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

[Quantum Windbag]

I can't wait until it goes to court

It might teach you progressive idiots that there are actual limits on what the government can do.

The law will be overturned.

It agrees with federal law. Until you can explain why a law that has been n the books since Clinton signed it is suddenly wrong, even though it has been used in multiple court decisions, is suddenly bullshit just because you don't like it you don't have a case for getting this law overturned.

42 U.S. Code Chapter 21B - RELIGIOUS FREEDOM RESTORATION | LII / Legal Information Institute

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Speaking from a legal aspect, sure it does. Religion is a BEHAVIOR... religion is not a race or a sex...


>>>>

Unless i am wearing some kind of sign about what religion I am how can anyone discriminate against me based on my religion?

Many people wear their religions around their neck (I see cross chains all the time). A priest walking in in clerical clothing (jacket and religious collar) is usually a pretty good giveaway. Many middle eastern religions require certain head coverings for men and facial or body coverings for women. A Jewish man might be wearing a yamaka.

Then of course there are the those items that are discussed in the course of business "my bride and I are getting married at Sikh Gurdwara of Los Angeles" and we wish to contract your floral services.


>>>>

I know atheist that wear crosses, all it proves is that they wear jewelry.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Unless i am wearing some kind of sign about what religion I am how can anyone discriminate against me based on my religion?

Many people wear their religions around their neck (I see cross chains all the time). A priest walking in in clerical clothing (jacket and religious collar) is usually a pretty good giveaway. Many middle eastern religions require certain head coverings for men and facial or body coverings for women. A Jewish man might be wearing a yamaka.

Then of course there are the those items that are discussed in the course of business "my bride and I are getting married at Sikh Gurdwara of Los Angeles" and we wish to contract your floral services.


>>>>

I know atheist that wear crosses, all it proves is that they wear jewelry.

That's pretty lame.

You asked for an example, I gave you multiple.

It doesn't matter if the individual is an atheist or not and wearing a cross around his/her neck. It's the perception of the business as to what they believe the customer is.

>>>>

 

[rightwinger]

Over/ under for repeal?

I give it six weeks

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The link to the bill is in the post, please show us where the exemption to discriminate (which applies only to the individuals religious beliefs) is limited to the application of those religious beliefs against gays.

Thank you.


>>>>

No problem.

D. A person whose religious exercise is burdened in violation of this section may assert that violation as a claim or defense in a judicial proceeding, and obtain appropriate relief against a government regardless of whether the government is a party to the proceeding.
E. A person that asserts a violation of this section must establish all of the following:
1. That the person's action or refusal to act is motivated by a religious belief.
2. That the person's religious belief is sincerely held.
3. That the state action substantially burdens the exercise of the person's religious beliefs.
F. The person asserting a claim or defense under subsection D of this section may obtain injunctive and declaratory relief. A party who prevails in any action to enforce this article against a government shall recover attorney fees and costs.

You are the one that claims he is all about the law as it is applied, show me one example of any case that allows people to discriminate against people based on their race and claim that it is religiously motivated.

Alternatively, you could argue that, as a hack, you just make things up as you go along.

No where in that section does it say anything about limiting it to the gays.

If a person's individual religious beliefs are that interracial marriages are wrong, they can make that claim.


>>>>

That is because, despite your attempt to say this is a radical approach, it is simply applying the same standard to the government of the State of Arizona that is applied to the federal government because of the RFRA. In other words, you of the incredible ability not to understand English, it limits the power of the state to pass laws that limit religious freedom. Since civil rights laws have already been ruled not to burden, and this law doesn't change that, it cannot apply to race, religion, or anything else that you are trying to argue that it does. It doesn't even apply to gays, despite the claims of every bigot who is attacking the law. It only applies to the state, and to individuals that have a sincere religious belief that prevents them from doing things that an otherwise neutral law would force them to do.

Perhaps you should read the federal law that this law is based on.

42 U.S. Code Chapter 21B - RELIGIOUS FREEDOM RESTORATION | LII / Legal Information Institute

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Many people wear their religions around their neck (I see cross chains all the time). A priest walking in in clerical clothing (jacket and religious collar) is usually a pretty good giveaway. Many middle eastern religions require certain head coverings for men and facial or body coverings for women. A Jewish man might be wearing a yamaka.

Then of course there are the those items that are discussed in the course of business "my bride and I are getting married at Sikh Gurdwara of Los Angeles" and we wish to contract your floral services.


>>>>

I know atheist that wear crosses, all it proves is that they wear jewelry.

That's pretty lame.

You asked for an example, I gave you multiple.

It doesn't matter if the individual is an atheist or not and wearing a cross around his/her neck. It's the perception of the business as to what they believe the customer is.

>>>>

I asked for an example of people being able to discriminate against me if i wasn't wearing a sign. You gave me examples of people announcing their religion. In other words, you are the one that is being lame.

 

[WinterBorn]

If I go to one of these businesses with my girlfriend, but act effeminate, how much proof will I be required to show to get service?

Will kissing her work? Or will intercourse be required for proof I am not gay?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Civil rights act does not cover discrimination because of BEHAVIOR... gay is not a race or a sex..

Speaking from a legal aspect, sure it does. Religion is a BEHAVIOR... religion is not a race or a sex...


>>>>

So is free speech, freedom of the press, and the right to bear arms. All are behaviours.

 

[WinterBorn]

I am hoping lots of gay men frequent these places and act straight until the check comes, then tip well and let them know they served gays.

 

[Jarhead]

Civil rights act does not cover discrimination because of BEHAVIOR... gay is not a race or a sex..

Speaking from a legal aspect, sure it does. Religion is a BEHAVIOR... religion is not a race or a sex...


>>>>

So is free speech, freedom of the press, and the right to bear arms. All are behaviours.

actually, no.

Speech, writing and carrying a gun are behaviors.

Free speech, freedom of press and right to bear arms are rights, not behaviors.

 

[Againsheila]

The Law gives the business owner discretion.

I do not believe that the typical business owner is going to refuse service to anyone unless he believes that the majority of patrons dislike whatever is it that you are doing.

Economics will prevent merchants from arbitrarily enforcing this right.

.

So give 'em the right to refuse service for french kissing in public. You can't make a law against something that you don't know unless they tell or show you.

The customers volunteered their relationship and wished for the shop to make their celebration cake. It was a religious decision on the shop owners part based on marriage. This has nothing to do with simply being gay.

The op title is a bit misleading :
Arizona Senate: Business owners can cite religion to refuse service to gays.

(I can't get the link to open, I could be mistaken on the case)

Great, now I'm conflicted.

 

[NYcarbineer]

You might also have towns in America where whites can't get services either. Gay bars will finally be able to eject straights. It seems to be nothing more than an expansion of freedom.

Freedom is about having the freedom to deny your fellow Americans their constitutionally protected civil rights.

Believe it or not, the Constitution trumps your discrimination fantasies.

 

[Contumacious]

I think another state passed something similar to this last week so this must be a trend that is catching on. I agree with this bill that if you are a business owner and believe in and live by your faith that you should be able to refuse service to whoever you want.


Arizona Senate: Business owners can cite religion to refuse service to gays
Arizona Senate: Business owners can cite religion to refuse service to gays

You thread title and the article title are incorrect, the bill allows for a business to refuse service to anyone, which means:

Service can be refused to races

Service can be refused to other religions

Service can be refused to interracial couples

Service can be refused to women (or men)

Service can be refused to divorcees

Service can be refused basically to anyone, not just the gays​

All the person has to do is claim "a sincerely held religious belief", and as the law is written it doesn't even need to be dogma within a major religion - it is the individuals belief. From the law ""Exercise of religion" means the practice or observance of religion, including the ability to act or refusal to act in a manner substantially motivated by a religious belief, whether or not the exercise is compulsory or central to a larger system of religious belief."



Arizona SB1062

>>>>

Do you have a compulsive need to misrepresent everything? The language of this bill is all but identical to the federal RFRA, and only a few whackadoodles have argued that that somehow allows people to discriminate against anyone they want.

hummmmmm

I wonder if they can discriminate against whackadoodles ?

.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I am hoping lots of gay men frequent these places and act straight until the check comes, then tip well and let them know they served gays.

I am wishing people would learn to ******* read.

What do you think the chances are that you will read before you say something stupid?

 

[WinterBorn]

I am hoping lots of gay men frequent these places and act straight until the check comes, then tip well and let them know they served gays.

I am wishing people would learn to ******* read.

What do you think the chances are that you will read before you say something stupid?

What do you think the chances are that my post was even remotely serious?

 

[CaféAuLait]

I am hoping lots of gay men frequent these places and act straight until the check comes, then tip well and let them know they served gays.

Ya know this 'discrimination' does not only exist by straight men and women. Gay men and women also refuse to allow straights into bars and establishments. In fact one is asked before they are permitted entry. Trans women who do not identify as gay will be turned away as well.

And then of course there were the gay women just married who claims discrimination against a gay bar since they would not allow them in the bar in their wedding garb. However, if they had been men in suits getting married they would have been allowed in. They feel the gay bar discriminated against lesbians. There are those in the gay community who argue that straight should not be allowed and gay bars should be allowed to turn away straights.

Why gay-only venues should have the right to exist | Liberal Conspiracy ( this is a left wing magazine)

Brides Denied: Gay Club CC Slaughters Refused Entry to Lesbian Newlyweds

Straights in Gay Clubs ? The Argument For Equality

Straights in Gay Clubs ? The Argument For Keeping It Gay

Why This Gay Bar Can No Longer Ask Whether You?re Straight ? And Refuse You Entry / Queerty

Heterophobia: the only straight in the village? - The Yorker

There can't be one set of rules, gays who claim they want their own venues to feel 'safe' while those claiming a religious reasons wanting to feel 'safe' in front of their G-d in not committing a 'sin'.

 

[Contumacious]

Over/ under for repeal?

I give it six weeks

You know if your people send in the Delta Force and/or SEAL Team 7 , it will be over in seconds.

i can't believe that stupid Arizona thinks the 10th Amendment is still active.

.

 

[Harry Dresden]

No it doesn't. How many restaurants or businesses have you ever been in that had a sign that read "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone!"? I've been in tons of them all over. It should be up to me who I want to serve and who I do not, the making of a profit is on me and only me. America is about freedom, let people choose who they choose to associate with, not forced.

Steve i believe that sign comes with certain rules and stipulations.......
they have the right to refuse service to anyone so they are able to get rid of guests who cause problems. This allows them to ask guests who are disturbing others to leave. They can ask anyone to leave if they see a reason for it.
but they can't discriminate based on race, sex, nationality, religion, etc. of the patron.

Funny, last time I looked it was perfectly legal for Curves to refuse to allow men to exercise, when did that change?

hey like i said above....just telling you what i read on a Civil Law link about that sign..... the curves in the Anaheim hills has a few guys in there working out with the ladies....

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Steve i believe that sign comes with certain rules and stipulations.......
they have the right to refuse service to anyone so they are able to get rid of guests who cause problems. This allows them to ask guests who are disturbing others to leave. They can ask anyone to leave if they see a reason for it.
but they can't discriminate based on race, sex, nationality, religion, etc. of the patron.

Funny, last time I looked it was perfectly legal for Curves to refuse to allow men to exercise, when did that change?

hey like i said above....just telling you what i read on a Civil Law link about that sign..... the curves in the Anaheim hills has a few guys in there working out with the ladies....

That is because California thinks those guys are women.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Funny, last time I looked it was perfectly legal for Curves to refuse to allow men to exercise, when did that change?

hey like i said above....just telling you what i read on a Civil Law link about that sign..... the curves in the Anaheim hills has a few guys in there working out with the ladies....

That is because California thinks those guys are women.

or those guys were looking at some of the nice looking ladies in there.....