Hands Up, Don't Discriminate Against Gays!

[sr71plt]

I'm not angry. I just love pointing out facts and bringing out true attitudes people have towards others. It's easy with some.

No, I don't think you're one of the angry ones. They're here from your end of the spectrum, though. And it emphasizes the impotence of both of these groups--that they are so intense and dogmatic on a porn discussion board.

 

[RjThoughts]

No, I don't think you're one of the angry ones. They're here from your end of the spectrum, though. And it emphasizes the impotence of both of these groups--that they are so intense and dogmatic on a porn discussion board.

Oh I know both wings have nut jobs.

Oh some of the discussions in the porn threads can get even more heated, with more name calling, making Miles angelic.

 

[Boxlicker101]

You would be wrong.
LINK.

The Indiana law is basically the same as the federal RFRA act in 19 other states.

They slipped in two toxic paragraphs in the post-Hobby Lobby era.

The first is Section 7.3, which give ANY Indiana business (not just the very limited "closely held" businesses in the Hobby Lobby case) the right to assert it's religious beliefs to legally discriminate against any "non-protected class" of people in America.

"Protected classes" include race, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, etc.

"Non-protected classes" seem to consist entirely of.....wait for it....gays and lesbians!

The second toxic change is technical but nasty: Enlisting the aid of the state government to help you prove you're being discriminated against by bigots requires the government to bend over backwards to first prove the business owner's rights weren't being discriminated against ("least restrictive" doctrine), which neatly flips the intent of the federal law on its head.

Bottom line: the legislation was designed to encourage legal discrimination against gays, in the hopes that it could force the issue to the Supreme Court to decide once and for all if homos are a "protected class" (i.e. "born that way" and Consitutionally protected) or a "nonprotected class" (i.e. a behavior that can be regulated by state law). The Supreme Court has been unwilling to address this for over ten years.

The bigot authors of this legislation are obviously betting huge that the Supremes will define homos as a constitutionally unprotected class, because it's prohibited in teh Bible.

I know protected class also includes age and physical or mental handicap, but does it include marital status?

 

[RjThoughts]

I know protected class also includes age and physical or mental handicap, but does it include marital status?

Good question, but this is 2015. Do you think some employers still won't hired married women?

 

[sr71plt]

Good question, but this is 2015. Do you think some employers still won't hired married women?

I know they'll try--sometimes from practical concerns. The issues that affect the job/business don't just evaporate because there are equality of access laws.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Good question, but this is 2015. Do you think some employers still won't hired married women?

I think the discrimination would more likely be against unmarried men.

 

[sr71plt]

I think the discrimination would more likely be against unmarried men.

Yes, I have sometimes seen it happen (from inside the process).

There's no such thing as a comprehensive, fully fair process in this.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

I wonder how many of us homo phobes vote?

 

[RobDownSouth]

I know protected class also includes age and physical or mental handicap, but does it include marital status?

Good catch. I assumed it did.

Turns out it's a quasi-grey area. It's NOT specified as a protected class under FEDERAL Law, but it IS protected under about half the STATE laws.

Also, age discrimination varies widely from state to state, some states the minimum threshold is 40, some are 50, and a few are 55.

 

[RobDownSouth]

There are a lot of posters here, on both fringes of the spectrum, who are spitting their posts out in anger.

Makes you feel all high 'n mighty, doesn't it?
Sitting up there on Mt. Olympus, above the fray?
The very epitome of White Privilege, some might say.

 

[sr71plt]

Makes you feel all high 'n mighty, doesn't it?
Sitting up there on Mt. Olympus, above the fray?
The very epitome of White Privilege, some might say.

It certainly makes me feel more objective than a good many posting here, yes. It also helps keep my blood pressure down and the bile from coming up from the back of my throat--where yours seems to be surging for no particular benefit to anyone, especially yourself.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

LMAO!!!

You're the one making the accusations, schmuck!

You know nothing about me. Like most ignorant bigots you make blanket statements which have no basis in fact. Face it, asswipe...you're busted... you stepped in a pile of dog shit and can't get it off your shoe.

Next time think before you post, as difficult as that may be for you.

Not easy going, filling in your former top Vette's shoes, huh?

Hang in there, buddy! Even the greatest baseball players need a month or two to get into their stride after Spring Training.

 

[sr71plt]

Amendments reportedly have passed the Indiana legislature and are on the governor's desk. If he sighs them, we'll have to see who's standing behind him this time.

http://my.earthlink.net/article/us?guid=20150402/103b6f5f-0692-4118-ae32-ec8a00c882d5

 

[lovecraft68]

I love how quickly these people's "conviction" folds in the face of adversity and back lash.

As I've said before I don't believe in the law, its ignorance. But if these people supposedly believe so strongly against homosexuals then show your conviction and dig in and stand up yourself...but no they fold like a house of cards.

Typical tyrannical bible thumping cowards. All show and fire and brimstone until they realize they might have a fight on their hands.

The GLBT have had to fight hard for their rights. Christians have had to fight for nothing since B.C....and it shows.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Amendments reportedly have passed the Indiana legislature and are on the governor's desk. If he sighs them, we'll have to see who's standing behind him this time.

http://my.earthlink.net/article/us?guid=20150402/103b6f5f-0692-4118-ae32-ec8a00c882d5

These changes would bring Indiana's RFRA in line with the other 19 states that have passed RFRA legislation.

Weren't you the one lecturing us yesterday how there was no difference between Indiana and those other 19 states? If you were, then why was an amendment necessary? I'm obviously missing something here.

 

[sr71plt]

Weren't you the one lecturing us yesterday how there was no difference between Indiana and those other 19 states? If you were, then why was an amendment necessary? I'm obviously missing something here.

No, it wasn't me. You really want to fight, don't you?

What I posted today was a link to an article on one of the writers of the 1993 federal law saying the Indiana law was essentially identical (post 8). And what I did was ask if anyone could evidence a difference. Someone did (post 9) and I immediately said thanks (post 10).

You're just being belligerent because you want to fight about something.

 

[RobDownSouth]

No, it wasn't me. You really want to fight, don't you?

What I posted today was a link to an article on one of the writers of the 1993 federal law saying the Indiana law was essentially identical (post 8). And what I did was ask if anyone could evidence a difference. Someone did (post 9) and I immediately said thanks (post 10).

You're just being belligerent because you want to fight about something.

Oh that's right, you were hiding behind the words of others.

"Plausible deniability". Vetteman used to use that little passive-aggressive ploy all the time.

In any event, I'm glad someone set you straight.

 

[sr71plt]

Oh that's right, you were hiding behind the words of others.

"Plausible deniability". Vetteman used to use that little passive-aggressive ploy all the time.

In any event, I'm glad someone set you straight.

And I hope you've found someone to fight with. You seem to need so badly to do that.

 

[RobDownSouth]

And I hope you've found someone to fight with. You seem to need so badly to do that.

You're certainly not much of a challenge. Someone pushes back against you, you fold faster than Superman on laundry day.

 

[sr71plt]

You're certainly not much of a challenge. Someone pushes back against you, you fold faster than Superman on laundry day.

Well, yes, when the pushing person is being idiotic and dogmatic. What's the use of engaging with such an asshole? Just time and effort wasted. The deep pit of Internet discussion boards.

Once again, all you want to do is fighting something. You're a total waste therefore.

The comic strip Dilbert is currently running a series on Dick of the Internet. I think it's something you need to read.

 

[about_average]

On the up side of the law, it's now legal to smoke pot. Provided you're a member of the right church.
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2015/04/02/indianas-church-of-cannabis-growing-like-a-weed

 

[MrBates2]

I love you Ann!! You are right! It is now, a never-ending parade of manufactured discrimination stories from the left. Remember when America was about protecting your rights? Well those days are over. Feelings are treated now more importantly, than rights are. Moreover, free speech? Oh yeah, that went away when 'hate speech' arrived. The Founders would not recognize this country if they were to see it today.

It saddens me greatly.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

The Founders would not recognize this country if they were to see it today.

They'd likely have a heart attack over all the Negroes moving freely to and fro in fine attire without chains and shackles.

http://media3.onsugar.com/files/2013/08/01/982/n/1922398/141c4caa45bc990d_Obama-1-buzzfeed.xxxlarge/i/Epic-Eyebrow-Raise.gif

http://media.tumblr.com/78bfc412eb72c5c76f71fd79fa831637/tumblr_inline_mt8eo1e2pA1qajehj.gif

http://media.tumblr.com/de54d002dd42fe62704974a85093a788/tumblr_inline_nkkfwuqyfT1qbarv9.gif

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

I love you Ann!! You are right! It is now, a never-ending parade of manufactured discrimination stories from the left. Remember when America was about protecting your rights? Well those days are over. Feelings are treated now more importantly, than rights are. Moreover, free speech? Oh yeah, that went away when 'hate speech' arrived. The Founders would not recognize this country if they were to see it today.

It saddens me greatly.

I disagree that free speech is compromised at all.

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

I love you Ann!! You are right! It is now, a never-ending parade of manufactured discrimination stories from the left. Remember when America was about protecting your rights? Well those days are over. Feelings are treated now more importantly, than rights are. Moreover, free speech? Oh yeah, that went away when 'hate speech' arrived. The Founders would not recognize this country if they were to see it today.

It saddens me greatly.

Freedom of Speech does not mean Freedom from Consequences or ridicule for that matter.