierce influence brought by activists from outside Arizona, the governor probably would have signed it. Agree with the bill or not, it's a scary thought to me that special outside interests can influence a state's will like this. I mean, the NFL?

 

[BigBoxaJunk]

It all sounds a bit like the proverbial slippery slope.

I've been thinking about this one today and that's the best I can come up with too. It definitely is that.

 

[IndyGal65]

Have you read the actual bill? Google "arizona bill 1062". This isn't a bill about LGBTs, though what happened in Colorado inspired it. It basically makes it so that business owners have some defense against discrimination claims when they refuse to do things against their religion.

I am disappointed that this bill failed for the reason it failed. Arizona is its own state. The people of Arizona elected the people who passed the bill. If the had bill failed without outside influence, fine. That's the process. But were it not for the fierce influence brought by activists from outside Arizona, the governor probably would have signed it. Agree with the bill or not, it's a scary thought to me that special outside interests can influence a state's will like this. I mean, the NFL?

Actually, no, I have not read the entire bill, so shame on me. However, I believe the "against their religion" part should have been left out. What if an athiest doesnt like gay people? Does that person have the "right" to refuse service, and if so, why or why not?

Just simply state that a business owner has the right to refuse service for any reason.

 

[bmbutch]

These threads are tough for me to jump into without violating the forum rules. I've researched the bill, the left &/or opponents in general did a masterful job labeling this bill "anti gay" & getting it vetoed.

Agree with poster above, Biblical teaching will become hate speach & that's going to be a bad day.

 

[jamil]

Actually, no, I have not read the entire bill, so shame on me. However, I believe the "against their religion" part should have been left out. What if an athiest doesnt like gay people? Does that person have the "right" to refuse service, and if so, why or why not?

Just simply state that a business owner has the right to refuse service for any reason.

The bill isn't about gay people. That's just what the media told you to get you properly motivated against it. Gay people aren't mentioned. It's about religious people having a defensive mechanism to help them when people claim discrimination when they are only following their religion.

For the purposes of constitutional protection of religion, Atheism should be as protected as any religion. I'm not sure the wording of this bill would recognize that. But I would think an Atheist baker might be able to use it to escape from litigation if he were sued for, say, refusing to make a cross cake. Not that that scenario is all that likely.

But the law couldn't just say a business owner can refuse service for any reason because national civil rights laws that prevent discrimination against protected people.

 

[mrjarrell]

So, just who were these religious people going to discriminate against, that they needed protection? Blacks? Tattooed people? Jews? Divorcee's? Who? We all know who the bill was crafted to discriminate against.

 

[level.eleven]

So, just who were these religious people going to discriminate against, that they needed protection? Blacks? Tattooed people? Jews? Divorcee's? Who? We all know who the bill was crafted to discriminate against.

No kidding. Apparently we are seeing the Lost Causer argument being stretched to this bill. After you get defeated, the cause totally wasn't about what we said it was about. Anyone taking this track need be laughed out the conversation.

I'm sorry sir, we can't serve you dinner due to your cotton/poly blend polo shirt.

The likely scenario is that these rapid fire gay discrimination bills we are seeing across the nation are the result of think tank. The memo was sent out after the defeat of gay marriage in SCOTUS and the subsequent 13 ruling against marriage discrimination issued by lower courts. Thrashing while going down in defeat.

Folks should check out the lobbyists who crafted the Arizona legislation.

 

[IndyGal65]

The bill isn't about gay people. That's just what the media told you to get you properly motivated against it. Gay people aren't mentioned. It's about religious people having a defensive mechanism to help them when people claim discrimination when they are only following their religion.

For the purposes of constitutional protection of religion, Atheism should be as protected as any religion. I'm not sure the wording of this bill would recognize that. But I would think an Atheist baker might be able to use it to escape from litigation if he were sued for, say, refusing to make a cross cake. Not that that scenario is all that likely.

But the law couldn't just say a business owner can refuse service for any reason because national civil rights laws that prevent discrimination against protected people.

I know it's not technically about gay people. However, that's all I've read on here from a few folks (e.g., Trooper referring to penis shaped cakes or cakes with gay porn on them). Not that that scenario is all that likely.

 

[IndyGal65]

So, just who were these religious people going to discriminate against, that they needed protection? Blacks? Tattooed people? Jews? Divorcee's? Who? We all know who the bill was crafted to discriminate against.

^^^This.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

So, just who were these religious people going to discriminate against, that they needed protection? Blacks? Tattooed people? Jews? Divorcee's? Who? We all know who the bill was crafted to discriminate against.

Do I not have the right to discriminate? We need to repeal laws enshrining legislated fairness and non-discrimination instead and we wouldn't have these attempts to restore peoples' rights in a piecemeal fashion.

 

[BigBoxaJunk]

Do I not have the right to discriminate? We need to repeal laws enshrining legislated fairness and non-discrimination instead and we wouldn't have these attempts to restore peoples' rights in a piecemeal fashion.

I hate to think that we're approaching the place where it's illegal to be impolite.

 

[mrjarrell]

Do I not have the right to discriminate? We need to repeal laws enshrining legislated fairness and non-discrimination instead and we wouldn't have these attempts to restore peoples' rights in a piecemeal fashion.

Sure, but what gives you the right to government protection for your bigotry? What makes religious people a protected class, like their trying to discriminate against?

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Sure, but what gives you the right to government protection for your bigotry? What makes religious people a protected class, like their trying to discriminate against?

It's all a tit-for-tat. Protected classes of people are a pox on our republic. They get special treatment and every other niche groups wants to get in on the bandwagon...but to your point--now that religious people are now a minority, maybe we should get in on the protected class bandwagon too and get our special privileges.

 

[mrjarrell]

Religious people are hardly a minority. You can't go 2 blocks without running across one of the fable factories.