Arizona Senate Passes Bill Allowing Business Owners To Refuse Service To Gays

[Bfgrn]

It seems to me that if we are to force a Christian to provide their services to a gay wedding, then we must also accept that:

• An African American owned florist must deliver flowers to a KKK meeting
  
• A gay-owed caterer must cater a Westboro Baptist Church party
  
• A Kosher bakery must deliver their goods to a meeting of the neo-Nazi party
  
• A Leftist event organizer can be forced to plan an NRA meeting

Everyone cool with that?

Prime example of how a turd thinks.

NONE of those end users would even consider hiring your examples...

 

[DriftingSand]

It seems to me that if we are to force a Christian to provide their services to a gay wedding, then we must also accept that:

• An African American owned florist must deliver flowers to a KKK meeting
• A gay-owed caterer must cater a Westboro Baptist Church party
• A Kosher bakery must deliver their goods to a meeting of the neo-Nazi party
• A Leftist event organizer can be forced to plan an NRA meeting

Everyone cool with that?

Great post!!!

Nope ... only straight, normal Christians must succumb to whims of their opposers. All others are protected by the Constitution.

 

[DriftingSand]

Cancelling those plans to visit Arizona. Too bad. Maybe I'll go to Utah instead... depends of course.

This boycott thing and pressure can work both ways.

I'm sure Arizona is deeply disappointed ... or not.

 

[hunarcy]

Wow. Just keep saying the same godamn thing and it becomes true, huh? There ARE examples where gays have piled on if you did not provide a service against your wishes. One I know of happened 10+ years ago in Seattle, long before gay marriage existed here. It could be that they were trying to head it off at the pass since these things have happened. Yes, you are participating in it if you are printing homosexual wedding invitations, cakes, posters, whatever.

It's time we take the country back from the tyranical left.

You conveniently didn't respond to my post. Why aren't you upset by people that make a mockery out of marriage, like Rush Limbaugh?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/8699848-post2013.html

What does Rush Limbaugh have to do with anything? Do you see him as the perfect example of how life should be lived? The fact is that no matter if people fall short of the ideal, the ideal exists and we should strive for it.

 

[Gadawg73]

Wow. Just keep saying the same godamn thing and it becomes true, huh? There ARE examples where gays have piled on if you did not provide a service against your wishes. One I know of happened 10+ years ago in Seattle, long before gay marriage existed here. It could be that they were trying to head it off at the pass since these things have happened. Yes, you are participating in it if you are printing homosexual wedding invitations, cakes, posters, whatever.

It's time we take the country back from the tyranical left.

You conveniently didn't respond to my post. Why aren't you upset by people that make a mockery out of marriage, like Rush Limbaugh?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/8699848-post2013.html

The ONLY ones making a mockery of it are the LEFT. Rush is married you DOLT.

True, 4 times.

 

[Mertex]

Wow. Just keep saying the same godamn thing and it becomes true, huh? There ARE examples where gays have piled on if you did not provide a service against your wishes. One I know of happened 10+ years ago in Seattle, long before gay marriage existed here. It could be that they were trying to head it off at the pass since these things have happened. Yes, you are participating in it if you are printing homosexual wedding invitations, cakes, posters, whatever.

It's time we take the country back from the tyranical left.

You conveniently didn't respond to my post. Why aren't you upset by people that make a mockery out of marriage, like Rush Limbaugh?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/8699848-post2013.html

The ONLY ones making a mockery of it are the LEFT. Rush is married you DOLT.

You idiot, marrying 4 times does not honor marriage except to DOLTS like you. You are so worried about marriage being defined negatively, well, ijit, marrying and divorcing that many times does not "honor" marriage except to ignorant people like you.

 

[Gadawg73]

It seems to me that if we are to force a Christian to provide their services to a gay wedding, then we must also accept that:

• An African American owned florist must deliver flowers to a KKK meeting
• A gay-owed caterer must cater a Westboro Baptist Church party
• A Kosher bakery must deliver their goods to a meeting of the neo-Nazi party
• A Leftist event organizer can be forced to plan an NRA meeting

Everyone cool with that?

Great post!!!

Nope ... only straight, normal Christians must succumb to whims of their opposers. All others are protected by the Constitution.

Did not have to deliver it.

 

[Mertex]

Wow. Just keep saying the same godamn thing and it becomes true, huh? There ARE examples where gays have piled on if you did not provide a service against your wishes. One I know of happened 10+ years ago in Seattle, long before gay marriage existed here. It could be that they were trying to head it off at the pass since these things have happened. Yes, you are participating in it if you are printing homosexual wedding invitations, cakes, posters, whatever.

It's time we take the country back from the tyranical left.

You conveniently didn't respond to my post. Why aren't you upset by people that make a mockery out of marriage, like Rush Limbaugh?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/8699848-post2013.html

What does Rush Limbaugh have to do with anything? Do you see him as the perfect example of how life should be lived? The fact is that no matter if people fall short of the ideal, the ideal exists and we should strive for it.

Yeah, well, I don't see the rw making bills to prevent people from marrying and divorcing that many times.....how come you're not striving for the ideal there?

 

[dblack]

Speaking of guns someone that goes by the 10 Commandments where one is "Thou shall Not Kill" can claim it is against their "religious freedom" to serve people carrying guns.
Don't you feel just a little bit silly defending this vague and ridiculous law that assumes there are people out there having their "religious freedom" denied when in fact THEY AREN'T?

A kid was rude to his parents in the fast food restaurant so they deny service to the kid. Religious freedom.

Again, amazing educated folks buy into this nonsense.

I actually agree it's not right to grant a religious exemption to this law - but do you at least see how the overreaching legal principles behind public accommodations laws are driving this?

There’s nothing ‘overreaching’ about the legal principles that are the foundation of public accommodations laws; Commerce Clause jurisprudence authorizes sound and warranted regulatory policies appropriate for a modern, 21st Century economy. It’s naïve, reactionary nonsense to argue otherwise.

Well, I think using the Commerce Clause for social engineering, to mitigate race relations and manipulate social mores, is very overreaching, regardless of how much 'case law' supports the practice. Laws that dictate whom we must associate with and why are inhumane and deeply violate basic freedom of conscience.

 

[Gadawg73]

It seems to me that if we are to force a Christian to provide their services to a gay wedding, then we must also accept that:

• An African American owned florist must deliver flowers to a KKK meeting
  
• A gay-owed caterer must cater a Westboro Baptist Church party
  
• A Kosher bakery must deliver their goods to a meeting of the neo-Nazi party
  
• A Leftist event organizer can be forced to plan an NRA meeting

Everyone cool with that?

Prime example of how a turd thinks.

NONE of those end users would even consider hiring your examples...

Exactly, they have to make up fantasies to "support" their arguments.
Because they have NO real life examples as Governor Brewer said.
"I have not heard OF ONE example in Arizona where a business owner's religious liberty has been violated".

 

[Gadawg73]

I actually agree it's not right to grant a religious exemption to this law - but do you at least see how the overreaching legal principles behind public accommodations laws are driving this?

There’s nothing ‘overreaching’ about the legal principles that are the foundation of public accommodations laws; Commerce Clause jurisprudence authorizes sound and warranted regulatory policies appropriate for a modern, 21st Century economy. It’s naïve, reactionary nonsense to argue otherwise.

Well, I think using the Commerce Clause for social engineering, to mitigate race relations and manipulate social mores, is very overreaching, regardless of how much 'case law' supports the practice. Laws that dictate whom we must associate with and why are inhumane and deeply violate basic freedom of conscience.

Name one law that forces you to associate with anyone.
The subject is "religious freedom" and the guidelines as what that exactly means when we write laws granting exemptions for that vague term.
One can claim that their religion bars them from waiting on gay people because they believe gay folks are sinners yet they will wait on someone that was a convicted felon for fraud and they cheat on their wife.
"Religious freedom" is what is being argued here and NO ONE has ever seen a case in Arizona where a business owner's religious freedom has been violated.
Similar to passing a jaywalking ordinance where there are no roads.

 

[Gadawg73]

Funny,the authors of the bill claim it was because of the ACA and Catholic Schools not wanting to have to purchase contraceptives with their health benefits and anti funding of state funds for abortion and such.
The authors of the bill deny that they wanted to see it used to deny anything to homosexuals.
Which is it folks?
Bottom line is the very folks that wrote the damn bill are now side stepping, back tracking and running from their own bill like monkeys on fire.

 

[hunarcy]

You conveniently didn't respond to my post. Why aren't you upset by people that make a mockery out of marriage, like Rush Limbaugh?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/8699848-post2013.html

What does Rush Limbaugh have to do with anything? Do you see him as the perfect example of how life should be lived? The fact is that no matter if people fall short of the ideal, the ideal exists and we should strive for it.

Yeah, well, I don't see the rw making bills to prevent people from marrying and divorcing that many times.....how come you're not striving for the ideal there?

There WERE laws that made divorce more restrictive, but people who thought like you think insisted that they be changed. Now, you want to complain about the results of liberal thinking? very disingenuous!

 

[Mertex]

What does Rush Limbaugh have to do with anything? Do you see him as the perfect example of how life should be lived? The fact is that no matter if people fall short of the ideal, the ideal exists and we should strive for it.

Yeah, well, I don't see the rw making bills to prevent people from marrying and divorcing that many times.....how come you're not striving for the ideal there?

There WERE laws that made divorce more restrictive, but people who thought like you think insisted that they be changed. Now, you want to complain about the results of liberal thinking? very disingenuous!

I'm not complaining, I'm just pointing out your hypocrisy. If you are so striving for the ideal marriage, shouldn't you start trying to keep people from marrying that many times?
Frankly I don't care if Rush Limbaugh gets divorced again and remarries a 20 year old girl....his wives seem to keep getting younger as he gets older.....and I don't care if gays marry either....you're the one that is whining about one thing while ignoring the other.

 

[Gadawg73]

What does Rush Limbaugh have to do with anything? Do you see him as the perfect example of how life should be lived? The fact is that no matter if people fall short of the ideal, the ideal exists and we should strive for it.

Yeah, well, I don't see the rw making bills to prevent people from marrying and divorcing that many times.....how come you're not striving for the ideal there?

There WERE laws that made divorce more restrictive, but people who thought like you think insisted that they be changed. Now, you want to complain about the results of liberal thinking? very disingenuous!

Reality is it is harder to get divorced now if you have kids than before.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Funny,the authors of the bill claim it was because of the ACA and Catholic Schools not wanting to have to purchase contraceptives with their health benefits and anti funding of state funds for abortion and such.
The authors of the bill deny that they wanted to see it used to deny anything to homosexuals.
Which is it folks?
Bottom line is the very folks that wrote the damn bill are now side stepping, back tracking and running from their own bill like monkeys on fire.

Funny how you keep arguing for a position that is patently false.

 

[dblack]

There’s nothing ‘overreaching’ about the legal principles that are the foundation of public accommodations laws; Commerce Clause jurisprudence authorizes sound and warranted regulatory policies appropriate for a modern, 21st Century economy. It’s naïve, reactionary nonsense to argue otherwise.

Well, I think using the Commerce Clause for social engineering, to mitigate race relations and manipulate social mores, is very overreaching, regardless of how much 'case law' supports the practice. Laws that dictate whom we must associate with and why are inhumane and deeply violate basic freedom of conscience.

Name one law that forces you to associate with anyone.
The subject is "religious freedom" and the guidelines as what that exactly means when we write laws granting exemptions for that vague term.
One can claim that their religion bars them from waiting on gay people because they believe gay folks are sinners yet they will wait on someone that was a convicted felon for fraud and they cheat on their wife.
"Religious freedom" is what is being argued here and NO ONE has ever seen a case in Arizona where a business owner's religious freedom has been violated.
Similar to passing a jaywalking ordinance where there are no roads.

Don't be coy. The fundamental concept of all "public accommodations" laws forces association. And that's the core of what we're talking about here. The impetus for the conversation is the vetoed Arizona law - and I happen to agree with you it's not a valid application of freedom of religion - but the broader context is the overreaching public accommodations laws that inspired it.

 

[hunarcy]

Yeah, well, I don't see the rw making bills to prevent people from marrying and divorcing that many times.....how come you're not striving for the ideal there?

There WERE laws that made divorce more restrictive, but people who thought like you think insisted that they be changed. Now, you want to complain about the results of liberal thinking? very disingenuous!

I'm not complaining, I'm just pointing out your hypocrisy. If you are so striving for the ideal marriage, shouldn't you start trying to keep people from marrying that many times?
Frankly I don't care if Rush Limbaugh gets divorced again and remarries a 20 year old girl....his wives seem to keep getting younger as he gets older.....and I don't care if gays marry either....you're the one that is whining about one thing while ignoring the other.

My hypocrisy, huh? Why do you have to lie? Could it be because I busted you on wanting to deflect to Limbaugh as his failings excuse the abandonment of the ideal? Of course it is. You may continue to lie about me and obsess about Limbaugh as if he is relevant to anyone else's choices. It obviously is your goal.

 

[Mertex]

There WERE laws that made divorce more restrictive, but people who thought like you think insisted that they be changed. Now, you want to complain about the results of liberal thinking? very disingenuous!

I'm not complaining, I'm just pointing out your hypocrisy. If you are so striving for the ideal marriage, shouldn't you start trying to keep people from marrying that many times?
Frankly I don't care if Rush Limbaugh gets divorced again and remarries a 20 year old girl....his wives seem to keep getting younger as he gets older.....and I don't care if gays marry either....you're the one that is whining about one thing while ignoring the other.

My hypocrisy, huh? Why do you have to lie? Could it be because I busted you on wanting to deflect to Limbaugh as his failings excuse the abandonment of the ideal? Of course it is. You may continue to lie about me and obsess about Limbaugh as if he is relevant to anyone else's choices. It obviously is your goal.

Yes, it is hypocrisy. And, I'm not lying. You and others like you are trying to claim that you want to keep "marriage" sacred, but when one of your heroes drags marriage through the mud, you look the other way.

If you are so bent on keeping marriage "honorable" then anything that defiles it, would be reason for you and those that think like you to try and write bills to change it, but the truth is that it isn't so much about keeping marriage sacred, but more about hating gays. Haters gotta hate......

 

[Seawytch]

Are you calling the people that wrote and passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 progressive assholes too?

The part that stomped all over private property rights, yes.

You should tell that to your fellow conservatives - they get all puffy and proud (well, pre-this month) as they like to so often announce how if it wasn't for 'publicans, yanno, the Civil Rights Act never would have passed!!

It's a real point of pride for them. Well, it used to be.

Sometimes they would even throw in a "Did you know MLK was a republican! ."

Meh..in 40 years the Republicans will be trying to take credit for gay civil rights.