Liberals Win Again!

[rightwinger]

FASCIST is the only word that fits for what's going on here over ONE STATE LAW. wake up people

SNIP:


The Fascist Left and Same-Sex Marriage
April 2, 2015 - 7:49 AM

By Ben Shapiro



Last week, Indiana Gov. Mike Pence signed a law with the same name as one signed on the federal level by President Bill Clinton in 1993, which was co-sponsored by Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., the presumptive next Senate minority leader. Naturally, Pence found himself on the wrong end of a partisan barrage from ABC News' George Stephanopoulos for signing that law the following Sunday. It sure is nice to be a Democrat.

What exactly does the law state? The Religious Freedom Restoration Act in Indiana states that "a governmental entity may not substantially burden a person's exercise of religion, even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability." That rule does not apply only if the government's action "is in furtherance of a compelling government interest" and is also "the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling government interest." If government does act against someone in violation of that person's religious principles, he or she can assert that violation "as a claim or defense in a judicial or administrative proceeding."

ALL of it here:

The Fascist Left and Same-Sex Marriage CNS News

Seems the right are the ones identified as fascists through most of the country

Wrong side of history again I see




.

 

[tinydancer]

This thread is funny!

RFRA stands. SCOTUS ruled that it now is expanded to say businesses can have religious beliefs that need protection.

Indiana and Arkansas are just fine tuning the way their State version of the Federal law was written.

Putting in a clause that states for the stupid/ignorant/idiotic among us that this bill in no way allows a business to discriminate against anyone is not a victory for Liberals.

Putting in a clause saying the bill in no way disriminates does not mean that it doesn't

There are still no protections in the bill and no clear definition of the scope your "religious convictions" may have

In fact, if your religious convictions say to hate fags, there is nothing in Indiana preventing you from discriminating

Have you even gotten around to reading the bill yet to understand it? Would you like a link?

Because the only difference between the legislation that Clinton signed in 1993 and the Indiana bill that was passed is the incorporation of "for profit" businesses.

And that I assume was based on the Justices ruling in Hobby Lobby in which they expanded the 1993 law to include "for profits".

This hype is all media and left wing loony tunes. The legislators will tweak the bill and the law will stand.

 

[rightwinger]

This thread is funny!

RFRA stands. SCOTUS ruled that it now is expanded to say businesses can have religious beliefs that need protection.

Indiana and Arkansas are just fine tuning the way their State version of the Federal law was written.

Putting in a clause that states for the stupid/ignorant/idiotic among us that this bill in no way allows a business to discriminate against anyone is not a victory for Liberals.

Putting in a clause saying the bill in no way disriminates does not mean that it doesn't

There are still no protections in the bill and no clear definition of the scope your "religious convictions" may have

In fact, if your religious convictions say to hate fags, there is nothing in Indiana preventing you from discriminating

Have you even gotten around to reading the bill yet to understand it? Would you like a link?

Because the only difference between the legislation that Clinton signed in 1993 and the Indiana bill that was passed is the incorporation of "for profit" businesses.

And that I assume was based on the Justices ruling in Hobby Lobby in which they expanded the 1993 law to include "for profits".

This hype is all media and left wing loony tunes. The legislators will tweak the bill and the law will stand.

Yup......blame the media
After that, you can blame low information voters

The law was nothing but grandstanding by Indiana Republicans to pander to social conservatives.....We may have lost on Gay Marriage but we will give you a way to block it

The law was poorly written and open ended.

Politically, it was a disaster for the state

 

[Anathema]

Glad one of you right wing turds are willing to admit that conservatism is dogma and doctrinaire.

What a wonderfully phrased note of praise. ANY true ideology is a matter of dogma and doctrine; to hell with anything else.

"Conservatism, though a necessary element in any stable society, is not a social program; in its paternalistic, nationalistic and power adoring tendencies it is often closer to socialism than true liberalism; and with its traditionalistic, anti-intellectual, and often mystical propensities it will never, except in short periods of disillusionment, appeal to the young and all those others who believe that some changes are desirable if this world is to become a better place."
Friedrich August von Hayek-The Road to Serfdom

Yes, Conservatism does share certain Authoritarian traits with Socialism. That is because a proper society requires STRICT RULES and a DECISIVE, often BRUTAL system of PUNISHMENTS in order to ensure that the society remains proper, since impropriaty is the main downfall of such a society.

The young and those who believe in change are the LAST people on earth than ANY ideology should be listening to. The young of ANY species are stupid. Human beings especially. Those who embrace change generally do so because they are unable to live up to the basic standards of society.

"In general, it can probably be said that the conservative does not object to coercion or arbitrary power so long as it is used for what he regards as the right purposes. He believes that if government is in the hands of decent men, it ought not to be too much restricted by rigid rules. Since he is essentially opportunist and lacks principles..."
Friedrich August von Hayek-Why I am Not a Conservative

I will agree with the first sentence, and I addressed why above. I totally disagree with the second and third. A true Conservative believes that once the initial Governing Documents are put into place, that there should rarely, if ever, be a need to change them, since morals and values (if proper) do not change. Therefore a true Conservative sees Elected Officials and Government employees as little more than bureaucrats carrying out their work in an emotionless way. They didn't MAKE the Rules. They are not there to DEBATE the Rules. They are only there to ENFORCE the Rules

 

[tinydancer]

This thread is funny!

RFRA stands. SCOTUS ruled that it now is expanded to say businesses can have religious beliefs that need protection.

Indiana and Arkansas are just fine tuning the way their State version of the Federal law was written.

Putting in a clause that states for the stupid/ignorant/idiotic among us that this bill in no way allows a business to discriminate against anyone is not a victory for Liberals.

Putting in a clause saying the bill in no way disriminates does not mean that it doesn't

There are still no protections in the bill and no clear definition of the scope your "religious convictions" may have

In fact, if your religious convictions say to hate fags, there is nothing in Indiana preventing you from discriminating

Have you even gotten around to reading the bill yet to understand it? Would you like a link?

Because the only difference between the legislation that Clinton signed in 1993 and the Indiana bill that was passed is the incorporation of "for profit" businesses.

And that I assume was based on the Justices ruling in Hobby Lobby in which they expanded the 1993 law to include "for profits".

This hype is all media and left wing loony tunes. The legislators will tweak the bill and the law will stand.

Yup......blame the media
After that, you can blame low information voters

The law was nothing but grandstanding by Indiana Republicans to pander to social conservatives.....We may have lost on Gay Marriage but we will give you a way to block it

The law was poorly written and open ended.

Politically, it was a disaster for the state

Don't hand me bullshit. This is an LGBT media driven issue that is comparable to "Hands up, don't shoot" lie without the riots. Well so far.

And the campaign is based on a lie that this is an anti gay bill.

Here's a visual on the only difference between RFRA 1993 and Indiana's law.

They included "for profit". The Supreme Court opened the door for this.

1) Unlike the federal law, the Indiana bill explicitly protects the exercise of religion of entities, which includes for profit corporations.

How Indiana s RFRA differs from federal version

 

[rightwinger]

Liberals have won once again

Persistence has changed the public opinion towards gay marriage. Most Americans just say ....Why not?

Conservatives just sit and fume and have to resort to petty threats not to sell to gay weddings

Pathetic....just pathetic

 

[Mertex]

Typical conservative, can't admit defeat. What did you think of Boehner and the rest of the conservatives who folded on not funding DHS? Are they liberals now too? Yikes.....Ted Cruz a Liberal? Shoot me!

I believe that there are probably about 50,000 REAL Conservatives left in the USA., and I doubt any of them are elected officials. Everyone else is a Liberal. Then again, I'm one who believes that Campaign Promises should be made UNDER OATH and with the full weight of a potential PERJURY charge behind them.

So the rest are just psuedo conservatives? Liberals in some awful disguise?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Can we thank that big election in November for this avalanche of support for gay rights?

 

[Mertex]

This thread is funny!

RFRA stands. SCOTUS ruled that it now is expanded to say businesses can have religious beliefs that need protection.

Indiana and Arkansas are just fine tuning the way their State version of the Federal law was written.

Putting in a clause that states for the stupid/ignorant/idiotic among us that this bill in no way allows a business to discriminate against anyone is not a victory for Liberals.

You might want to reconsider your beliefs on this issue. Even your "RedState" source believes he has surrendered.....if the bill didn't allow businesses to discriminate, why does Pence have to surrender? RedState thinks he is trying to have it both ways....hmmmm, I wonder what the other way could possibly mean?

Stick a fork in Mike Pence’s hopes of running for president. He’s done. Having done the right thing by protecting the religious freedom of the people of Indiana, he’s now negotiating a surrender. What is more troubling is that he seems to be trying to have it both ways.
Mike Pence prepares to cave RedState

I don't care what RedState thinks. Pence isn't surrendering.

He already has.........you don't change something that doesn't need changing...so if the law, as you claim, doesn't provide permission to discriminate, why is Gov Pence scurrying to change it?

Indiana governor surrenders wants changes to religious-objections law WOPULAR

He's being very wise to send the legislation back for an amendment that makes it very clear that the bill itself does not allow nor endorse any person or business to discriminate.

So you are claiming that he was very dumb before his decision to go back and amend it? The experts all agree about what the bill does.....maybe he is changing it because he didn't realize this to begin with?

Because people and idiotic CEO's have bought into the bullshit that is being driven by the media that Indiana's bill allows anyone and everyone willy nilly to discriminate against <fill in the blank>.

A blatant lie.

Everything Pence has ever quoted regarding gays clearly identifies him as a homophobe - this bill went right along with his homophobic attitude. The only reason he has "surrendered" is because he knows his state is in deep shit if he doesn't, not because he has all of a sudden become tolerant.

The State legislation is based on the RFRA that Schumer introduced, that President Clinton signed, that Senator Obama voted for.

The Indiana bill went one step further though based on the outcome of the Hobby Lobby decision by the Supreme Court.

Everyone except the homophobes are in agreement that the bill is not the same. Either Indiana's legislators are dense or they think they are smarter than everyone else.....I don't think the latter is the truth.

It recognized for profit organizations or businesses had a religious right under RFRA.

Nobody has a right to discriminate. If they don't like homosexuality, then don't practice it, but no one has the right to have a public business and then restrict who they will serve.

Now everyone is running around and saying that this is the part that makes the bill evil.

But under the judgement of the SCOTUS it's bang on the money.

It's really that simple. Here's the part everyone is freaking about. But hey. They should go bitch to the Justices.

Check Section 7 - 3- B - 2. This only about for profit.

ETA: whoopsied forgot to add link

How Indiana s RFRA differs from federal version

The two bills are different. You just don't get it. Pence finally got it (through pressure) - if you don't, that's your problem, I'm not going to explain it to you again.


Indiana’s RFRA law has new and different language than the other statutes and the federal law. And it has different legislative intent.

States began passing their own RFRA laws only after 1997, when the Supreme Court ruled that the 1993 federal law did not govern state laws. States wanted to “protect” religious liberty just as the feds had (more on that later).

But all of that came before Chief Justice Roberts ruled last summer inHobby Lobby v. Burwell. That was the famous case that ruled that a business, Hobby Lobby, was being burdened in its free expression of religion by a provision of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare to its foes) requiring coverage for contraception. This was a revolution in defining religious freedom in this country.

The Indiana law is the first state RFRA to pass after Hobby Lobby, and it actually codifies its jurisprudence in two ways.

First, it explicitly states that for-profit businesses – and not just individuals – have a right to the free exercise of religion. As The Atlantic points out, the federal law has no such language, nor do 17 of the 19 existing state RFRA statues. In fact, Louisiana and Pennsylvania exclude businesses from being protected by RFRA.


Indiana religious freedom law is different and here s why - DecodeDC Story

 

[jillian]

Mike Pence is a stupid weakling who caved under pressure when he really didn't need to...

I think you guys should be as wingnutty and fringy as possible.

it helps democrats to keep winning the white house.

 

[jillian]

Can we thank that big election in November for this avalanche of support for gay rights?

it doesn't hurt....

but either way stick a fork in pence... he's done.

 

[jillian]

Ultra-Conservative Senator/Governor Mike Pence has changed his position.

Southern Conservative Senator/Governor Asa Huchinson is calling for a re-write before he signs it, making clear there will be no discrimination, and pointing out that the Federal law will be his guidepost, not a 'States Rights' position.

Liberals win again.

Well, pack yer' ass with gerbils, and jump for joy!

another expert on gerbil packing speaks.

This countrys' preoccupation with all things gay is another sign of our un-exceptionalism when we are actually facing a multitude of significant pressing problems that take a back seat to the whims of what amounts to 4% of our population.

it's a preoccupation with civil rightrs.

something that offends the rabid right....

 

[Dot Com]

Yep. Repubs, trying to throw red meat to their SOCON base, stepped in it again

 

[peach174]

Ultra-Conservative Senator/Governor Mike Pence has changed his position.

Southern Conservative Senator/Governor Asa Huchinson is calling for a re-write before he signs it, making clear there will be no discrimination, and pointing out that the Federal law will be his guidepost, not a 'States Rights' position.

Liberals win again.

Well, pack yer' ass with gerbils, and jump for joy!

another expert on gerbil packing speaks.

This countrys' preoccupation with all things gay is another sign of our un-exceptionalism when we are actually facing a multitude of significant pressing problems that take a back seat to the whims of what amounts to 4% of our population.

it's a preoccupation with civil rightrs.

something that offends the rabid right....

What about the Religious Civil Rights?
It violates their 1st amendment right.

 

[rightwinger]

Ultra-Conservative Senator/Governor Mike Pence has changed his position.

Southern Conservative Senator/Governor Asa Huchinson is calling for a re-write before he signs it, making clear there will be no discrimination, and pointing out that the Federal law will be his guidepost, not a 'States Rights' position.

Liberals win again.

Well, pack yer' ass with gerbils, and jump for joy!

another expert on gerbil packing speaks.

This countrys' preoccupation with all things gay is another sign of our un-exceptionalism when we are actually facing a multitude of significant pressing problems that take a back seat to the whims of what amounts to 4% of our population.

it's a preoccupation with civil rightrs.

something that offends the rabid right....

What about the Religious Civil Rights?
It violates their 1st amendment right.

In what way?

 

[Mertex]

Ultra-Conservative Senator/Governor Mike Pence has changed his position.

Southern Conservative Senator/Governor Asa Huchinson is calling for a re-write before he signs it, making clear there will be no discrimination, and pointing out that the Federal law will be his guidepost, not a 'States Rights' position.

Liberals win again.

If Pence is willing to change his mind then ha cannot be a Conservative, nevermind an Ultra-Conservative. He IS a Liberal, So I'm not sure if that means the Libs win because they turned Pence into one of their own or if they lose for the same reason.

Glad one of you right wing turds are willing to admit that conservatism is dogma and doctrinaire.

Hayek agrees!

"Conservatism, though a necessary element in any stable society, is not a social program; in its paternalistic, nationalistic and power adoring tendencies it is often closer to socialism than true liberalism; and with its traditionalistic, anti-intellectual, and often mystical propensities it will never, except in short periods of disillusionment, appeal to the young and all those others who believe that some changes are desirable if this world is to become a better place."
Friedrich August von Hayek-The Road to Serfdom

"In general, it can probably be said that the conservative does not object to coercion or arbitrary power so long as it is used for what he regards as the right purposes. He believes that if government is in the hands of decent men, it ought not to be too much restricted by rigid rules. Since he is essentially opportunist and lacks principles..."
Friedrich August von Hayek-Why I am Not a Conservative

I have fun pointing out the hypocrisy of the left and will continue to do so.

While ignoring your own and the GOP's humongous hypocrisy. The fools making these laws claim to be Christian, yet they do the complete opposite of what Jesus commanded them to do. Where in the Bible does it say that Jesus tells anyone to shun, hate, discriminate against someone because you think they are sinners? Jesus spoke lovingly to the woman at the well who was committing adultery......he didn't call her names or shunned her, and he commands everyone of his followers to love their neighbor as themselves.

It's kind of difficult to ignore humungous.

And yet, it could hit you on the head and you still wouldn't see it.

What the Indiana Governor did makes perfect and logical sense to me.He would like to balance the budget and get people to work.

And he is willing to throw it all into the toilet just to satisfy his homophobic tendencies?

Did they call it the "discrimination law" when they signed it ...

This really doesn't even make sense, but coming from you I'm not surprised. If Pence and his cronies are trying to disguise something that is discriminatory, why would they call it "discrimination law" when they signed it. Even you should be able to figure that out.

Why don't Democrats realize that the country is in debt and the "Golden Goose" is tapped out?

Surely you are smart enough to figure out that Obama has brought the country out of the toilet where Bush put it. The economy is doing better than where Bush left it, unemployment is further down than when Bush was in office, but then again, you probably watch Faux News 24/7, so you probably believe the idiocy that the country is doing worse.

btw. I'm really not sure why you're quoting the bible when you have no faith or concept of right and wrong.

You're not really sure because you don't know anything about me. I have more concept of right and wrong in my little finger than you and the rest of the homophobic right-wing has all put together. I know that discrimination is not only against our Constitutional rights, it's against God's rules......

When Jesus said "love your neighbor as yourself" he didn't say unless he happens to be homosexual.

 

[Esmeralda]

Ultra-Conservative Senator/Governor Mike Pence has changed his position.

Southern Conservative Senator/Governor Asa Huchinson is calling for a re-write before he signs it, making clear there will be no discrimination, and pointing out that the Federal law will be his guidepost, not a 'States Rights' position.

Liberals win again.

Well, pack yer' ass with gerbils, and jump for joy!

another expert on gerbil packing speaks.

This countrys' preoccupation with all things gay is another sign of our un-exceptionalism when we are actually facing a multitude of significant pressing problems that take a back seat to the whims of what amounts to 4% of our population.

The phenomenon of gay acceptance is sweeping the entire Western World. It isn't just happening in America. Don't you have any knowledge of reality outside your own backyard?

BBC News - Gay marriage around the world

 

[peach174]

Well, pack yer' ass with gerbils, and jump for joy!

another expert on gerbil packing speaks.

This countrys' preoccupation with all things gay is another sign of our un-exceptionalism when we are actually facing a multitude of significant pressing problems that take a back seat to the whims of what amounts to 4% of our population.

it's a preoccupation with civil rightrs.

something that offends the rabid right....

What about the Religious Civil Rights?
It violates their 1st amendment right.

In what way?

When they are Forced to bake cakes or cater at gay weddings.
This is against the 1st amendment and prohibits them from their free exercise.
It does not prohibit any gay couples to go to another business that will do it for them nor does it stop any other sale products from those businesses selling to gays.
Both groups have their rights and gay rights are not being violated when they have plenty of businesses to choose from.
Gays are not being banned from the businesses that would be a violation of their rights.
Forcing religious businesses owners to go against their religious views is a violation of their rights.

 

[rightwinger]

another expert on gerbil packing speaks.

This countrys' preoccupation with all things gay is another sign of our un-exceptionalism when we are actually facing a multitude of significant pressing problems that take a back seat to the whims of what amounts to 4% of our population.

it's a preoccupation with civil rightrs.

something that offends the rabid right....

What about the Religious Civil Rights?
It violates their 1st amendment right.

In what way?

When they are Forced to bake cakes or cater at gay weddings.
This is against the 1st amendment and prohibits them from their free exercise.
It does not prohibit any gay couples to go to another business that will do it for them nor does it stop any other sale products from those businesses selling to gays.
Both groups have their rights and gay rights are not being violated when they have plenty of businesses to choose from.
Gays are not being banned from the businesses that would be a violation of their rights.
Forcing religious businesses owners to go against their religious views is a violation of their rights.

But it does violate the rights of others

Nobody is forcing religious beliefs or establishing a religion. You have a freedom of religion guaranteed in the first amendment, but you don't have the right to use your religion to violate the equal rights of others

 

[Anathema]

So the rest are just psuedo conservatives? Liberals in some awful disguise?

No. The rest are LIBERALS. There are only two political philosophies in the world so far as I'm concnerned. If you're not 100% Conservative, then you're a liberal