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

[Quantum Windbag]

I could care less what is fair or not. Fair has nothing to do with but I do agree it is a state's issue but the Supreme Court has ruled how many times against states denying equal access under the law striking down anti gay marriage statutes?

Interestingly my addressing that point was embedded in your quote.

The 14th amendment says the law cannot be applied differently to different people. It isn't a formula, and it doesn't say if it tugs on your heartstrings or your sense of fairness the Supreme Court can go ahead and legislate.

Gays can marry exactly the same people straights can. No more, no less. Therefore, it passes constitutional muster. Fairness and heart strings need to be taken to the legislature. If straights could marry people of the same sex or gays could not enter man/woman government marriages then you'd have an argument. However, neither is the case, gays can marry exactly the same people straights can. And no one can provide an example of the 14th being applied to a formula. Well that isn't who they WANT to marry. Fair view, take it to the legislature where it belongs.

Wrong.
Laws against interracial marriage were propped up with your phony baloney "the laws for blacks being legal to marrying blacks is the same as the law for whites marrying whites" same people nonsense.
Last time I heard that bogus argument I fell off my dinosaur.

They were?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Your rights only go as far to violate my rights.

Incorrect.

‘Rights’ have nothing to do with a relationship between two private parties, nor are private entities subject to Constitutional restrictions, and they are not entitled to Constitutional protections regarding another private entity.

Civil rights pertain only to the relationship between the citizen and the state, and what is or is not warranted with regard to the state’s desire to limit or deny citizens their civil rights.

Property owners have rights with regard to how to manage their property; but as with other rights, property rights are not absolute, and subject to reasonable restrictions. Public accommodations laws are reasonable, Constitutional, and in no way manifest a ‘violation’ of religious rights, as their primary purpose is to regulate markets, not disadvantage persons of faith.

 

[Faun]

I can't wait until it goes to court

Why would it go to court?

Looks like it's not going to court.

 

[RandallFlagg]

Your rights only go as far to violate my rights.

Incorrect.

‘Rights’ have nothing to do with a relationship between two private parties, nor are private entities subject to Constitutional restrictions, and they are not entitled to Constitutional protections regarding another private entity.

Civil rights pertain only to the relationship between the citizen and the state, and what is or is not warranted with regard to the state’s desire to limit or deny citizens their civil rights.

Property owners have rights with regard to how to manage their property; but as with other rights, property rights are not absolute, and subject to reasonable restrictions. Public accommodations laws are reasonable, Constitutional, and in no way manifest a ‘violation’ of religious rights, as their primary purpose is to regulate markets, not disadvantage persons of faith.

Why don't you finish law school, take the bar exam and become one more of the hundreds of thousands of worthless crooked piece of shit lawyers out there you fool? God, I wish we had listen to Shakespeare.....

 

[Gadawg73]

A politician lied? Tell me it ain't so.

Yes, the politicians that passed Senate Bill 1062 are a bunch of liars.
Good point.
4 of them publicly changed their minds after the bill passed and stated they were manipulated with false information from "religious" organizations and other members that lobbied for the bill.
They were all Republicans.
As a conservative that concerns me.
For partisan hack ideologues like you it does not matter.

Because they disagreed with the Great and Infallible Gadawg, right?

I do not live in AZ.
The Conservative Republican Governor Brewer disagreed with them.
And you.
And she tongue lashed you and all your friends that were conned and pan caked once again.

 

[Gadawg73]

So once again a Legislature grand stands and wastes the time and money of the taxpayers on a BS piece of Legislation that their own Governor from their own party vetoed the day she got it.
What the Republican party has become is a sad sack of losers more interested in a lame vaudeville act disguised as stumping for Jesus.
Only in America do the naive and gullible buy this stuff.
But I remain conservative and am voting Republican again as Brewer is what we need.

 

[protectionist]

So once again a Legislature grand stands and wastes the time and money of the taxpayers on a BS piece of Legislation that their own Governor from their own party vetoed the day she got it.
What the Republican party has become is a sad sack of losers more interested in a lame vaudeville act disguised as stumping for Jesus.
Only in America do the naive and gullible buy this stuff.
But I remain conservative and am voting Republican again as Brewer is what we need.

You are the farthest thing from being a Conservative there ever could be. I suspect you are young, from the Reagan era, and oblivious to the true meaning of Conservatism in America. And your support for Brewer and her veto of this bill clearly shows that.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Your rights only go as far to violate my rights.

Incorrect.

‘Rights’ have nothing to do with a relationship between two private parties, nor are private entities subject to Constitutional restrictions, and they are not entitled to Constitutional protections regarding another private entity.

Civil rights pertain only to the relationship between the citizen and the state, and what is or is not warranted with regard to the state’s desire to limit or deny citizens their civil rights.

Property owners have rights with regard to how to manage their property; but as with other rights, property rights are not absolute, and subject to reasonable restrictions. Public accommodations laws are reasonable, Constitutional, and in no way manifest a ‘violation’ of religious rights, as their primary purpose is to regulate markets, not disadvantage persons of faith.

Does that mean that a business cannot deny anyone a civil right, or does it mean you talked yourself into a corner again?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Yes, the politicians that passed Senate Bill 1062 are a bunch of liars.
Good point.
4 of them publicly changed their minds after the bill passed and stated they were manipulated with false information from "religious" organizations and other members that lobbied for the bill.
They were all Republicans.
As a conservative that concerns me.
For partisan hack ideologues like you it does not matter.

Because they disagreed with the Great and Infallible Gadawg, right?

I do not live in AZ.
The Conservative Republican Governor Brewer disagreed with them.
And you.
And she tongue lashed you and all your friends that were conned and pan caked once again.

Brewer is a conservative Republican? Does she know that?

She is a politician, she lied.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

For all the heads in the sand fools here that are too stubborn to admit they were wrong:

Governor Brewer stated that "the bill could have unintended and negative consequences".
Uh, yeah, been saying that from the start SAME AS governor of Kansas said as the bills would ALLOW ambulance and other medical personnel to DENY service to gay folks.
WELL DUH
"Senate Bill 1062 has the potential to cause more problems than it purports to solve".
Of course it would. Anyone objective to what the bill SAYS knows that.
Good to see someone is not a stubborn fool with their head in the sand.

A politician lied? Tell me it ain't so.

Yes, the politicians that passed Senate Bill 1062 are a bunch of liars.
Good point.
4 of them publicly changed their minds after the bill passed and stated they were manipulated with false information from "religious" organizations and other members that lobbied for the bill.
They were all Republicans.
As a conservative that concerns me.
For partisan hack ideologues like you it does not matter.

LOL. Sure buddy.

 

[Barb]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVmp_JlDI2g#t=1]Jon Stewart Trashes Morally Repugnant Arizona Bill, Rips Fox News Apocalyptic Paranoia - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The single most interesting thing about this thread is how all the people who claim they are tolerant are willing to lie about something just to prove how tolerant they are.

 

[007]

The single most interesting thing about this thread is how all the people who claim they are tolerant are willing to lie about something just to prove how tolerant they are.

True... and the other less interesting fact is, because we already know it, is that it's OK to trash the shit otta Christians and their rights, but we must never, NEVER trash the imaginary rights of homos. They might take a ******* football game away from you or something.

It's time the silent MAJORITY get with the push back... BOYCOTT THE NFL.

 

[jillian]

What's so interesting ? In Arizona or anywhere else, business owners generally have one primary objective > optimizing PROFITS, and everything gets funneled into that. Including , unfortunately, right and wrong.

Optimizing profits means avoiding controversy. The NFL has no interest in being perceived as anti gay therefore they will relocate the Superbowl elsewhere.

The NFL no interest in being perceived as anti gay ? Why not ? Sounds like a perfectly reasonable thing to me.

only in the alternate reality that is rightwingworld

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

You almost gotta laugh at the hypocrisy on the left. The left is adamant that no offensive religious orientated medallions or clothing or politically offensive T's that depict the NRA or can be worn in schools because they might offend agnostics and athiests but they encourage boys to use the girls locker room and bathroom if they feel "insecure" about their sexuality. The left wants normal people and even deeply religious people to be tolerant of hairy men in dresses and overt sodomites who disrupt service in small business establishments.

That’s not “hypocrisy on the left” but your ignorance of the law. A valid law that might inadvertently burden the religious practice of a given faith is not un-Constitutional if its primary focus does not concern religious restriction (Employment Division v. Smith (1990)). This is why public accommodations laws are valid, and in no way ‘violate’ religious liberty.

 

[Bumberclyde]

Bill vetoed by governor. Better luck next time.

 

[Gadawg73]

The single most interesting thing about this thread is how all the people who claim they are tolerant are willing to lie about something just to prove how tolerant they are.

You are confused, not interested.

 

[Gadawg73]

The single most interesting thing about this thread is how all the people who claim they are tolerant are willing to lie about something just to prove how tolerant they are.

True... and the other less interesting fact is, because we already know it, is that it's OK to trash the shit otta Christians and their rights, but we must never, NEVER trash the imaginary rights of homos. They might take a ******* football game away from you or something.

It's time the silent MAJORITY get with the push back... BOYCOTT THE NFL.

Good to see someone admit the bill was about Christians ONLY and to hell with the rights of everyone else.
That is unAmerican and the conservative Republican Governor of AZ knows it.
We are a nation OF LAWS, not of religion.

 

[Gadawg73]

What is it now on these afraid of the big bad gay boogeyman issues?
Is it 10 out 11 or 11 out of 11 on these cases that I TOLD YOU SO?

Wham it zero on set, EP team on the ready, KO team on the squares and 4th string D to group.

 

[Gadawg73]

Brewer last night:
"I have not heard one example in Arizona where a business owner's religious liberty has been violated".
Because none have been.
How stupid one must feel now that supported this legislation.
A waste of the taxpayers dollars and they claim they are conservatives.