Jump to content



Photo

Indiana... wow, stunning


  • Please log in to reply
220 replies to this topic

#1 snowman

snowman

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,673 posts

Posted 26 March 2015 - 04:42 PM

Gov Pence is wrong to sign "religious freedom" into law. This is a law that allows people who hate other people to discriminate against them.  And wow again, to justify this using some twisted interpretation of what they think the bible says is absurd.

 

Indiana deserves all the ridicule coming her way.


  • JHS1982 likes this

#2 woo

woo

    Key Club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,726 posts

Posted 26 March 2015 - 05:37 PM

I saw this one coming....

And I expect other states to follow suit.

 

Forcing a business to put their beliefs to the side for the benefit of a few is wrong.


Edited by woo, 26 March 2015 - 05:54 PM.


#3 kelley

kelley

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,126 posts

Posted 26 March 2015 - 05:53 PM


Forcing a business to but their beliefs to the side for the benefit of a few is wrong.


Two wrongs don't make a right.
  • JHS1982 likes this

#4 woo

woo

    Key Club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,726 posts

Posted 26 March 2015 - 05:59 PM

{sorry for the above typo, fixed now}

 

So....

A baker that does not believe in gay marriage should be forced to bake a cake for a gay couple?

 

In my line of work, I have refused to work for several clients "just because I did not like them"

 

Let businesses decide who they cater to, and let the free market decide if they are successful or not.


  • karen, JHS1982 and jiyabird like this

#5 Tina

Tina

    Tinacious

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,739 posts

Posted 26 March 2015 - 06:10 PM

I don't know whether this law is the solution or not, but I fall somewhere in the middle.

 

I do not think people should be forced to give money to someone who hates them without knowing that person hates them.  I don't want to give my money to someone who hates me.  I don't want an @$$hole to become rich because he must hide his hate thanks to the law.

 

Personally, I'd rather their hate be open & known so that the free market can work.  That way they can't use their prosperous business to fund politicians who hate me too.


  • Quasar and JHS1982 like this

#6 grammy

grammy

    Councilman

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 883 posts

Posted 26 March 2015 - 06:11 PM

Money is green. I don't care what the lifestyle or religion is. But we are going way back in time if we allow people to be refused service if we don't agree or like the way the look. And that's just ugly and wrong.
  • JHS1982 and Donna like this

#7 Donna

Donna

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,465 posts

Posted 26 March 2015 - 06:16 PM

You mean like "white only" lunch counters? 

 

This is a law looking for a problem and its going to create a hostile environment for corporations/companies attracting employees to move to Indiana.  Conventions will look to locate in friendlier states.   


  • cindiloohoo, Avid Reader, JHS1982 and 2 others like this

#8 kelley

kelley

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,126 posts

Posted 26 March 2015 - 06:21 PM

{sorry for the above typo, fixed now}

So....
A baker that does not believe in gay marriage should be forced to bake a cake for a gay couple?

In my line of work, I have refused to work for several clients "just because I did not like them"

Let businesses decide who they cater to, and let the free market decide if they are successful or not.

No. Some people shouldn't be able to boss other people around. I assert an inalienable right to discriminate against whomever I wish for whatever reason I want. I intend to never work for another *, for example.

Still doesn't make this law necessary or decent.

That whole part where it runs off conventions, employers and individuals sucks a lot too.

Edited by kelley, 26 March 2015 - 06:21 PM.

  • JHS1982, snowman and Donna like this

#9 Tina

Tina

    Tinacious

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,739 posts

Posted 26 March 2015 - 06:21 PM

To me the lawsuits come across as "waaaah! He won't take my money!  Please, someone make him take my money!"

 

I think it limits competition and the opportunity for new entrepreneurs to offer a competing service/product.

 

If someone were to become known as the bigot baker, someone would start a business to offer services to those denied.  That's the way a free market works.  That way you are giving your money to someone who doesn't hate you.

By FORCING them to hide it, there are unintended consequences such as not helping support someone you'd RATHER support.

Is there any place locally you avoid because you know something about the owner that makes you boycott the business?  Why would we not want to boycott a bigot?


Now, I haven't read this new law so like I said I don't know if this is the solution or just going to make it worse.  But I do think the histrionics & drama over it are most likely a little over the top.  

The first time someone uses the law to deny someone service, let's see what happens - then freak out... ok?


  • TLIES, JHS1982, jiyabird and 1 other like this

#10 Tina

Tina

    Tinacious

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,739 posts

Posted 26 March 2015 - 06:22 PM

http://tribuneherald...discrimination/



#11 cindiloohoo

cindiloohoo

    Commissioner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,511 posts

Posted 26 March 2015 - 06:31 PM

As I was reading about this on a different site today I came across a couple of questions I think are pertinent and should be answered:

 

1.) What criteria will business owners be using to determine who is and who is not gay? Ordering a latte? Saying please? Not liking President Bush? Or do you just have to be suspiciously gay-like to impinge enough on someone’s religious freedom to warrant being denied service?

 

2.) As the Klan also operated under the auspices of Christianity, what is to keep businesses from kicking out or denying service to blacks, and when confronted, just say “Oh, we didn’t kick them out because they were black, we kicked them out because they were gay?”

 

 


  • JHS1982 and Donna like this

#12 kelley

kelley

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,126 posts

Posted 26 March 2015 - 06:35 PM

http://tribuneherald...discrimination/




Great example of why forcing people to bake cakes is wrong.

That's why we should work to uphold rights to speech, association, property rights, et.al.

Repeal a law, challenge the precedents.

A new law that pro actively protects discrimination ONLY based on religious freedom (for example, my decision not to work for *s isn't religiously based, just a personal preference of who I associate with) and timed in a way that makes it obvious it's about the gays is plain ugly.
  • cindiloohoo, JHS1982 and Donna like this

#13 Donna

Donna

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,465 posts

Posted 26 March 2015 - 06:45 PM

Sorry, I'll freak out now, thank you.  I don't want to stand by and witness the coming train wreck.  Is that over the top? 

 

Yes, I boycott businesses with a history of bigotry.  I think the history of discrimination with all its drama over whatever group being denied calls us to be better than we were.  A lot of Hoosiers, business organizations and individuals spoke against this bill.  This is the GOP and Pence is a d!ck.


  • JHS1982 likes this

#14 kelley

kelley

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,126 posts

Posted 26 March 2015 - 06:52 PM

Sorry, I'll freak out now, thank you. I don't want to stand by and witness the coming train wreck. Is that over the top?

Yes, I boycott businesses with a history of bigotry. I think the history of discrimination with all its drama over whatever group being denied calls us to be better than we were. A lot of Hoosiers, business organizations and individuals spoke against this bill. This is the GOP and Pence is a d!ck.


Pence. Is. Totally. A. D¶ck!
  • cindiloohoo, JHS1982 and Donna like this

#15 Tina

Tina

    Tinacious

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,739 posts

Posted 26 March 2015 - 06:58 PM

Great example of why forcing people to bake cakes is wrong.

That's why we should work to uphold rights to speech, association, property rights, et.al.

Repeal a law, challenge the precedents.

A new law that pro actively protects discrimination ONLY based on religious freedom (for example, my decision not to work for *s isn't religiously based, just a personal preference of who I associate with) and timed in a way that makes it obvious it's about the gays is plain ugly.


Ok, I get that, but you and I both know that if they had simply repealed the law there would be the exact same histrionics & drama calling any lawmaker who attempted it a racist.

 

So we agree that repealing would have been a better way.

I also think this was something Republicans considered "safer" vs being called racist.  I don't agree that this was the right call, but like I said, I'm somewhere in the middle.   I do think society has come a looooong way.  So I don't think this is going to be as catastrophic as some seem to believe.


  • JHS1982 likes this

#16 cindiloohoo

cindiloohoo

    Commissioner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,511 posts

Posted 26 March 2015 - 07:05 PM

Pence. Is. Totally. A. D¶ck!

The fact that he insisted on doing this behind closed doors is very telling - it tells me the man doesn't have the courage of his alleged convictions.


  • JHS1982 and Donna like this

#17 grammy

grammy

    Councilman

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 883 posts

Posted 26 March 2015 - 07:12 PM

If a landlord for religious reasons doesn't approve of gay couples he will be able to refuse to rent under Religious Freedom? Bigotry and Hate under any religion is still bigotry and hate. I can't remember who to credit that to but it sure rings true .
  • GrumpyGranny, JHS1982 and JenS like this

#18 Tina

Tina

    Tinacious

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,739 posts

Posted 26 March 2015 - 07:23 PM

If a landlord for religious reasons doesn't approve of gay couples he will be able to refuse to rent under Religious Freedom? Bigotry and Hate under any religion is still bigotry and hate. I can't remember who to credit that to but it sure rings true .

Sexual orientation is not currently a protected class under Fair Housing.

Fair Housing Act
Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 (Fair Housing Act), as amended, prohibits discrimination in the sale, rental, and financing of dwellings, and in other housing-related transactions, based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status (including children under the age of 18 living with parents or legal custodians, pregnant women, and people securing custody of children under the age of 18), and disability.


  • kelley likes this

#19 woo

woo

    Key Club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,726 posts

Posted 26 March 2015 - 07:26 PM

If a landlord for religious reasons doesn't approve of gay couples he will be able to refuse to rent.

They could do that before today.


  • kelley likes this

#20 CityBoy

CityBoy

    Councilman

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 973 posts

Posted 26 March 2015 - 07:39 PM

Like Tina, I'm somewhere in the middle on this issue.  But I don't get the leap to calling a business owner a "hater" because of his religious beliefs.  That term is over-used, in my opinion; likewise for the term "racist."  It's become a standard rebuttal to reasoned opinions or deeply held beliefs -- just slime the other person as a hater or a racist.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users