Will Republicans ever learn? Indiana governor to sign bill allowing business not to serve gays

[RKMBrown]

Yes, the shit has hit the Pence fan. He's going to try spinning his way out of it tomorrow.

Pence also plans to fight back in the state and national media. He’s scheduled, for instance, to defend the law Sunday morning on ABC’s “This Week” with George Stephanopoulos. “I’m not going to take it (the criticism) lying down,” he said.

Gov. Mike Pence to push for clarification of religious freedom law

So much for 2016.

Next.

ROFL What makes you think Pence represents all republicans? Do the KKK represent all democrats?

 

[Flash]

BRIPAT9643 SAID:

'BTW, the law on that issue is totally illegitimate. The Constitution does not grant the federal government authority to regulate private business. FDR intimidated the SC into agreeing to it. It's the same as a mugger holding a gun to his victims head and demanding money. Then he calls the money "mine." It still isn't his.'

At least you're consistent at being ignorant and wrong.

Articles III and VI of the Constitution authorize the Supreme Court to determine what the Constitution means, its rulings are the law of the land.

That you and others on the right disagree with those rulings as a consequence of your ignorance and hate is thankfully irrelevant.

It is a fact of Constitutional law that the Commerce Clause authorizes Congress, as well as state and local governments, to enact regulatory policy concerning the markets, including public accommodations laws, and to regulate private business.

I always scroll right by that person's posts. It has nothing intelligent to contribute so I don't waste my time.

I read what it posted since you reposted it and replied to it.

Anyone who says that the constitution doesn't give congress the authority to regulate business obviously never read or understood the constitution.

Here's the commerce clause:
Article I, Section 8, Clause 3:[3]

[The Congress shall have Power] To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

The words of the clause are clear and short. The congress can regulate business.

Anyone who doesn't believe that business should be regulated is violating the constitution.

Many of us think that the filthy ass federal government has way overstepped its authority with the massive amount of regulations that have been forced upon the American people, including the right of free association.

 

[bodecea]

BRIPAT9643 SAID:

'BTW, the law on that issue is totally illegitimate. The Constitution does not grant the federal government authority to regulate private business. FDR intimidated the SC into agreeing to it. It's the same as a mugger holding a gun to his victims head and demanding money. Then he calls the money "mine." It still isn't his.'

At least you're consistent at being ignorant and wrong.

Articles III and VI of the Constitution authorize the Supreme Court to determine what the Constitution means, its rulings are the law of the land.

That you and others on the right disagree with those rulings as a consequence of your ignorance and hate is thankfully irrelevant.

It is a fact of Constitutional law that the Commerce Clause authorizes Congress, as well as state and local governments, to enact regulatory policy concerning the markets, including public accommodations laws, and to regulate private business.

I always scroll right by that person's posts. It has nothing intelligent to contribute so I don't waste my time.

I read what it posted since you reposted it and replied to it.

Anyone who says that the constitution doesn't give congress the authority to regulate business obviously never read or understood the constitution.

Here's the commerce clause:
Article I, Section 8, Clause 3:[3]

[The Congress shall have Power] To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

The words of the clause are clear and short. The congress can regulate business.

Anyone who doesn't believe that business should be regulated is violating the constitution.

Many of us think that the filthy ass federal government has way overstepped its authority with the massive amount of regulations that have been forced upon the American people, including the right of free association.

Then get rid of PA laws. I thought the Right wanted less government...so get rid of what you think is a bad law......don't add MORE laws.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

ROFL What makes you think Pence represents all republicans? Do the KKK represent all democrats?

No the KKK meets with the Third ranking Republican Steve Scalise...Pence is a sitting Governor while the KKK is merely a GOP support group...

Study: The KKK helped Republicans win the South - Vox

They conclude that having a Klan chapter present was associated with a 2 percent bigger increase in Republican support from 1960 to 1972, a 3.7 percent bigger increase from 1960 to 1980, a 4.9 percent bigger increase from 1960 to 1992, and a 3.4 percent bigger increase from 1960 to 2000.How could this have worked?

 

[Dana7360]

lets say the Bakery gets a request for a Jewish wedding and says oh no I am anti Semitic ....

The the Jewish couple should go to a Jewish Baker that wants their business.
When the government starts saying who can do what with their business, then the government can pay the overhead, the electricity, the water, the internet, the bags, the register tape, the employees wages, the building insurance and the taxes of all goods sold....in my opinion.
I, myself, would love to have their business. And Blacks can sit at my counter IF I had one at the time. I am there to sell. I don't give a rats ass about the customers beliefs. I just want to make a profit on goods I sell. Period.

The Government provided the infrastructure the roads , the Banking system the internet and all else that supports business activities ....no one should be free to discriminate ....unless they announce they discriminate ...

Stickers touting "This business serves everyone" have been appearing on business windows in many Indiana cities.

That is good business sense. "The business serves everyone". No problems, no lawsuits, no crying and whining. It says up front and in yer face that business is in BUSINESS. Period.

and the wing nuts who support the law should put up a signs like Westboro Baptist "God hates Fags"

I don't support it or dis support it. I just don't get it.
Why go to a business and DEMAND they serve you when other businesses would love to have you? Demanding and having to pass a law to force a business to service you is just as bad as the business demanding you do business with them. Where is THAT law?

It's just stupid.

There are millions of small towns all over America. Towns so small that there's just one store. One gas station. One post office.

If the person who owns the one and only food store in the town refuses to sell to someone because the store owner says it's against their religion, where is that person going to get food?


The person is either going to starve to death or will be forced to move from their home, from everyone they know and love and from their job just to be able to buy food.

Or how about if I make it personal? Seems people like you only understand things when they directly effect yourself.

You live in a very small town. I own the only food store in the town and the closest other food store is hundreds of miles away. You walk into my store, I look at you and decide my religion doesn't approve of right wing bigots and I refuse to sell you any food.

Where are you going to get food?

Or you come to me with cancer and I'm the only doctor for hundreds of miles that can treat your cancer. I look at you and decide my religion doesn't approve of right wing bigots and I refuse to treat you. You die because proper medical help was refused to you just because of who you are and what you look like.

Now do you get it?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Then what are you and the rest of the queers whining about?

They aren't fully included in the list of people, under reasonable conditions, you are required by law to serve. The "freedom" that you believe exists, doesn't, and hasn't for decades.

You said they didn't have the freedom to exclude gays. No you're claiming they do. Which is it?

You'd have to have reading comprehension to understand, but businesses haven't had the "freedom" to just refuse service for decades now.

You just said they did. Which is it?

BTW, the law on that issue is totally illegitimate. The Constitution does not grant the federal government authority to regulate private business. FDR intimidated the SC into agreeing to it. It's the same as a mugger holding a gun to his victims head and demanding money. Then he calls the money "mine." It still isn't his.

If the Supreme Court supports it, it's constitutional.

Sadly, even when it's 5-4, solely political ideology. Maybe the court should be restrained, and like a civil jury be required to have more than a simple majority, but less than a criminal trial? Also, the plaintive and respondent ought to have challenges, that would give Scalia and Alito and Thomas time to consider the law and not use as a measure their biased biases and buddies.

 

[Disir]

Yes, the shit has hit the Pence fan. He's going to try spinning his way out of it tomorrow.

Pence also plans to fight back in the state and national media. He’s scheduled, for instance, to defend the law Sunday morning on ABC’s “This Week” with George Stephanopoulos. “I’m not going to take it (the criticism) lying down,” he said.

Gov. Mike Pence to push for clarification of religious freedom law

So much for 2016.

Next.

ROFL What makes you think Pence represents all republicans? Do the KKK represent all democrats?

What are you talking about?

Bill aims to let Pence run for governor president at same time - 13 WTHR Indianapolis

 

[Wry Catcher]

I spent a career putting people in jail who denied having their hand in the cookie jar, even when shown a picture of them with their hand in the cookie jar.

I've spent nearly 5 years on forums just like this one, arguing with tens of hundreds of people just like you. You know what I learned? You folks are hypocrites. You claim objectivity, proclaiming how logical and pragmatic you are, then when someone kicks your backside in a debate, you start calling people liars, sans argument. You resort to smear tactics and character assassinations. You do everything except argue the point.

If only you spent a career learning simple manners....

Now, I'm not suggesting you're a criminal, but the evidence strongly suggests you have a character flaw very similar to one.

Case in point. You can't go ten words without insulting someone.

The truth maybe harsh, but some people with an open mind and the ability to change can benefit from it. You lied, and have spent time attacking my character since I pointed that out.

 

[RKMBrown]

Yes, the shit has hit the Pence fan. He's going to try spinning his way out of it tomorrow.

Pence also plans to fight back in the state and national media. He’s scheduled, for instance, to defend the law Sunday morning on ABC’s “This Week” with George Stephanopoulos. “I’m not going to take it (the criticism) lying down,” he said.

Gov. Mike Pence to push for clarification of religious freedom law

So much for 2016.

Next.

ROFL What makes you think Pence represents all republicans? Do the KKK represent all democrats?

What are you talking about?

Bill aims to let Pence run for governor president at same time - 13 WTHR Indianapolis

Then I guess you meant so much for 2016 for pence.

 

[Disir]

BRIPAT9643 SAID:

'BTW, the law on that issue is totally illegitimate. The Constitution does not grant the federal government authority to regulate private business. FDR intimidated the SC into agreeing to it. It's the same as a mugger holding a gun to his victims head and demanding money. Then he calls the money "mine." It still isn't his.'

At least you're consistent at being ignorant and wrong.

Articles III and VI of the Constitution authorize the Supreme Court to determine what the Constitution means, its rulings are the law of the land.

That you and others on the right disagree with those rulings as a consequence of your ignorance and hate is thankfully irrelevant.

It is a fact of Constitutional law that the Commerce Clause authorizes Congress, as well as state and local governments, to enact regulatory policy concerning the markets, including public accommodations laws, and to regulate private business.

I always scroll right by that person's posts. It has nothing intelligent to contribute so I don't waste my time.

I read what it posted since you reposted it and replied to it.

Anyone who says that the constitution doesn't give congress the authority to regulate business obviously never read or understood the constitution.

Here's the commerce clause:
Article I, Section 8, Clause 3:[3]

[The Congress shall have Power] To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

The words of the clause are clear and short. The congress can regulate business.

Anyone who doesn't believe that business should be regulated is violating the constitution.

Many of us think that the filthy ass federal government has way overstepped its authority with the massive amount of regulations that have been forced upon the American people, including the right of free association.

Many of us don't give a damn what your filthy ass thinks.

 

[RKMBrown]

We should boycott the USA this law passed in indiana is already federal law. Brought to us by Bill Clinton.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

BRIPAT9643 SAID:

'BTW, the law on that issue is totally illegitimate. The Constitution does not grant the federal government authority to regulate private business. FDR intimidated the SC into agreeing to it. It's the same as a mugger holding a gun to his victims head and demanding money. Then he calls the money "mine." It still isn't his.'

At least you're consistent at being ignorant and wrong.

Articles III and VI of the Constitution authorize the Supreme Court to determine what the Constitution means, its rulings are the law of the land.

That you and others on the right disagree with those rulings as a consequence of your ignorance and hate is thankfully irrelevant.

It is a fact of Constitutional law that the Commerce Clause authorizes Congress, as well as state and local governments, to enact regulatory policy concerning the markets, including public accommodations laws, and to regulate private business.

I always scroll right by that person's posts. It has nothing intelligent to contribute so I don't waste my time.

I read what it posted since you reposted it and replied to it.

Anyone who says that the constitution doesn't give congress the authority to regulate business obviously never read or understood the constitution.

Here's the commerce clause:
Article I, Section 8, Clause 3:[3]

[The Congress shall have Power] To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

The words of the clause are clear and short. The congress can regulate business.

Anyone who doesn't believe that business should be regulated is violating the constitution.

Many of us think that the filthy ass federal government has way overstepped its authority with the massive amount of regulations that have been forced upon the American people, including the right of free association.

Your unwarranted contempt for the Federal government is unfounded, ridiculous, and naïve.

And freedom of association jurisprudence has nothing to do with Commerce Clause jurisprudence, where the latter in no way 'interferes' with the former.

Moreover, Federal regulatory policy as been subject to comprehensive and exhaustive judicial review over the decades, where current regulatory policy – including public accommodations laws – have been upheld as Constitutional by the Supreme Court.

Consequently, that you 'think' the Federal government has “overstepped its authority” with regard to regulatory policy is subjective and wrong, an opinion based on errant conservative dogma and libertarian reactionaryism, not the Constitution and its case law.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I am retired. Businesses (2) are closed and have been for years. Even if they were still going, I wouldn't tell it here. Are you crazy???

And, can not some read? Try reading my post again. I never denied service to blacks, hispanics, asian, etc any more than I denied service to middle easterners, gays, wiccans, baptists, muslims. I denied service to ASSHOLES disrupting my business.

And, I'm pretty damn sure Indiana businesses wouldn't carve the heart out of a customer or allow it to be done in their store or condone a customer that practices it. Jeez. Get real.

Well, here's some evidence that some businesses do, and it cost 'em:

South Carolina Restaurant Refuses To Serve Black Patrons Denny s Redux Above the Law

 

[AvgGuyIA]

"Will Republicans ever learn? Indiana governor to sign bill allowing business not to serve gays"

Fascinatin'... So we now have Texas, Alabama and Indiana rejecting Federal Authority which requires them to accept deviant reasoning as sound reason.

Seems that someone is failing to learn, but it's not the Republicans.

If government cannot sponsor religious practices, it can't write laws to prohibit or interfere with it. The Public Accommodations law as applied to forced serving of gays in their rituals which go against God's written laws is unconstitutional. Separation of Church and State. You can't have it both ways.

 

[RKMBrown]

"Will Republicans ever learn? Indiana governor to sign bill allowing business not to serve gays"

Fascinatin'... So we now have Texas, Alabama and Indiana rejecting Federal Authority which requires them to accept deviant reasoning as sound reason.

Seems that someone is failing to learn, but it's not the Republicans.

If government cannot sponsor religious practices, it can't write laws to prohibit or interfere with it. The Public Accommodations law as applied to forced serving of gays in their rituals which go against God's written laws is unconstitutional. Separation of Church and State. You can't have it both ways.

The federal PA law does not include protection for sexual orientation. Some states do.

That said I find it really odd that the christian radicals think protecting groups of particular types of sexual orientation from discrimination by religious radicals as akin to sponsoring religious practice. Do the christian radicals really think being gay is a religion?

 

[Dana7360]

I seriously don't see the problem with this new law. It goes along the lines of "we have the right to refuse service to anyone", doesn't it? If businesses do not want to cater to homosexuals or muslims or green skinned aliens....then that is on the businesses' heads...and pocket book. Businesses should not be FORCED to do business with those that go against their own freedom of choice.

Here's what's wrong with your views:

A person could be having a heart attack and the doctor or hospital would refuse to help them because they are of the wrong skin color or of who they love. So the person dies.

Or the one and only store in an area refuses to sell food to a person because of the color of their skin or who they love. So the person starves to death or has to finds a way to move to a place that will have a store that will sell them food.

A person shouldn't be denied life saving help or basic food to live just because another person says their religion doesn't approve of that person's lifestyle or what that person looks like.

A person shouldn't have to leave their home, all the people they love and their job just because someone says their religion doesn't approve of them and refuses to sell them food.

If a person goes in business to serve the public, then that person serves all the public. Not just those they say their religion approves of.

Yeah...well in more than half the states you can be fired or denied housing or basic services just for being gay. That's right, it's not just in "right to work" states where you can be fired for being gay, but in 30 out of 50 states. And yeah, can you believe it, but gays can actually be denied housing because they are gay.

Can you imagine coming back from your honeymoon to find out you've been fired and kicked out of your home?

People that say we don't need Public Accommodation laws anymore think only of urban areas where there is often another vendor or service provider. They forget about the rural living gay or Muslim (the last minority groups it's "okay" to discriminate against) Where is the rural dwelling Muslim or gay family supposed to buy food or fuel?

I can't agree with you more.

We are living in a nation that allows it's citizens to be denied basic necessities of life just because of who they love.

I guess that's what the right wing bigots call American Exceptionalism.

 

[Stephanie]

We should boycott the USA this law passed in indiana is already federal law. Brought to us by Bill Clinton.

they are trying to keep that secret. If that got out they couldn't get all outraged over a Republican.

damn pathetic loser/liars

 

[mikegriffith1]

Will "Republicans ever learn"? Gee, will liberals ever learn to simply respect the values and beliefs of others, instead of trying to force religious vendors to service events that they find offensive and uncomfortable?

And maybe I missed it, but I have yet to see a liberal answer the question of why someone would want to force anyone to attend, much less service, their wedding against their will? Why would someone want anyone at their wedding who they knew did not want to be there, not to mention found it objectionable and uncomfortable?

Wedding flowers, cakes, and photographs are not "basic necessities of life." And no gay couple to date has reported being unable to find vendors to service their ceremonies.

 

[RKMBrown]

I seriously don't see the problem with this new law. It goes along the lines of "we have the right to refuse service to anyone", doesn't it? If businesses do not want to cater to homosexuals or muslims or green skinned aliens....then that is on the businesses' heads...and pocket book. Businesses should not be FORCED to do business with those that go against their own freedom of choice.

Here's what's wrong with your views:

A person could be having a heart attack and the doctor or hospital would refuse to help them because they are of the wrong skin color or of who they love. So the person dies.

Or the one and only store in an area refuses to sell food to a person because of the color of their skin or who they love. So the person starves to death or has to finds a way to move to a place that will have a store that will sell them food.

A person shouldn't be denied life saving help or basic food to live just because another person says their religion doesn't approve of that person's lifestyle or what that person looks like.

A person shouldn't have to leave their home, all the people they love and their job just because someone says their religion doesn't approve of them and refuses to sell them food.

If a person goes in business to serve the public, then that person serves all the public. Not just those they say their religion approves of.

Yeah...well in more than half the states you can be fired or denied housing or basic services just for being gay. That's right, it's not just in "right to work" states where you can be fired for being gay, but in 30 out of 50 states. And yeah, can you believe it, but gays can actually be denied housing because they are gay.

Can you imagine coming back from your honeymoon to find out you've been fired and kicked out of your home?

People that say we don't need Public Accommodation laws anymore think only of urban areas where there is often another vendor or service provider. They forget about the rural living gay or Muslim (the last minority groups it's "okay" to discriminate against) Where is the rural dwelling Muslim or gay family supposed to buy food or fuel?

I can't agree with you more.

We are living in a nation that allows it's citizens to be denied basic necessities of life just because of who they love.

I guess that's what the right wing bigots call American Exceptionalism.

Yeah and when Bill Clinton and Barrack Obama voted for this bill the left wing bigots celebrated.

 

[Flash]

[

Then get rid of PA laws. I thought the Right wanted less government...so get rid of what you think is a bad law......don't add MORE laws.

When the filthy ass government forces you to do business with somebody you don't want to do business with then it is bad law. Especially when it goes against your freedom of religion as in this case.

The government protecting freedom by establishing a law that protects the right of free association is a good thing. Especially when it protects the Constitutional right of freedom of religion as in this case.

Liberals are hung up on this this stupid thing about providing equal outcomes. It is this communistic ideal that they have have, which is always the root of every Liberal idea. They hate the concept of liberty and freedom because that .doesn't always guarantee equal outcome. They have a hard time dealing with that.

The basic concept of freedom is not advanced when the filthy ass government tells you who you have to associate with.