What's new
By:

Kansas lawmaker introduces, and state house passes, a new law making it legal to discriminate agains

Status
Not open for further replies.
1010617_10152146093098810_1710449867_n.jpg
 
Ms Tree said:
Is Obama's criticism of Uganda's anti-gay law hypocritical?

http://america.aljazeera.com/watch/shows/the-stream/the-stream-officialblog/2014/2/24/is-obama-s-criticismofugandasantigaylawhypocritical.html

Interesting article. Can't say I disagree with the points made. How can he condemn Uganda while he remains silent about AZ, KS and the rest of the states who deny equality to homosexuals in the US.
Click to expand...
How can he condemn Uganda, AZ, KS or anyone else, while allowing muslim countries a pass!
 
Brewer vetoed the 'religious freedom bill'.  This makes the 2nd loss for the tea party.
 
Ms Tree said:
Brewer vetoed the 'religious freedom bill'.  This makes the 2nd loss for the tea party.
Click to expand...
 
Mass suicides in the tea party now?   LOL
 
Postponed until after the Super Bowl
 
How about a law to allow someone to refuse service to fat people? Under the gluttony is a sin umbrella, and therefore fat people offend me. I bet the Repugs would be up in arms in a second since judging by the Republican attendees at the election primaries today, fat white people are in the majority of their supporters.
 
What I cannot figure out is why the law is only addressing homosexuals? After all, most religions also frown on adultery? Why are they not refused service? What about anyone who eats pork? Football players could have a problem since they touch a pig skin. Anyone getting your redwings .... no no no. Bad boy, no service for you. Mixing fabrics would be an easy one to test for. Just show us your labels before we serve you. It my religion, I'm sure you understand right? Not sure about the beard thing in 19:27 Sounds like if you don't look like ZZ top your screwed. If you have tattoos no service. Working on the sabbath is a no no. I wonder if any of these places looking to discriinate against gays are open on the sabbath? Irony?

Suffice to say there is a petty long list of people to discriminate against but they only chose one to codify into law. And the idiots who passed these bills never even thought there might be a back lash? How out of touch can the republicans and the Tea Party actually be?
 
Have you actually read the proposed text of either law from KS or AZ?

I know for a fact there's no mention of sexual orientation in the AZ bill. While gay activists made it all about them, they didn't bother yelling the whole truth. Most just believed what GLAAD told them to do.

Read the bill. It's an almost exact match of the Federal RFRA that Clinton signed in 1993, but takes the protections extended between Federal government employees and the agencies they worked for, and extended them to business owners.

For those seeking equal protection clause lawsuits, why is it thus OK to not offer equal protection to business owners?...
 
eolesen said:
Have you actually read the proposed text of either law from KS or AZ?

I know for a fact there's no mention of sexual orientation in the AZ bill. While gay activists made it all about them, they didn't bother yelling the whole truth. Most just believed what GLAAD told them to do.

Read the bill. It's an almost exact match of the Federal RFRA that Clinton signed in 1993, but takes the protections extended between Federal government employees and the agencies they worked for, and extended them to business owners.

For those seeking equal protection clause lawsuits, why is it thus OK to not offer equal protection to business owners?...
Click to expand...
 
So are you saying that this was designed to protect a Muslim restaurant owner who refuses service to Christian's because his religion considers them to be infidels, and it was done to protect Muslim rights?   
 
eolesen said:
Have you actually read the proposed text of either law from KS or AZ?I know for a fact there's no mention of sexual orientation in the AZ bill. While gay activists made it all about them, they didn't bother yelling the whole truth. Most just believed what GLAAD told them to do.Read the bill. It's an almost exact match of the Federal RFRA that Clinton signed in 1993, but takes the protections extended between Federal government employees and the agencies they worked for, and extended them to business owners.For those seeking equal protection clause lawsuits, why is it thus OK to not offer equal protection to business owners?...
Click to expand...
Are you sure that you are not seeking public office or have a legal back ground? You sure have become adept at at writing half truths and BS.

First off and most obvious you bring up both states and then conveniently ignore the most egregious offender of the two. The KS law was so obviously discriminatory they could have put up a separate gay water fountain and you would not have been able to see the difference.

To argue that the RFRA laws and the AZ twist are not obvious attempts to allow people to discriminate against people they do not like is ignorant at best. As KC pointed out, the intent of these laws it's not to allow a Muslim establishment to deny service to a good wholesome Christian or for me to deny service to a two time adulterer like Gingrich. The cases before the courts that have prompted these laws to come to the defense of their helpless Christians are cases where Christians sensibilities have been offended by being required to serve gays equally. Do you think the sincerely held beliefs of the KKK would be respected by the courts? How about my sincerely held beliefs to not serve people who have had get knocked out of wedlock.... Calling Ms Palin.... Nah. These good Christians who hold these sincere beliefs put people like Palin and put people like Gingrich and Palin on a pedestal but have the audacity to condemn homosexuals. Talk about hypocrisy.
 
I'm sure you'd be entirely content forcing Christians into the closed that the gays were freed from.

Hypocrisy is a quasi-protected class exhibiting unabashed intolerance of others who disagree with their lifestyle.

You'll always have the idiots like the KKK and Westboro, but that's not whose rights to practice religion are being marginalized.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/15/faith-mcgregor-sues-omar-mahrouk-muslim-barber_n_2140277.html

http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/obama-inc-sues-trucking-company-for-firing-muslim-drivers-who-refused-to-deliver-alcohol/
 
 
eolesen said:
I'm sure you'd be entirely content forcing Christians into the closed that the gays were freed from.

Hypocrisy is a quasi-protected class exhibiting unabashed intolerance of others who disagree with their lifestyle.

You'll always have the idiots like the KKK and Westboro, but that's not whose rights to practice religion are being marginalized.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/15/faith-mcgregor-sues-omar-mahrouk-muslim-barber_n_2140277.html

http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/obama-inc-sues-trucking-company-for-firing-muslim-drivers-who-refused-to-deliver-alcohol/
Click to expand...
 

And I am sure you'd be wrong but what else is new.

No hypocrisy is the Christian majority thinking that they are above the law and are entitled to force their beliefs on others.

Who's rights are being marginalized? These supposed victims you speak of are using religion to justify their discrimination in the work place. So where in the bible does it say that Christians may not provide services to gays or anyone else who violates the tenants of their faith? We have been having this same discussion on another site that I frequent and thus far no one there has been able to point out a biblical reference that precludes a Christian from providing a service to a homosexual or an adulterer or anyone else for that matter.
 
Glad the country is doing so well that we can devote so much time to ghey rights.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

C
January 11 Airline News
Replies
4
Views
2K
cubfan02us
C

Latest posts

Back
Top