Sincere question about "Religious Freedom" legislation
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
12-04-2015, 03:31 PM
RE: Sincere question about "Religious Freedom" legislation
(12-04-2015 08:10 AM)BnW Wrote:  What the Indiana so-called freedom of religion law really does is knock out all those local laws and allow people state-wide to discriminate against gays and lesibians in commerce. Or, at least it was going to do that. Under a lot of pressure, the Indiana legislator is changing the law to clarify that it specifically does not allow discrimination or overrule any anti-discrimination ordinances (which is interesting because I'm 99% sure the entire point of the law was to allow businesses to refuse serving gay couples).

And by explicitly identifying the LGBT community in their "clarifying" language the idiots have inadvertently opened up the door for the LGBT community to be recognized as a protected class in Indiana. Should've just left well enough alone. Fucking idiots get what they deserve.

There is only one really serious philosophical question, and that is suicide. -Camus
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-04-2015, 04:12 PM
RE: Sincere question about "Religious Freedom" legislation
I hadn't considered that. I'd need to read the updated law but I suspect that is a really long shot argument.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-04-2015, 04:34 PM (This post was last modified: 12-04-2015 04:41 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Sincere question about "Religious Freedom" legislation
(12-04-2015 04:12 PM)BnW Wrote:  I hadn't considered that. I'd need to read the updated law but I suspect that is a really long shot argument.

Here's part of the "clarifying" language: "This chapter does not: (1) 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 services; (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, 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."

My layman's read on that wording is that it sure seems to put "sexual orientation" and "gender identity" on equal footing with established protected classes. No?

There is only one really serious philosophical question, and that is suicide. -Camus
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
12-04-2015, 05:53 PM
RE: Sincere question about "Religious Freedom" legislation
I don't read it as establishing a new class. (1) is making clear it does not provide a new legal right to discriminate, but it equally doesn't impact any existing rights to discrimination. (2) is saying it does not provide any kind of defense to any cause of action for discrimination. For (2), you still need to have an independent cause of action to bring a claim for discrimination. In Indiana, gays and lesbians don't have any state protection from discrimination but they do in some municipalities. So, (2) is making it clear that if you violate those local ordinances, the new Religious Freedom law doesn't give you any kind of defense to a subsequent cause of action.

Sorry, I just don't read that as creating a new class. However, what it does do is highlight the limitations in the state of Indiana. The governor and the legislator put forth that language as a fix to all the public outcry. But, what if the protesters aren't satisfied with this? What if the only way the boycotts stop is when gays are equal under the law in Indiana? Then what do they do? Do they cave?

Personally, I hope the boycotts and the protests continue. I hope companies continue to pull out of all the states that don't offer equal protection to all citizens in their states. I'm not sure that's going to happen but I'm hopeful that at some point soon, it does.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes BnW's post
12-04-2015, 09:22 PM
RE: Sincere question about "Religious Freedom" legislation
(12-04-2015 03:01 PM)JFish123 Wrote:  The Christians at the bakery and pizzeria have served gay people all the time. It would actually be unchristian to do so. They just wouldn't do a gay wedding, that's it. There's a differences in not serving someone cause there gay and not wanting to CATER a gay wedding.
https://youtu.be/l1_gqbQcI60
Big government loves to force people to do things. And this video data if all. And no, neither this video nor I ever think gay people or the gay movement are nazis, that's silly. But I would never force a gay baker to do anything. Don't want to do a cake because of the bible verses on it? Ok, I'll just go somewhere else. I might think your wrong but I won't sue you for it. That's ridiculous. Some peoples disdain, bigotry toward people of faith are clearly shown.

If someone has a sincerely held religious belief that the races are not equal, can they refuse to cater a black -white wedding? How about refusing to cater a Jewish wedding because they reject Christ? Do you support that?

I'm happy to respond to your comments but first I need to understand where you draw lines, if at all.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-04-2015, 10:02 PM
RE: Sincere question about "Religious Freedom" legislation
(12-04-2015 03:01 PM)JFish123 Wrote:  The Christians at the bakery and pizzeria have served gay people all the time. It would actually be unchristian to do so. They just wouldn't do a gay wedding, that's it. There's a differences in not serving someone cause there gay and not wanting to CATER a gay wedding.


[Image: 2587767-9145564471-missi.gif]


Doesn't matter. Either you cater weddings or you do not. If you do cater to weddings, then you have to cater without discriminating against your customers; that's part of the deal whenever you're offering up a service to the public. So bigoted asshole bakeries have a few options. One, then can stop catering all weddings, so that way they're treating everyone equally. Two, they can suck it up and cater weddings they don't like, because they're (supposedly) a professional and law abiding business. Third, they can close up shop.


When you serve the public, you have to serve the public equally.



(12-04-2015 03:01 PM)JFish123 Wrote:  https://youtu.be/l1_gqbQcI60


How to Format like a Winner!

[video=youtube]insert YouTube URL you want to embed here dingus![/video]



(12-04-2015 03:01 PM)JFish123 Wrote:  Big government loves to force people to do things.


[Image: cry-baby.png]


Oh, you poor baby! Is the big bad government forcing you to treat your fellow citizens like actual human beings with equal rights? Oh, sad day for you!



(12-04-2015 03:01 PM)JFish123 Wrote:  And this video data if all.


[Image: poe_reading.jpg]



(12-04-2015 03:01 PM)JFish123 Wrote:  And no, neither this video nor I ever think gay people or the gay movement are nazis, that's silly. But I would never force a gay baker to do anything. Don't want to do a cake because of the bible verses on it? Ok, I'll just go somewhere else.


Not even remotely the same, as both you and Bill Jack have failed to understand.


The Colorado Civil Rights Division recently ruled that Azucar Bakery in Denver did not engage in illegal discrimination when it refused to make cakes with anti-gay messages on them.

In March of 2014, Marjorie Silva, owner of Azucar, refused to make cakes that included two Bible verses: “God hates sin. Psalm 45:7″ and “Homosexuality is a detestable sin. Leviticus 18:2.” The cake design was also to include a portrayal of two grooms holding hands in front of a cross with a red “X” over them. The man who made the request, one William Jack, proceeded to file a complaint against her for discriminating against him based on his “creed” as defined by Colorado law.

A decision letter from the Division ruled in Silva’s favor. She did not discriminate against Jack because of his religious identity, but because his request included “derogatory language and imagery.” Her standard against such language is consistent across protected classes. “In the same manner [she] would not accept [an order from] anyone wanting to make a discriminatory cake against Christians, [she] will not make one that discriminates against gays,” the decision reads. “The evidence demonstrates that [Silva] would deny such requests to any customer, regardless of creed.”


http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2015/04/06...s-against/


She refused to put those specific messages on the cake, and her actions were consistent. Not only that, but she still would have sold him a cake, she just wasn't going to put hateful speech on them. Compare this with bigoted bakeries and florists absolutely refusing to do any service?


As they say, the devil is in the details. Next time, don't gloss over them like a ignorant shill.


(12-04-2015 03:01 PM)JFish123 Wrote:  I might think your wrong but I won't sue you for it. That's ridiculous. Some peoples disdain, bigotry toward people of faith are clearly shown.


[Image: page-image-1579-14a5346a-3f41-4e6d-aef4-...fd76d5.jpg]


Oh yes, poor you. Trying to defend the bigoted assholes makes you look like an asshole apologist, but I'm sure people hate you for being Christian and not for being an asshole bigot apologist. Right...


Might I make a shampoo recommendation?

[Image: toxic_baby_shampoo.jpg]

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes EvolutionKills's post
12-04-2015, 10:42 PM
RE: Sincere question about "Religious Freedom" legislation
(12-04-2015 05:53 PM)BnW Wrote:  Personally, I hope the boycotts and the protests continue. I hope companies continue to pull out of all the states that don't offer equal protection to all citizens in their states. I'm not sure that's going to happen but I'm hopeful that at some point soon, it does.



Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-04-2015, 11:28 PM
RE: Sincere question about "Religious Freedom" legislation
Here's something I posted on AF on this same issue.

Can a theist tell me what exactly is the problem with homosexuality?

Even if I let you say it is a choice, so what? What does it matter?

I have a website here which discusses the issues and terminology surrounding religion and atheism. It's hopefully user friendly to all.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Robvalue's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: