Repugnicans in Indiana passed the religious freedom legislation. . . :rolleyes:
Quote from: Palehorse on March 16, 2015, 06:04:18 PM
Repugnicans in Indiana passed the religious freedom legislation. . . :rolleyes:
God bless us, everyone. :haha: :haha: :preach: :pope: :pray: :haha: And discriminate. :mad:
Quote from: Palehorse on March 16, 2015, 06:04:18 PM
Repugnicans in Indiana passed the religious freedom legislation. . . :rolleyes:
And so? Would you rather see religion supressed?
Quote from: me on March 17, 2015, 09:36:36 PM
And so? Would you rather see religion supressed?
From our government?
HELL YES! *
*-Exactly as our founding fathers intended.
Now coming to your Indiana locale - all sorts of discrimination hiding behind the guise of 'religion'.
The Indiana Legislature has passed the fraudulent 'Religious Freedom Restoration Act'.
What an amazing load of horse shit!
By yourself, you can be any sort of bigoted, racist, discriminating POS you want to be, BUT when you become a public entity such as a business you do NOT have any right to discriminate according to whatever BS 'religious convictions' you hold dear to your smarmy lil' heart.
Don't like that, work for someone else, don't open a business.
This POC act goes to show what happens when a stupid led-by-the-nose electorate puts a group of genuinely insane RW Toilet Paper Party idiots into power with a super majority.
We get all sort of true anti-American legislation.
Legislation and Law are both about enabling behaviors you deem desirable and punishing those deemed undesirable.
This piece of crap legislation is doing nothing but enabling discriminatory practices; period.
I did see one sign posted by a business owner that said, "I reserve the right to NOT serve any member of congressional representation that voted for the Religious Freedom Act."
I think that is EXACTLY what every single business in the state should do; refuse to serve these surly ass-hats and let them see the results of their asinine legislation. :yes:
I think maybe I need to either have this explained to me or go read it because it seems as though it was passed to prevent non religious people, such as myself or an athiest, from discriminating against someone who happens to be religious. In other words they have as much right to their religion as I have to not be religious. Am I misunderstanding because of the threads subject? (Indiana's Religious Freedom Legislation)
I haven't read the legislation myself, but typically when you have laws with names like "Religious Freedom Legislation," or in Indiana's case, "Religious Freedom Restoration Act," all the laws are really designed to do is codify the right for one group to discriminate against others based on their religious beliefs. There's really nothing religious about them at all.
Okay, I'm going to weigh in my thoughts on this. First of all, it is a shame that we need this law. I 100% believe that any owner should have the right to sell what he wants to whoever he wants. This is indeed a free country, and I despise the fact we have to have laws saying one way or the other. I think in a perfect world, if a group deliberately discriminated against a group for hateful reasons, then word would get out, and business would SUCK for said group. Free enterprise is important, the more it is tampered with, the more of our personal freedoms are being crapped away.
I think if a business is against gay marriage, due to religious or ANY reason, they should be able to make up their own mind to accept or decline this customer. THAT is called freedom. BUT, there should be ramifications to their actions, and if enough people decided NOT to support that particular business because they feel they are being discriminating then so be it. It would behoove a business to accommodate everyone, unless it is a deeply religious reason for them to accept the consequences of their actions.
Therefore I think this is a good law, and let's let the law of nature handle these actions. This is NOT the 50's or 60's....I think we are past those days of racially discriminating.
That is my personal belief.
Senate Bill 568
Introduced Senate Bill (S)
Authored by
Sen. Scott Schneider,
Sen. Dennis Kruse,
Sen. Brent Steele.
Co-Authored by
Sen. Carlin Yoder,
Sen. James Buck,
Sen. Amanda Banks,
Sen. Liz Brown,
Sen. James Smith,
Sen. James Tomes,
Sen. Greg Walker,
Sen. Brent Waltz,
Sen. Jean Leising.
Third level navigation links - accordion
Authors
The portrait of Sen. Scott Schneider
Sen. Scott Schneider
Author
The portrait of Sen. Dennis Kruse
Sen. Dennis Kruse
Author
The portrait of Sen. Brent Steele
Sen. Brent Steele
Author
The portrait of Sen. Carlin Yoder
Sen. Carlin Yoder
Co-Author
The portrait of Sen. James Buck
Sen. James Buck
Co-Author
The portrait of Sen. Amanda Banks
Sen. Amanda Banks
Co-Author
The portrait of Sen. Liz Brown
Sen. Liz Brown
Co-Author
The portrait of Sen. James Smith
Sen. James Smith
Co-Author
The portrait of Sen. James Tomes
Sen. James Tomes
Co-Author
The portrait of Sen. Greg Walker
Sen. Greg Walker
Co-Author
The portrait of Sen. Brent Waltz
Sen. Brent Waltz
Co-Author
The portrait of Sen. Jean Leising
Sen. Jean Leising
Co-Author
DIGEST
Religious freedom restoration act. Provides that a state or local government action may not substantially burden a person's right to the exercise of religion unless it is demonstrated that applying the burden to the person's exercise of religion is: (1) essential to further a compelling governmental interest; and (2) the least restrictive means of furthering the compelling governmental interest. Provides that a person whose exercise of religion has been substantially burdened, or is likely to be substantially burdened, by a state or local government action may assert the burden as a claim or defense in a judicial proceeding, regardless of whether the state or a political subdivision of the state is a party to the judicial proceeding. Allows a person who asserts a burden as a claim or defense to obtain appropriate relief, including: (1) injunctive relief; (2) declaratory relief; (3) compensatory damages; and (4) recovery of court costs and reasonable attorney's fees
https://iga.in.gov/legislative/2015/bills/senate/568# Click Bill versions at on the lower left and then introduce senate bill to see the entire bill.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 24, 2015, 04:28:30 PM
Okay, I'm going to weigh in my thoughts on this. First of all, it is a shame that we need this law. I 100% believe that any owner should have the right to sell what he wants to whoever he wants. This is indeed a free country, and I despise the fact we have to have laws saying one way or the other. I think in a perfect world, if a group deliberately discriminated against a group for hateful reasons, then word would get out, and business would SUCK for said group. Free enterprise is important, the more it is tampered with, the more of our personal freedoms are being crapped away.
I think if a business is against gay marriage, due to religious or ANY reason, they should be able to make up their own mind to accept or decline this customer. THAT is called freedom. BUT, there should be ramifications to their actions, and if enough people decided NOT to support that particular business because they feel they are being discriminating then so be it. It would behoove a business to accommodate everyone, unless it is a deeply religious reason for them to accept the consequences of their actions.
Therefore I think this is a good law, and let's let the law of nature handle these actions. This is NOT the 50's or 60's....I think we are past those days of racially discriminating.
That is my personal belief.
Good grief!
1. A resounding NO! Once you open yourself up as a PUBLIC concern, i.e.: a business, you NO LONGER have the right to push your bigoted, racist, authoritarian, phony 'religious BS onto the PUBLIC!
This silly arse 'religious' BS is NO different than that old racist BS of "you can't sit at our counter" or "you can't use this restroom" etc. because you're BLACK!
All that's being done here is to try and give you bigots and racists a 'religious' excuse to foist your bigotry and racism onto the PUBLIC by trying to give it a 'palatable' front that the idiots will swallow.
It's disgusting to the core and just shows exactly how evil you folks are deep down in your black lil' hearts.
2. Your stupid concept of 'free enterprise' is just as phony as your BS 'religious' excuse. It's simply a front to legitimize your bigotry, racism, and authoritarianism all while being able to exploit both the public and the work force.
Your 'free enterprise' is simply the dictatorship of the Haves - capitalistic servitude. It's a worse evil than those 'evils' you claim of socialism and communism because it portrays itself as something completely other than it is, and serving others than it actually does.
3. That's pure unadulterated BS! Simply look at this law, the fight against gay marriage, the constant unwarranted attacks on Obama, his wife, his children, and other blacks in this administration, not to mention the attitudes displayed against Ferguson residents ad infinitum. Bigotry and racism are alive and well...and unfortunately doing fine.
WOW!! :spooked:
I'm not a all surprised, but you REALLY are full of sh!t!!! :yes:
Seriously... :yes: You ARE!! :yes:
Quote from: Y on March 24, 2015, 05:02:58 PM
Good grief!
1. A resounding NO! Once you open yourself up as a PUBLIC concern, i.e.: a business, you NO LONGER have the right to push your bigoted, racist, authoritarian, phony 'religious BS onto the PUBLIC!
This silly arse 'religious' BS is NO different than that old racist BS of "you can't sit at our counter" or "you can't use this restroom" etc. because you're BLACK!
All that's being done here is to try and give you bigots and racists a 'religious' excuse to foist your bigotry and racism onto the PUBLIC by trying to give it a 'palatable' front that the idiots will swallow.
It's disgusting to the core and just shows exactly how evil you folks are deep down in your black lil' hearts.
2. Your stupid concept of 'free enterprise' is just as phony as your BS 'religious' excuse. It's simply a front to legitimize your bigotry, racism, and authoritarianism all while being able to exploit both the public and the work force.
Your 'free enterprise' is simply the dictatorship of haves - capitalistic servitude. It's a worse evil than those 'evils' you claim of socialism and communism because it portrays itself as something completely other than it is, and serving others than it actually does.
I don't see a thing in the bill about businesses.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 24, 2015, 05:06:58 PM
WOW!! :spooked:
I'm not a all surprised, but you REALLY are full of sh!t!!! :yes:
Seriously... :yes: You ARE!! :yes:
Face it, Hank, you're an idiot.
Once again you talk shite when you don't have a leg to stand on.
Show us the legal or constitutional basis for your stupid BS.
Just to point out your hypocrisy, all it would take would be for some stupid 'religious' nut(s) to decide it's against his/her/their 'religion' to do business with bald, near-sighted, dumpy, white guys like you - business you need - and you'd be cryin' and howlin' all the way to the moon.
You're such a hypocrite...as well as a bigot and racist.
Quote from: me on March 24, 2015, 05:11:05 PM
I don't see a thing in the bill about businesses.
You don't see the discrimination it is driving and will drive; but plenty of entities that conduct the conventions the Indy CIB is counting upon to pay for that big new stadium called the Luke, and the convention center are already reaping the "rewards" this type of legislation is and will drive.
GenCon has already come out and stated they are now rethinking holding their convention in Indiana, and there will be a host of others that will follow suit. . . And don't be surprised if the football Gods frown upon Indianapolis surrounding a future super bowl too.
And that is just the tip of the iceberg ! :yes:
http://www.wthr.com/story/28603977/gen-con-ceo-rethinking-indiana-as-host-site-if-religious-freedom-bill-becomes-law (http://www.wthr.com/story/28603977/gen-con-ceo-rethinking-indiana-as-host-site-if-religious-freedom-bill-becomes-law)
http://www.wthr.com/story/28602411/kravitz-blog-religious-freedom-bill-may-hurt-indys-sports-convention-business (http://www.wthr.com/story/28602411/kravitz-blog-religious-freedom-bill-may-hurt-indys-sports-convention-business)
Good for them!
I told my wife last night that this law was going to slit Indiana's throat - including Pence's and the legislature's.
There was already a tweet from a gay basketball player to Pence making a point about this law.
My wife told me that Bob Kravitz put out a fiery rant about it and roasting Pence and the legislature/legislators.
It's nothing less than any of them supporting this law deserve.
Quote from: Y on March 24, 2015, 05:45:34 PM
Good for them!
I told my wife last night that this law was going to slit Indiana's throat - including Pence's and the legislature's.
There was already a tweet from a gay basketball player to Pence making a point about this law.
My wife told me that Bob Kravitz put out a fiery rant about it and roasting Pence and the legislature/legislators.
It's nothing less than any of them supporting this law deserve.
Yep. Kravitz's rant is in the second link in my post above. . .
Things like this is what the bill is for. What happened to this woman is not even remotely right.
http://www.thefederalistpapers.org/current-events/woman-gets-sued-for-not-serving-gay-wedding-heres-what-the-judge-decided
She deserves to be sued.
Once she opened her doors to the PUBLIC, she doesn't have the right to discriminate against segments of that PUBLIC.
If she didn't want to make cupcakes for EVERYBODY that wanted to pay for/buy them, then she should have just worked for someone else who wasn't a bigot...or just stayed home.
Quote from: Y on March 24, 2015, 06:14:21 PM
She deserves to be sued.
Once she opened her doors to the PUBLIC, she doesn't have the right to discriminate against segments of that PUBLIC.
If she didn't want to make cupcakes for EVERYBODY that wanted to pay for/buy them, then she should have just worked for someone else who wasn't a bigot or just stayed home.
It was no big deal, even though I disagree with her decision she, or any other small business owner, should have that right and the people should decided whether to patronize that business based on that not a law suit. She would either sink or float if she chose to do business in that manner. To lose everything because some malcontent wanted to be sue happy is just wrong and for the judge to grant them what he did without a trial is even worse.
Quote from: me on March 24, 2015, 06:21:02 PM
It was no big deal, even though I disagree with her decision she, or any other small business owner, should have that right and the people should decided whether to patronize that business based on that not a law suit. She would either sink or float if she chose to do business in that manner. To lose everything because some malcontent wanted to be sue happy is just wrong and for the judge to grant them what he did without a trial is even worse.
I disagree. Doing so enables the bad behaviors that are and should be illegal.
Quote from: Palehorse on March 24, 2015, 06:57:38 PM
I disagree. Doing so enables the bad behaviors that are and should be illegal.
But for a person to lose everything like this lady did is wrong also. I'm not saying she was right I'm saying the people who sued her and the judge were wrong. If you don't like someone's business practices don't patronize them there is no need to ruin them. Were there other places these people could have gone? Yes. Did they seek her out knowing what would happen with the intent to sue and make a point? Highly possible. Should they or their attorney have profited from someting where no actual harm was done other than maybe hurting their feelings? Hell no. I do believe that is what this law is meant to prevent.
It is getting to a point where if you even disagree with the wrong person you can be sued because you've offended them.
Legislation like this creates an unintended consequence for business, that of blurring the line between corporate and personal responsibility/liability. If the corporation is nothing more than an extension of the individual who owns it, it can be argued that the individual should be held personally liable for the failures of that corporation. You can't have it both ways.
The Hobby Lobby Supreme Court decision opened that door and it's only a matter of time before someone walks through it.
Quote from: Exterminator on March 25, 2015, 11:05:33 AM
Legislation like this creates an unintended consequence for business, that of blurring the line between corporate and personal responsibility/liability. If the corporation is nothing more than an extension of the individual who owns it, it can be argued that the individual should be held personally liable for the failures of that corporation. You can't have it both ways.
The Hobby Lobby Supreme Court decision opened that door and it's only a matter of time before someone walks through it.
I agree with that but there should also be some way to protect people from losing everything in cases like I referrenced.
*BoD don't even think about stealing any letters today. ;D
Quote from: me on March 25, 2015, 01:28:02 PM
*BoD don't even think about stealing any letters today. ;D
Not yet! :biggrin:
Just saw a headline that read, "Indiana legislature passes law paving way for Sharia law." :biggrin:
Another potential lost convention. (http://www.indystar.com/story/news/local/hamilton-county/2015/03/25/disciples-christ-threatens-cancel-convention-due-religious-freedom-bill/70432180/)
Quote from: Exterminator on March 25, 2015, 01:34:57 PM
Just saw a headline that read, "Indiana legislature passes law paving way for Sharia law." :biggrin:
It's funny how the fucktards that pass this kind of shit, and those who support it, don't get that exact point.
Quote from: Locutus on March 25, 2015, 02:47:33 PM
It's funny how the fucktards that pass this kind of shit, and those who support it, don't get that exact point.
All I am saying that when a photographer, who is a strong Christian, can be sued for NOT wanting to do a gay wedding....there is a problem....when a deeply religious business has to either shutdown or engage in ceremonies that they find morally objectionable, we have a Constitutional problem.
I totally understand this dilemma, but to call people fucktards for wanting to stand on moral principals is fucked up!
Like I said before, the free market should decide this. If people do not want to support this photographer because of his convictions, then don't hire him. It doesn't mean this guy HATES anybody, he just doesn't want to support something he is morally against. Yet, he has been SUED, because a gay couple couldn't just find another photographer.
(http://i475.photobucket.com/albums/rr111/hlovett_2008/10422005_1033042180043271_2970656721408484286_n_zpsjsgsemru.jpg) (http://s475.photobucket.com/user/hlovett_2008/media/10422005_1033042180043271_2970656721408484286_n_zpsjsgsemru.jpg.html)
These damn fucking churches have more freedom than all of the rest of us has now. :rant: The damn bastards don't have to pay taxes and the people who give to them get a tax deduction. :mad: :mad: :mad: :rant:
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
The First Amendment's Establishment Clause prohibits the government from making any law "respecting an establishment of religion." This clause not only forbids the government from establishing an official religion, but also prohibits government actions that unduly favor one religion over another. It also prohibits the government from unduly preferring religion over non-religion, or non-religion over religion.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 25, 2015, 02:57:03 PM
All I am saying that when a photographer, who is a strong Christian, can be sued for NOT wanting to do a gay wedding....there is a problem..
Please provide every example you can find of people who have been successfully sued for refusing to service a gay wedding in any capacity. The florist in the article posted by 'me' can serve as one example even though she broke the law. Please provide others so that we can ascertain whether or not this is a real issue and weigh the potential real damages to these people against the tens of millions of dollars of potential losses from this inane legislation.
The exodus begins. (http://www.ibj.com/articles/52427-salesforce-ceo-were-cancelling-travel-to-indiana?utm_source=ibj-daily&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=2015-03-26)
I can't believe HH and 'me' support that ridiculous legislation.
All this is just pure crazy IMO. Why can't these malcontents just go elsewhere and do business rather than make a big deal out of something and force other people to do something that is against their beliefs or face losing everything they have through a law suit. Just don't patronize those businesses you find objectionable period. There should never have been a need for this law in the first place. Not only is the law wrong the reason someone felt it necessary to make it wrong. Everyone wants things their way and it just isn't possible to please everyone.
Example, someone was reading something to my grandson's wife at work yesterday and they were away from everyone. A woman was walking past and told the one reading she found it objectionable and she should quit reading it even though she was invading their space and should have walked on rather than state, rather rudely I might add, that the girl had to quit reading what she was reading. That is just wrong. What the hell is wrong with people today?
Just a casual observation from afar, and with the disclaimer that I know very little about Mike Pence, I dare say that he may not have signed this bill if he didn't have presidential aspirations. :wink:
When you have chambers of commerce, and others, telling the governor of a state that something they're about to sign is going to be bad for business, they typically don't sign it. That is, of course, unless they have something personal to gain.
Quote from: Exterminator on March 26, 2015, 07:53:53 AM
Please provide every example you can find of people who have been successfully sued for refusing to service a gay wedding in any capacity. The florist in the article posted by 'me' can serve as one example even though she broke the law. Please provide others so that we can ascertain whether or not this is a real issue and weigh the potential real damages to these people against the tens of millions of dollars of potential losses from this inane legislation.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/joshsteimle/2013/08/28/entrepreneurship-threatened-by-ruling-in-new-mexico-gay-marriage-case/ (http://www.forbes.com/sites/joshsteimle/2013/08/28/entrepreneurship-threatened-by-ruling-in-new-mexico-gay-marriage-case/)
Elaine Huguenin is the co-owner of Elane Photography along with her husband. Their small business is based in New Mexico. In 2006 she refused to photograph a gay marriage ceremony for Vanessa Willock and her partner, citing religious beliefs. Elaine and her business came to national attention after the couple sued her, claiming discrimination. According to the New Mexico Human Rights Act, it is illegal for a business to refuse its services to an individual because of that person's sexual orientation. The same law also prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry and gender.
On August 22nd, 2013, New Mexico's highest court ruled against Elaine, stating "When Elane Photography refused to photograph a same-sex commitment ceremony, it violated the NMHRA in the same way as if it had refused to photograph a wedding between people of different races."
It cannot be disputed that Elaine broke the law. What we can dispute is whether the long term consequences of having such a law in place are beneficial for society.
After the ruling, Louise Melling of the American Civil Liberties Union issued a statement saying "When you open a business, you are opening your doors to all people in your community, not just the select few who share your personal beliefs."
Were this reasoning to be applied equally to all cases, as blind justice demands, then a business owned by a gay individual must provide services to the Westboro Baptist Church, if asked to. A Jewish entrepreneur must provide services to a neo-Nazi. MoveOn.org must sell ad space to Glenn Beck (ok, MoveOn.org doesn't sell ad space, but you get the idea).
According to a recent Rasmussen poll, 85% of Americans believe Elaine had the right to refuse service to the gay couple. I suspect the percentage would be even higher if respondents had been asked not if a Christian woman could refuse to photograph a gay marriage ceremony, but if a business owned by an African-American woman must provide services to the KKK.
It is important to reiterate that no harm was done to the gay couple other than to offend their sensibilities. Thomas Jefferson recognized that in the absence of physical harm or true aggression, a person's opinion "neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." Likewise, the refusal of service has not caused anyone's pocket to be picked nor anyone's leg to be broken.
Here is another case:
http://blogs.findlaw.com/free_enterprise/2015/02/in-gay-couples-wedding-cake-lawsuit-ore-bakery-loses-again.html (http://blogs.findlaw.com/free_enterprise/2015/02/in-gay-couples-wedding-cake-lawsuit-ore-bakery-loses-again.html)
Sweet Cakes by Melissa isn't so sweet, after all. Last year, the Oregon bakery got into trouble with the state's Bureau of Labor and Industries for violating a state law prohibiting sexual-orientation discrimination (http://www.katu.com/news/local/Sweet-Cakes-by-Melissa-owners-vow-to-fight-state-241026131.html) in places of public accommodation. Aaron and Melissa Klein, the owners of the bakery, refused to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex couple, citing their religious beliefs. After an investigation, the Bureau determined that their business had violated the law.
Last week, the Kleins suffered another legal setback.
A Bakery, Not a ChurchAn administrative law judge ruled against the Kleins' motion to dismiss the case (http://www.oregonlive.com/business/index.ssf/2015/02/sweet_cakes_by_melissa_discrim.html) on the ground the Kleins were exercising their freedom of religious expression,
The Oregonian reports. Oregon's law does allow exceptions for religious institutions, the Bureau's spokesman Charlie Burr said, but "[t]he bakery is not a religious institution under the law."
Quote from: Locutus on March 26, 2015, 01:38:09 PM
I can't believe HH and 'me' support that ridiculous legislation.
Actually, I am still on the fence on this. I see both sides. You guys FORCE me to take a side sometimes.... :razz: :icon_twisted:
Quote from: Locutus on March 26, 2015, 02:08:07 PM
Just a casual observation from afar, and with the disclaimer that I know very little about Mike Pence, I dare say that he may not have signed this bill if he didn't have presidential aspirations. :wink:
When you have chambers of commerce, and others, telling the governor of a state that something they're about to sign is going to be bad for business, they typically don't sign it. That is, of course, unless they have something personal to gain.
Here listen to him explain it himself. He has a very clear take and understanding on it. Hard to disagree with him, if you are being honest and open-minded.
http://www.wibc.com/blogs/garrison/segments-interviews/pence-fires-back-media
Quote from: me on March 26, 2015, 01:42:42 PM
All this is just pure crazy IMO. Why can't these malcontents just go elsewhere and do business rather than make a big deal out of something and force other people to do something that is against their beliefs or face losing everything they have through a law suit. . . .
The problem with doing that is it just blossoms from there. Like anything else in this world, you allow one thing and then it becomes three, then 12, and so on.
Using a similar approach, why can't all these religious zealots just go somewhere else rather than drag down an entire state?
The city of Indianapolis will be bankrupt within 5 years if this law is allowed to go forward unchallenged. The CIB alone will likely go belly up before that 5 year period, as these conventions and other events begin going to other states to hold their events. The VERY events used to justify the sunset tax imposed upon Marion County and the collar counties; which as of this moment now has had it's "sunset" moved out decades because of some ignorant legislation that panders to Christian extremists. It will just be a matter of time before it will become other religions as well, for constitutionally we are REQUIRED to treat all the exact same way. You cannot pander to one without pandering to all.
It just blows me away that so few see this!
Quote from: Locutus on March 26, 2015, 02:08:07 PM
Just a casual observation from afar, and with the disclaimer that I know very little about Mike Pence, I dare say that he may not have signed this bill if he didn't have presidential aspirations. :wink:
When you have chambers of commerce, and others, telling the governor of a state that something they're about to sign is going to be bad for business, they typically don't sign it. That is, of course, unless they have something personal to gain.
Yeah, he's another GOP Jackwagon with presidential aspirations. . . And this legislation all but guarantees those aspirations are yet another case of pissing in the wind. ANOTHER governor, and ANOTHER EPIC FAILURE! :yes:
I think this is nothing more than hyperbole. Listen to the interview I posted. THEN, make a decision.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 26, 2015, 05:09:17 PM
I think this is nothing more than hyperbole. Listen to the interview I posted. THEN, make a decision.
50 million
plus in lost revenues to the city of Indianapolis right out of the gate. And a lot more where that came from. . . Enough said.
Quote from: Palehorse on March 26, 2015, 04:59:04 PM
. . .
The city of Indianapolis will be bankrupt within 5 years if this law is allowed to go forward unchallenged. The CIB alone will likely go belly up before that 5 year period, as these conventions and other events begin going to other states to hold their events. The VERY events used to justify the sunset tax imposed upon Marion County and the collar counties; which as of this moment now has had it's "sunset" moved out decades because of some ignorant legislation that panders to Christian extremists. . . .
Bookmark this Hank, because just as soon as it happens I will be reposting it and reminding you and everyone else of just how "benign" you consider this law to be. . .
Quote from: Palehorse on March 26, 2015, 04:59:04 PM
The problem with doing that is it just blossoms from there. Like anything else in this world, you allow one thing and then it becomes three, then 12, and so on.
Using a similar approach, why can't all these religious zealots just go somewhere else rather than drag down an entire state?
Why can't those who are causing all this crap just patronize another business rather than try to make someone go against their beliefs to serve them?
The city of Indianapolis will be bankrupt within 5 years if this law is allowed to go forward unchallenged. The CIB alone will likely go belly up before that 5 year period, as these conventions and other events begin going to other states to hold their events. The VERY events used to justify the sunset tax imposed upon Marion County and the collar counties; which as of this moment now has had it's "sunset" moved out decades because of some ignorant legislation that panders to Christian extremists. It will just be a matter of time before it will become other religions as well, for constitutionally we are REQUIRED to treat all the exact same way. You cannot pander to one without pandering to all.
It just blows me away that so few see this!
Quote from: me on March 26, 2015, 01:42:42 PM
All this is just pure crazy IMO. Why can't these malcontents just go elsewhere and do business rather than make a big deal out of something and force other people to do something that is against their beliefs or face losing everything they have through a law suit. Just don't patronize those businesses you find objectionable period. There should never have been a need for this law in the first place. Not only is the law wrong the reason someone felt it necessary to make it wrong. Everyone wants things their way and it just isn't possible to please everyone.
Example, someone was reading something to my grandson's wife at work yesterday and they were away from everyone. A woman was walking past and told the one reading she found it objectionable and she should quit reading it even though she was invading their space and should have walked on rather than state, rather rudely I might add, that the girl had to quit reading what she was reading. That is just wrong. What the hell is wrong with people today?
Quote from: Palehorse on March 26, 2015, 05:23:03 PM
50 million plus in lost revenues to the city of Indianapolis right out of the gate. And a lot more where that came from. . . Enough said.
For no other reason than to prove a point and "get even". What a crock. Both the the reason for the legislation and the cause of it having to be even considered are totally wrong. If you don't understand that then so be it. They are infringing on one persons right and granting another's because they whine louder.
QuoteMe. . . .
Why can't those who are causing all this crap just patronize another business rather than try to make someone go against their beliefs to serve them? . . .
Why even attempt to legitimize discrimination in the first place?
This state will now lose millions in revenues over some horse-shit legislation that was not necessary except to the religious extremists, and those same businesses will lose consumer traffic. The very same consumer traffic many here touted as justification for the city of Indianapolis to host a super bowl via its "generation of millions of dollars" to those businesses.
Big business, and yes even the storied NCAA whose Hall of Fame and HQ reside in downtown Indianapolis, are doing just what you say; they're refusing to do business with the entire state AND patronizing other states that do not have such discriminatory laws on the books.
Quote from: me on March 26, 2015, 05:30:47 PM
For no other reason than to prove a point and "get even". What a crock. Both the the reason for the legislation and the cause of it having to be even considered are totally wrong. If you don't understand that then so be it. They are infringing on one persons right and granting another's because they whine louder.
Define "they". . . If you are referring to the LGBT community then you just took your discrimination to a whole new level. :rolleyes:
(http://i475.photobucket.com/albums/rr111/hlovett_2008/11052476_989809207714467_2771273607256689380_n_zpsnxuloeht.png) (http://s475.photobucket.com/user/hlovett_2008/media/11052476_989809207714467_2771273607256689380_n_zpsnxuloeht.png.html)
Quote from: Palehorse on March 26, 2015, 05:38:54 PM
Define "they". . . If you are referring to the LGBT community then you just took your discrimination to a whole new level. :rolleyes:
The people who want everything their way is what I'm referring to whether it be gays, blacks, religious groups, just those groups or people who always have to be whining about their rights but not considering the rights of others. Now if you think that is discrimination too bad. It is simply not allowing one group of people to control how someone thinks or feels and, even more importantly, who they have to do business with. I'm waiting to see the grocery store full of shirtless shoeless people because they start whining discrimination too.
(http://i475.photobucket.com/albums/rr111/hlovett_2008/11049630_10152869630434092_3563005112947156719_n_zpsmw6ruwxd.jpg) (http://s475.photobucket.com/user/hlovett_2008/media/11049630_10152869630434092_3563005112947156719_n_zpsmw6ruwxd.jpg.html)
Is this the Salem Witch Trials or March 26, 2015 in Indiana?
If you have to pass a law that hurts people in order to prove your morals or faith, then you have no morals and faith to prove.
Quote from: me on March 26, 2015, 05:46:36 PM
The people who want everything their way is what I'm referring to whether it be gays, blacks, religious groups, just those groups or people who always have to be whining about their rights but not considering the rights of others. Now if you think that is discrimination too bad. It is simply not allowing one group of people to control how someone thinks or feels and, even more importantly, who they have to do business with. I'm waiting to see the grocery store full of shirtless shoeless people because they start whining discrimination too.
(https://rajivawijesinha.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/no-colored-allowed-black-americana-cast-iron-sign-10x4_220665307171.jpg)
:rolleyes:
There's really no difference.
This state would have been far better served in strengthening its anti-discriminatory laws instead of enabling discrimination! :rant:
Here we see some of the true motivation for this crap:
Governor Mike Pence
5 hrs ·
Today I signed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, because I support the freedom of religion for every Hoosier of every faith.
The Constitution of the United States and the Indiana Constitution both provide strong recognition of the freedom of religion but today, many people of faith feel their religious liberty is under attack by government action.
One need look no further than the recent litigation concerning the Affordable Care Act. A private business and our own University of Notre Dame had to file lawsuits challenging provisions that required them to offer insurance coverage in violation of their religious views. . . .
It's fucking healthcare legislation sour grapes, and this asshat is enabling discrimination over it! :mad:
https://iga.in.gov/legislative/2015/bills/senate/101#document-92bab197 (https://iga.in.gov/legislative/2015/bills/senate/101#document-92bab197)
What a bunch of dumbasses. Read this law and think of Sharia Law while you are doing it. The same Sharia Law you morons accused our POTUS of enabling.
This bill enables it!
It also gives discrimination legal validity! :mad:
Dumbasses??
Morons??
Really?
You never over react either....it is indeed bookmarked ....
Why is it liberals are so hateful? You called me a dumbass for what pH? You honestly think those who disagree are dumbasses?
Like I said, and time will support me on this, it is just liberal hyperbole!
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 26, 2015, 07:13:04 PM
. . .
Like I said, and time will support me on this, it is just liberal hyperbole!
We'll see what you think when an Indiana, Muslim owned business imposes Sharia Law upon its employees. . .
And when the city of Indianapolis goes bankrupt. . .
When Lucas Oil Stadium is either shuttered or given to the Colts gratis.
When Victory Field is shuttered. . .
This state will indeed lose so much money it may itself go bankrupt over the next decade, as the sparse businesses in this state begin to flee.
*The rest of your post is hyperbole and doesn't rate a response.
It's just a matter of time before the lawsuits begin that will challenge the constitutionality of this damnable piece of legislation.
Bookmarked!
Did anyone of you guys read the links I posted? Did anyone listen to the link where Pence explains why he passed it? Or have you just done what you accuse me of doing and just parroting what the media is blabbering?
30 states already have this law. None of those states has gone bankrupt or sharia law has been imposed. It is 100% liberal hyperbole!
I haven't read your link yet Hank, but I intend to. Believe it or not, I'm still working. :mad:
Quote from: Locutus on March 26, 2015, 08:29:41 PM
I haven't read your link yet Hank, but I intend to. Believe it or not, I'm still working. :mad:
Dang! Time to get home and crack open a cold one! I'm taking a vacation day tomorrow and going to hang with my kids!
Listen to it and let me know what you think.
I will.
I'm done now. I'm going to crack a cold one and watch the West Virginia v. Kentucky basketball game here at 9:45 on CBS.
Quote from: Locutus on March 26, 2015, 09:06:48 PM
I will.
I'm done now. I'm going to crack a cold one and watch the West Virginia v. Kentucky basketball game here at 9:45 on CBS.
Sweet!
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 26, 2015, 08:28:24 PM
Did anyone of you guys read the links I posted? Did anyone listen to the link where Pence explains why he passed it? Or have you just done what you accuse me of doing and just parroting what the media is blabbering?
30 states already have this law. None of those states has gone bankrupt or sharia law has been imposed. It is 100% liberal hyperbole!
1. Yeah, just because Pence 'says' that's 'why' he passed it, but he wouldn't lie nor misrepresent, now would he? :rolleyes:
2. 30? So what? Another one of your stupid - and yes I do mean stupid - logical fallacies that I've smacked you around about for years - Appeal to Authority/Popularity.
3. Now let's examine your '30'. It's not '30', it's actually 19 with actual laws:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/03/01/where-in-the-u-s-are-there-heightened-protections-for-religious-freedom/
...18 of which passed state laws based on the 1993 federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act...(https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/files/2014/02/RFRA1.jpg)
You can even get your BS propaganda down with any accuracy.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 26, 2015, 07:13:04 PM
Dumbasses??
Morons??
Really?
You never over react either....it is indeed bookmarked ....
Why is it liberals are so hateful? You called me a dumbass for what pH? You honestly think those who disagree are dumbasses?
Like I said, and time will support me on this, it is just liberal hyperbole!
Yes, they are all those things.
Once you decide to enter the public marketplace, you no longer have the same rights and protections you have as a private citizen. That is a long established legal principle.
If that principle didn't exist, there would be no ability to regulate commerce (remember that phrase?) and people doing business would be able to do anything and everything under the sun - something you and the other RW idjits keep pushing for with your idiotically unsafe and unscrupulous Laissez Faire mentality and legislation - simply to make a dollar.
Therefore, when you enter into business you can expect to be regulated and to act in a legal and socially acceptable manner - no discrimination being one.
If you do not want to abide by that part of the legal/social contract, then DON'T go into business. Stay a private citizen, work for someone else, and be just as bigoted, racist, and phony 'religious' as you want to be...BUT when you become part of the business community, you have to keep your black-hearted lil' prejudices out of public interaction.
Anyone who doesn't, or can't get that, is exactly as you named above.
Quote from: Palehorse on March 26, 2015, 07:17:07 PM
We'll see what you think when an Indiana, Muslim owned business imposes Sharia Law upon its employees. . .
And when the city of Indianapolis goes bankrupt. . .
When Lucas Oil Stadium is either shuttered or given to the Colts gratis.
When Victory Field is shuttered. . .
This state will indeed lose so much money it may itself go bankrupt over the next decade, as the sparse businesses in this state begin to flee.
*The rest of your post is hyperbole and doesn't rate a response.
If people are that small minded that something like this keeps them away we don't need them here anyway. It's their attitudes that caused the need for this. To sue someone for monetary damages just because your feelings are hurt is ridiculous. Go do your business somewhere else and let them have the money you would have spent in their establishment don't sue them for pete's sake. People are turning into pure ass holes over this kind of crap. Ya'll spend far too much time sweating the small stuff and not seeing what's really going on. Everyone is being pitted against each other worse than I've ever seen it and you know from history what happens then. Think people think.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 26, 2015, 03:59:06 PM
[/i]Here is another case:
These people broke the law in their respective states. Indiana had no such law to break, ergo, this legislation "fixes" a non-existent problem at a cost of tens of millions of dollars in tourism revenue.
Quote from: me on March 26, 2015, 05:46:36 PM
The people who want everything their way is what I'm referring to whether it be gays, blacks, religious groups, just those groups or people who always have to be whining about their rights but not considering the rights of others.
I would submit that you have just described the very people whose intolerance this law is designed to "protect". Are the rights of one person selling cupcakes in the city market more important than the rights of everyone else?
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 26, 2015, 07:13:04 PM
Like I said, and time will support me on this, it is just liberal hyperbole!
It's not liberal at all and not hyperbole. A friend of mine with IMPD (who, coincidentally is the cop that shot one of the robbers at the Family Dollar store on the west side last Sunday) who is a staunch, Obama hating conservative was lamenting on his Facebook page yesterday what the loss of revenue means to the much needed increase in head count for that department. And it is happening now as I pointed out with the Salesforce article I linked to. When the CEO of a multi-billion dollar corporation tells the governor that he will decrease his investment in your state should a piece of legislation get signed into law and then immediately acts on that threat, we have moved beyond the realm of hyperbole and into that of reality. This legislation is already costing not only money but future jobs. Way to go, Pence!
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 26, 2015, 08:28:24 PM
30 states already have this law. None of those states has gone bankrupt or sharia law has been imposed.
Those laws were passed in the 90's when the public was not so accepting of the LGBT community, when they did not enjoy protected status and when the power of social media had yet to be realized. Times have changed, perhaps you should change with them.
Quote from: Exterminator on March 27, 2015, 09:42:07 AM
I would submit that you have just described the very people whose intolerance this law is designed to "protect". Are the rights of one person selling cupcakes in the city market more important than the rights of everyone else?
Since when is it right to sue someone over hurt feelings for monetary damages? That's what the law is for, to protect people from that happening. Has that law effected the other states that have it in place? I still feel the reason the legislation had to be passed in the first place is just as bad as the legislation. Caterers, photographers, and florists are small businesses not large corporations even though they may be incorporated for insurance and tax reasons. Word of mouth and loss of business is the way to take care of their stupidity not losing everything they have to a whiner who sees it as an opportunity to get rich by suing them because they got their feelings hurt. It's not like there aren't other places to choose from that would be glad for their business not not so narrow minded. If someone is forced to do something against their beliefs and they're small minded the service won't be all that great anyway because the photographer or whoever doesn't want to be there in the first place. The whole thing is a load of crap.
Quote from: me on March 27, 2015, 11:50:25 AM
The whole thing is a load of crap.
With this, I will agree. No one has been successfully sued in the state of Indiana for refusing to provide goods and/or services to a gay couple...not once, not now, not ever. This legislation was entirely unnecessary and serves only to shine a national spotlight on our state as intolerant which, in turn, negatively affects tourism, job growth and revenue. It causes a lot of damage for nothing.
Indiana defines stupidity as religion. (http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/indiana-defines-stupidity-as-religion)
Quote from: Exterminator on March 27, 2015, 12:41:37 PM
With this, I will agree. No one has been successfully sued in the state of Indiana for refusing to provide goods and/or services to a gay couple...not once, not now, not ever. This legislation was entirely unnecessary and serves only to shine a national spotlight on our state as intolerant which, in turn, negatively affects tourism, job growth and revenue. It causes a lot of damage for nothing.
It shouldn't though because people should just not patronize those places. The thing is the way things are getting it was just a matter of time before someone did sue so that got nipped in the bud but then the unintended consequences reared it's ugly head. It was a no win situation all the way around. It boils down to poor judgement on the legislative end and stupidity, intolerence, and whining on the other. Unfortunately the entire state may suffer because of it.
Quote from: me on March 27, 2015, 12:52:22 PM
It shouldn't though because people should just not patronize those places.
And they didn't and that strategy is extremely effective. Years ago there was a very successful company in the Indianapolis area called Atkins Elegant Desserts. They made the best cheesecake I have probably ever eaten, versions of which were sold frozen in various grocery stores and they even had a big store on 82nd Street just east of Castleton that was always busy. I seem to recall that they were even exporting their cheesecakes overseas at some point. The company still exists but only as a tiny shell of what it once was or could have been, occupying a small, lonely storefront in a strip mall somewhere in Fishers. Here's what happened to them. (http://freestudents.blogspot.com/2007/08/one-of-most-hateful-mothers-i-have-read.html)
My point, again, is that the market works and people will boycott and take their business elsewhere rather than sue.
Quote from: Exterminator on March 27, 2015, 12:42:57 PM
Indiana defines stupidity as religion. (http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/indiana-defines-stupidity-as-religion)
While Pence's action drew the praise of stupid people across America, former Arizona Governor Jan Brewer was not among them. "Even I wasn't dumb enough to sign a bill like that," she said.:rotfl: :biggrin:
^^ You know something's dumb if Jan Brewer is smart enough not to sign it. :yes:
Wow! This is even spilling over into the dog world! (https://www.facebook.com/NAFAFLYBALL/posts/10152944667533462?fref=nf)
Quote from: Locutus on March 27, 2015, 02:47:18 PM
^^ You know something's dumb if Jan Brewer is smart enough not to sign it. :yes:
:biggrin:
Quote from: Exterminator on March 27, 2015, 01:46:53 PM
And they didn't and that strategy is extremely effective. Years ago there was a very successful company in the Indianapolis area called Atkins Elegant Desserts. They made the best cheesecake I have probably ever eaten, versions of which were sold frozen in various grocery stores and they even had a big store on 82nd Street just east of Castleton that was always busy. I seem to recall that they were even exporting their cheesecakes overseas at some point. The company still exists but only as a tiny shell of what it once was or could have been, occupying a small, lonely storefront in a strip mall somewhere in Fishers. Here's what happened to them. (http://freestudents.blogspot.com/2007/08/one-of-most-hateful-mothers-i-have-read.html)
My point, again, is that the market works and people will boycott and take their business elsewhere rather than sue.
Wow, that is sad. How can a parent do something like that to their child. Dislike the lifestyle fine but to take it to those extremes is uncalled for. Too bad the friend didn't think to dress in drag and go in as Britany. I may have missed some things 'cause I just skimmed the article it made me so mad but I did get the idea for the most part.
Quote from: Y on March 26, 2015, 09:51:21 PM
1. Yeah, just because Pence 'says' that's 'why' he passed it, but he wouldn't lie nor misrepresent, now would he? :rolleyes:
2. 30? So what? Another one of your stupid - and yes I do mean stupid - logical fallacies that I've smacked you around about for years - Appeal to Authority/Popularity.
3. Now let's examine your '30'. It's not '30', it's actually 19 with actual laws:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/03/01/where-in-the-u-s-are-there-heightened-protections-for-religious-freedom/
...18 of which passed state laws based on the 1993 federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act...
(https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/files/2014/02/RFRA1.jpg)
You can even get your BS propaganda down with any accuracy.
Yes, they are all those things.
Once you decide to enter the public marketplace, you no longer have the same rights and protections you have as a private citizen. That is a long established legal principle.
If that principle didn't exist, there would be no ability to regulate commerce (remember that phrase?) and people doing business would be able to do anything and everything under the sun - something you and the other RW idjits keep pushing for with your idiotically unsafe and unscrupulous Laissez Faire mentality and legislation - simply to make a dollar.
Therefore, when you enter into business you can expect to be regulated and to act in a legal and socially acceptable manner - no discrimination being one.
If you do not want to abide by that part of the legal/social contract, then DON'T go into business. Stay a private citizen, work for someone else, and be just as bigoted, racist, and phony 'religious' as you want to be...BUT when you become part of the business community, you have to keep your black-hearted lil' prejudices out of public interaction.
Anyone who doesn't, or can't get that, is exactly as you named above.
Well shit. . . You beat me to it! :smile:
http://www.ewtnnews.com/catholic-news/US.php?id=11899
This link tells it like it is. I have never been as adament about an issue, since our liberal media has deliberately got this wrong!
If we lose any business it will have the blood of ignorant fucking liberal media who has lied through their fucking teeth, all in the name of politics!
In your opinion Hank, would it be right for this law to be used to support a Christian policeman who refused to police a mosque?
Quote from: Locutus on March 28, 2015, 06:55:17 PM
In your opinion Hank, would it be right for this law to be used to support a Christian policeman who refused to police a mosque?
The new law does not say that at all. Prove to me that it does! It clearly doesn't! It does give the courts to act upon this with common sense.
The police take an oath to defend its citizens when they take the job. If they have issues, they don't have to take the job.
Did you read the link I posted?
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 28, 2015, 07:03:13 PM
The new law does not say that at all. Prove to me that it does! It clearly doesn't! It does give the courts to act upon this with common sense.
The police take an oath to defend its citizens when they take the job. If they have issues, they don't have to take the job.
Did you read the link I posted?
I did and I didn't claim the law said that. I just asked a question.
Would it be right for a Christian police officer to use this law as a defense for refusal to police a mosque?
I take it from your answer that you don't think that it should.
Quote from: Locutus on March 28, 2015, 07:05:41 PM
I did and I didn't claim the law said that. I just asked a question.
Would it be right for a Christian police officer to use this law as a defense for refusal to police a mosque?
I take it from your answer that you don't think that it should.
No, a cop takes an oath and knows exactly what his job is when he\she signs up. This law does not open the doors for discrimination, it merely reinforces the federal law that Bill Clinton passed in 1993!
All I hope is all of the corporations who spend big money in this state and even the NCAA drops out of this state. And really stick it in the ass of Pense, the Republican party and the state of Indiana for such a stupid law. :mad: :mad: :mad: :rant: Also Henry, stick the law in your ass, bigot. :finger2:
Quote from: The Troll on March 28, 2015, 09:39:54 PM
All I hope is all of the corporations who spend big money in this state and even the NCAA drops out of this state. And really stick it in the ass of Pense, the Republican party and the state of Indiana for such a stupid law. :mad: :mad: :mad: :rant: Also Henry, stick the law in your ass, bigot. :finger2:
Just as I figured, you would rather see people hurt and the economy tank, in the name of politics! Typical liberal!
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 28, 2015, 06:44:23 PM
http://www.ewtnnews.com/catholic-news/US.php?id=11899
This link tells it like it is. I have never been as adament about an issue, since our liberal media has deliberately got this wrong!
If we lose any business it will have the blood of ignorant fucking liberal media who has lied through their fucking teeth, all in the name of politics!
Well let's just see:
". . .Until yesterday, 19 states and the federal government have these exact same laws on the books, and none of these terrible things that are being said might happen have happened," Fiedorek told EWTN News March 27.. . ."At a very high level, this is true, however the key difference is that those 19 states used the exact same verbiage as the federal law. . . So the article is based upon fallacy. . .
". . ."The Constitution of the United States and the Indiana Constitution both provide strong recognition of the freedom of religion, but today, many people of faith feel their religious liberty is under attack by government action," Pence said. . . ."Seriously? Their feelings that their religious liberty is under attack is based upon the fact that government has refused to post the 10 commandments and other religious, specifically Christian, displays within or upon governmental facilities. Instead of identifying the root cause of the zealots fears, and addressing them via educating them surrounding the constitutionally required separation of church and state, the creation of a law enabling religious based discrimination is done? :roll eyes:
The fact is this law nests quite nicely with Indiana's civil rights law, which outlines and specifies nondiscriminatory requirements surrounding race, religion, creed, etc., but fails to list "sexual orientation" among those aspects one cannot be discriminated due to. So the LGBT community is more than justified to be outraged over this recent legislation, which will almost certainly be used by the conservative religious zealots as a lever to discriminate against them legally.
Of the 19 states previously passing this type of legislation, all of them list "sexual orientation" as an aspect under their civil rights laws. Indiana does not.
Then there is this:
http://www.theindychannel.com/news/local-news/paperwork-filed-with-indiana-secretary-of-state-for-first-church-of-cannabis (http://www.theindychannel.com/news/local-news/paperwork-filed-with-indiana-secretary-of-state-for-first-church-of-cannabis)
So now, based upon this states religious restoration act legislation, we see a church of Cannabis applying for recognition. A church that specifically uses weed within it's ceremonies. An act that goes directly against the states laws on the substance. . .
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 28, 2015, 06:44:23 PM
If we lose any business it will have the blood of ignorant fucking liberal media who has lied through their fucking teeth, all in the name of politics!
The so-called liberal media wouldn't be talking about this if this stupid and unnecessary legislation hadn't been passed in the first place; now would they? And how did they lie, exactly?
Is Indiana's much different than this one?
http://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/jmd/legacy/2014/07/24/act-pl103-141.pdf
http://definitions.uslegal.com/r/religious-freedom-restoration-act%20/
Quote from: me on March 29, 2015, 06:52:13 PM
Is Indiana's much different than this one?
It is; google it.
Quote from: Exterminator on March 29, 2015, 09:07:49 PM
It is; google it.
I did. Read it.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/indianas-religious-freedom-restoration-act-explained_900641.html
https://iga.in.gov/legislative/2015/bills/senate/568#
Once again. Go to the bottom right, click on Bill version, then click on introduce senate bill (s). I posted this same thing a few pages back and you obviously didn't see it or ignored it.
The bottom line is that this type of legislation, regardless of whether it's in Indiana or elsewhere, is simply designed to aid and abet those who want to want to be able to discriminate, and to do it legally. It allows them to discriminate against whomever they choose, all while hiding behind a cloak of their religious beliefs. Nothing more; nothing less.
Quote from: Locutus on March 29, 2015, 10:32:42 PM
The bottom line is that this type of legislation, regardless of whether it's in Indiana or elsewhere, is simply designed to aid and abet those who want to want to be able to discriminate, and to do it legally. It allows them to discriminate against whomever they choose, all while hiding behind a cloak of their religious beliefs. Nothing more; nothing less.
Is that what Clinton's bill was too then? Where's the outrage about that one?
Quote from: Exterminator on March 29, 2015, 09:08:31 PM
Crickets!
With headlines that Indiana Hates Gays, that they are anti-gay, that this bill allows discrimination (it doesn't and you know it)....it goes on and on and on. It is just an attack on a bill that supports religious freedom. Nothing More Nothing Less. Yet, it is being attacked for MORE than it really is.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 30, 2015, 08:15:45 AM
With headlines that Indiana Hates Gays, that they are anti-gay, that this bill allows discrimination (it doesn't and you know it)....it goes on and on and on. It is just an attack on a bill that supports religious freedom. Nothing More Nothing Less. Yet, it is being attacked for MORE than it really is.
Well, that's absolute bullshit. You can claim all you want that this law isn't specifically intended to target the LGBT community but that's an outright lie. Let's use the words of Eric Miller, the Founder and Executive Director of Advance America, who lobbied for the bill and was with Pence at the private signing ceremony; shall we?
"Churches, Christian businesses and individuals deserve protection from those who support homosexual marriages and those who support government recognition and approval of gender identity (men who dress as women). SB 101 will help provide the protection!
Christian bakers, florists and photographers should not be punished for refusing to participate in a homosexual marriage!
A church should not be punished because they refuse to let the church be used for a homosexual wedding!"I am pretty sure that is the very definition of discrimination. One Democratic lawmaker even tried to insert an amendment into the bill that specifically stated that it could not be used to discriminate and that amendment was rejected by Republicans. Why would they do that if the intent was not to do just that? No, no lies are being told about this bill. Religious freedom is a long held tenet of our society and was not under attack. This law is nothing more than a license to discriminate under the guise of religious beliefs. Nothing more, nothing less.
Quote from: Exterminator on March 30, 2015, 10:01:25 AM
No, no lies are being told about this bill. Religious freedom is a long held tenet of our society and was not under attack. This law is nothing more than a license to discriminate under the guise of religious beliefs. Nothing more, nothing less.
Well, millions of folks disagree with you.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 30, 2015, 10:13:59 AM
Well, millions of folks disagree with you.
No, millions don't...maybe thousands of fat, bald, middle-aged rednecks do.
Quote from: Exterminator on March 30, 2015, 10:20:17 AM
No, millions don't...maybe thousands of fat, bald, middle-aged rednecks do.
Nope, Millions. Millions of everyday, hard-working, good people. If you think I'm wrong....then prove it.
I can say this. Exactly
1,264,877 Million of people voted for Mike Pence and several million voted for our state senators and congressmen, and they voted for this bill by a LARGE number.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 30, 2015, 11:09:48 AM
Nope, Millions. Millions of everyday, hard-working, good people. If you think I'm wrong....then prove it.
I can say this. Exactly 1,264,877 Million of people voted for Mike Pence and several million voted for our state senators and congressmen, and they voted for this bill by a LARGE number.
Many of those people have come out publicly against this legislation.
Quote from: Exterminator on March 30, 2015, 11:12:39 AM
Many of those people have come out publicly against this legislation.
A few. With your logic, I can say that some democrats support it. Fact is, millions of people are NOT against it. For the record, I never stated one way or the other if I was in favor of it being passed or not. I'm just pissed on how badly this was mis-characterized.
Two word; "sexual orientation" need only be added to the protected classes contained within civil rights law in this state, and all of this goes away. Instantly.
But Mikie says no way.
Wonder why?
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 30, 2015, 11:32:14 AM
I'm just pissed on how badly this was mis-characterized.
It is being exposed for exactly what it is and you know it.
Quote from: Palehorse on March 30, 2015, 12:39:20 PM
Two word; "sexual orientation" need only be added to the protected classes contained within civil rights law in this state, and all of this goes away. Instantly.
But Mikie says no way.
Wonder why?
No he didn't. He said if "the general assembly in Indiana sends me a bill that adds a section that reiterates and amplifies and clarifies what the law really is and what it has been for the last 20 years, than I'm open to that."
Quote from: Exterminator on March 30, 2015, 12:50:59 PM
It is being exposed for exactly what it is and you know it.
Wrong! It is being portrayed as discriminatory when it is NOT. It is only designed to protect Religious Liberty of people of faith. We have laws in place regarding discrimination. It is a political ploy by the left to demonize Christians. It is shameless rhetoric. PERIOD.
Again, I want to say, I'm still on the fence if they should have passed it, but not because it is discriminatory towards sexual orientation, because it is NOT. It allows the courts to protect those of faith.
It couldn't be more simple, yet it is WAY OVERBLOWN.
Quote from: Locutus on March 29, 2015, 10:32:42 PM
The bottom line is that this type of legislation, regardless of whether it's in Indiana or elsewhere, is simply designed to aid and abet those who want to want to be able to discriminate, and to do it legally. It allows them to discriminate against whomever they choose, all while hiding behind a cloak of their religious beliefs. Nothing more; nothing less.
And I ask again. Is that what Clinton's 1993 bill did? If so where was the outrage then?
QuoteQuote from: Exterminator on March 29, 2015, 09:07:49 PM
It is; google it.
Quote from: me on March 29, 2015, 10:28:54 PM
I did. Read it.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/indianas-religious-freedom-restoration-act-explained_900641.html
https://iga.in.gov/legislative/2015/bills/senate/568#
Once again. Go to the bottom right, click on Bill version, then click on introduce senate bill (s). I posted this same thing a few pages back and you obviously didn't see it or ignored it.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 30, 2015, 01:15:11 PM
Wrong! It is being portrayed as discriminatory when it is NOT. It is only designed to protect Religious Liberty of people of faith. We have laws in place regarding discrimination. It is a political ploy by the left to demonize Christians. It is shameless rhetoric. PERIOD.
Again, I want to say, I'm still on the fence if they should have passed it, but not because it is discriminatory towards sexual orientation, because it is NOT. It allows the courts to protect those of faith.
It couldn't be more simple, yet it is WAY OVERBLOWN.
Have you checked the resumes of some of the people who were present at Pence's private signing ceremony? If not, you certainly should. I would be interested in whether or not you still would make the claims that you're making here after you check that out. :wink:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 30, 2015, 01:15:11 PM
Wrong! It is being portrayed as discriminatory when it is NOT.
That is simply not true. They have come right out and said that it is designed to protect business owners from being forced to service gay marriages when it is against their religious convictions to do so? Again, how is that not discriminatory?
You can post your links 100 times, me, and it still won't change the fact that Indiana's law is fundamentally different from the federal law despite whether or not your lack of reading comprehension allows you to understand how.
Quote from: me on March 30, 2015, 01:21:12 PM
And I ask again. Is that what Clinton's 1993 bill did? If so where was the outrage then?
Here. (https://inadvancesheet.wordpress.com/2015/03/27/the-indiana-religious-freedom-restoration-act-an-analysis-of-its-controversy/) Read it.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 30, 2015, 01:08:25 PM
No he didn't. He said if "the general assembly in Indiana sends me a bill that adds a section that reiterates and amplifies and clarifies what the law really is and what it has been for the last 20 years, than I'm open to that."
Nope. I heard it straight from his own anti-Christ pie-hole myself on Sunday.
"That is not what the people of the state of Indiana want, so I am not going to do it."
Now , I am one of those people and so are several hundred of my friends; and NONE of us agree with the law and are in full support of adding those two little words to Indianas civil rights laws.
Time to get out the illustrations for those who don't want to research and understand on their own. This is EXACTLY what that bill was about. To claim otherwise is just disingenuous.
(https://scontent-atl.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/11082646_10153964673853840_7647854205244940729_n.png?oh=2306a05749fc1759d7eb392c073e53df&oe=55A18D5E)
Please, dont pull that crap knowing the type of people our POTUS associates himself with.
Quote from: me on March 30, 2015, 03:11:52 PM
Please, dont pull that crap knowing the type of people our POTUS associates himself with.
I'm not pulling any crap. Once again, when you don't like something that's pointed out to you as fact, you start deflecting.
That picture shows some of those who were there, and what they stand for. Their mere presence there flies flat in the face of everything you and HH are saying about that despicable piece of legislation. I can't help it if you don't like the facts, but the facts remain.
And in further developments:
(CNN)Indiana's top two state lawmakers pledged Monday to amend the state's controversial "religious freedom" law to clarify that it cannot be used to discriminate against gay people.
Republicans David Long and Brian Bosma, the state legislature's senate president pro tempore and house speaker, respectively, insisted Monday that the law would not and was not intended to allow discrimination against anyone.
"It is not the intent of the law to discriminate against anyone and it will not be allowed to discriminate against anyone," Long said. "To the extent that we need to clarify through legislative action that this law does not and will not be allowed to discriminate against anyone, we plan to do just that."
http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/30/politics/indiana-legislators-fix-religious-freedom-law/index.html
Sounds like the backlash is starting to have some effect on their thinking.
Wonder what the three boys in the picture will think of their law if language is inserted into it to protect the rights of gay people? Somehow, I don't think they'll like it so much. :biggrin:
Ya know, someone walks into a store they don't have to fill out questionairs about their beliefs and can purchase anything they want but if they're asking the owner to do something that is against their beliefs or that they're unconfortable with, like catering a wedding or doing floral arangements, that is a different thing altogether. If I were in the catering business and someone wanted me to cater a satanist get together I'd darn sure refuse. Same difference.
Quote from: Locutus on March 30, 2015, 03:06:36 PM
Time to get out the illustrations for those who don't want to research and understand on their own. This is EXACTLY what that bill was about. To claim otherwise is just disingenuous.
GLAAD is the epitome of hypocrisy.... it seems to me they are all about being intolerant, discriminating against Christians, they are full of hate. Everything YOU claim Christians are.
Those guys in the photo, all have a voice and their opinions, but remember one thing, they were ELECTED by THEIR CONSTITUENTS.
You guys are forcing me to take a stand on this.....by default. I feel as if I HAVE TOO....
You hate Christians...you made that quite clear. You hate anyone who has differing opinions than you do....For the life of me, it spells H Y P O C R I C Y....Take a look in the mirror before you attack. :yes:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 30, 2015, 04:20:00 PM
GLAAD is the epitome of hypocrisy.... it seems to me they are all about being intolerant, discriminating against Christians, they are full of hate. Everything YOU claim Christians are.
How exactly is GLADD intolerant toward Christians? A few examples would be nice. While you're at it, a few examples of how GLADD and/or its members can and have discriminated against Christians would be in order as well. Even if you can provide some examples of what you claim, it doesn't change the fact that those 3 men were there at the signing ceremony, and that their presence speaks volumes about the intent of this law.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 30, 2015, 04:20:00 PM
Those guys in the photo, all have a voice and their opinions, but remember one thing, they were ELECTED by THEIR CONSTITUENTS.
I wasn't aware those three were elected, but it doesn't really matter. They, and the people they represent, are very anti-gay; all of them. You and 'me' don't like the fact that they were there because it paints a crystal clear picture of the genesis of this law in Indiana. Do you really think those three would have been there if they didn't perceive this as a piece of anti-gay legislation? C'mon HH, even you aren't that dense. :rolleyes:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 30, 2015, 04:20:00 PM
You guys are forcing me to take a stand on this.....by default. I feel as if I HAVE TOO....
You hate Christians...you made that quite clear. You hate anyone who has differing opinions than you do....For the life of me, it spells H Y P O C R I C Y....Take a look in the mirror before you attack. :yes:
I don't hate Christians. I hate the ones (see above) who try to codify their biases and legislate their morality onto others. This legislation had gays in the crosshairs from the very get go. You and 'me' sitting here trying to deflect what it is all about fell flat on its face when the
picture shows who was there right behind Pence as he signed the bill.
Pictures don't lie. Case closed.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 30, 2015, 04:20:00 PM
GLAAD is the epitome of hypocrisy.... it seems to me they are all about being intolerant, discriminating against Christians, they are full of hate. Everything YOU claim Christians are.
Those guys in the photo, all have a voice and their opinions, but remember one thing, they were ELECTED by THEIR CONSTITUENTS.
You guys are forcing me to take a stand on this.....by default. I feel as if I HAVE TOO....
You hate Christians...you made that quite clear. You hate anyone who has differing opinions than you do....For the life of me, it spells H Y P O C R I C Y....Take a look in the mirror before you attack. :yes:
Don't trivialize an egregious violation of civil rights by ascribing validity to your opinions by expressing them as factual, and ironically by imposing them upon others.
(http://i475.photobucket.com/albums/rr111/hlovett_2008/religiousfreedom-read-638x478_zpsoxfdg5dg.png) (http://s475.photobucket.com/user/hlovett_2008/media/religiousfreedom-read-638x478_zpsoxfdg5dg.png.html)
The fact is Indiana's law is starkly different than every single one of the other state bills that have been passed, as well as the federal one.
Let's start with Section 9:
Under that section, a "person" (which under the law includes not only an individual but also any organization, partnership, LLC, corporation, company, firm, church, religious society, or other entity) whose "exercise of religion has been substantially burdened, or is likely to be substantially burdened" can use the law as "a claim or defense... regardless of whether the state or any other governmental entity is a party to the proceeding."
Every other Religious Freedom Restoration Act applies to disputes between a person or entity and a government. Indiana's is the only law that explicitly applies to disputes between private citizens.
Then there is Section 5:
Which provides protections to religious practices "whether or not compelled by, or central to, a system of religious belief." So entities can seek to justify discriminatory practices based on religious practices that are fringe to their belief system.
Beyond the differences between the Indiana law and other states, many of the other states that have a RFRA also have a law that prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation. Indiana does not have one.
Claiming Indiana's law is just like the other states is not only untrue, but it is nothing more than a huge lie! :yes:
And finally, the Mayor of Indianapolis is the latest voice to decry this heinous legislation, and is calling for the General Assembly to add the two words, "sexual orientation" to this states protected classes under its civil rights laws.
I have some additional questions HH.
Would you support these efforts of the legislators as indicated above in fixing the legislation so that it is clarified by saying that it specifically can't be used to discriminate against gay people?
Do you think the three men in the picture will support such efforts?
Do you think Mike Pence will sign it or veto it?
And now corporate Indiana is weighing in against this legislation:
INDIANAPOLIS -
The leaders of some of Indiana's largest businesses have voiced their opposition to the Religious Freedom Restoration Act in a letter to the state's Republican leadership.
The chief executive officers of nine companies, including Angie's List, Anthem, Cummins, Dow AgroSciences, Eli Lilly and Co., Emmis Communications, IU Health, Roche Diagnostics and Salesforce Marketing sent the letter to Governor Mike Pence, Senate Pro Tem David Long and House Speaker Brian Bosma.
The letter reads:
"Regardless of the original intention of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, we are deeply concerned about the impact it is having on our employees and on the reputation of our state. All of our companies seek to promote fair, diverse and inclusive workplaces. Our employees must not feel unwelcome in the place where they work and live.
"As we seek to attract and retain great talent from Indiana and around the world, it is critical that we make it clear that Indiana is the welcoming state we all believe it to be. As leaders in the Indiana business community, we call on you to take immediate action to ensure that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act will not sanction or encourage discrimination against any residents or visitors to our state by anyone.
"By immediately enacting new legislation that makes it clear that neither the Religious Freedom Restoration Act nor any other Indiana law can be used to justify discrimination based upon sexual orientation or gender identity, our state's elected leaders can provide the reassurance to the people of our state, our nation and the world that is needed at this critical moment."
http://www.wthr.com/story/28653210/indianas-corporate-leaders-call-for-action-on-rfra (http://www.wthr.com/story/28653210/indianas-corporate-leaders-call-for-action-on-rfra)
http://ftpcontent2.worldnow.com/wthr/pdf/RFRA_Letters.pdf (http://ftpcontent2.worldnow.com/wthr/pdf/RFRA_Letters.pdf)
Even the business leaders know what the intent is. :rolleyes:
Quote from: Palehorse on March 30, 2015, 05:02:00 PM
Don't trivialize an egregious violation of civil rights by ascribing validity to your opinions by expressing them as factual, and ironically by imposing them upon others.
(http://i475.photobucket.com/albums/rr111/hlovett_2008/religiousfreedom-read-638x478_zpsoxfdg5dg.png) (http://s475.photobucket.com/user/hlovett_2008/media/religiousfreedom-read-638x478_zpsoxfdg5dg.png.html)
The fact is Indiana's law is starkly different than every single one of the other state bills that have been passed, as well as the federal one.
Let's start with Section 9:
Under that section, a "person" (which under the law includes not only an individual but also any organization, partnership, LLC, corporation, company, firm, church, religious society, or other entity) whose "exercise of religion has been substantially burdened, or is likely to be substantially burdened" can use the law as "a claim or defense... regardless of whether the state or any other governmental entity is a party to the proceeding."
Every other Religious Freedom Restoration Act applies to disputes between a person or entity and a government. Indiana's is the only law that explicitly applies to disputes between private citizens.
Then there is Section 5:
Which provides protections to religious practices "whether or not compelled by, or central to, a system of religious belief." So entities can seek to justify discriminatory practices based on religious practices that are fringe to their belief system.
Beyond the differences between the Indiana law and other states, many of the other states that have a RFRA also have a law that prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation. Indiana does not have one.
Claiming Indiana's law is just like the other states is not only untrue, but it is nothing more than a huge lie! :yes:
And finally, the Mayor of Indianapolis is the latest voice to decry this heinous legislation, and is calling for the General Assembly to add the two words, "sexual orientation" to this states protected classes under its civil rights laws.
Quote from: Palehorse on March 30, 2015, 05:12:57 PM
And now corporate Indiana is weighing in against this legislation:
INDIANAPOLIS -
The leaders of some of Indiana's largest businesses have voiced their opposition to the Religious Freedom Restoration Act in a letter to the state's Republican leadership.
The chief executive officers of nine companies, including Angie's List, Anthem, Cummins, Dow AgroSciences, Eli Lilly and Co., Emmis Communications, IU Health, Roche Diagnostics and Salesforce Marketing sent the letter to Governor Mike Pence, Senate Pro Tem David Long and House Speaker Brian Bosma.
The letter reads:
"Regardless of the original intention of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, we are deeply concerned about the impact it is having on our employees and on the reputation of our state. All of our companies seek to promote fair, diverse and inclusive workplaces. Our employees must not feel unwelcome in the place where they work and live.
"As we seek to attract and retain great talent from Indiana and around the world, it is critical that we make it clear that Indiana is the welcoming state we all believe it to be. As leaders in the Indiana business community, we call on you to take immediate action to ensure that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act will not sanction or encourage discrimination against any residents or visitors to our state by anyone.
"By immediately enacting new legislation that makes it clear that neither the Religious Freedom Restoration Act nor any other Indiana law can be used to justify discrimination based upon sexual orientation or gender identity, our state's elected leaders can provide the reassurance to the people of our state, our nation and the world that is needed at this critical moment."
http://www.wthr.com/story/28653210/indianas-corporate-leaders-call-for-action-on-rfra (http://www.wthr.com/story/28653210/indianas-corporate-leaders-call-for-action-on-rfra)
http://ftpcontent2.worldnow.com/wthr/pdf/RFRA_Letters.pdf (http://ftpcontent2.worldnow.com/wthr/pdf/RFRA_Letters.pdf)
INDIANAPOLIS - An October conference has become the first to pull out of Indianapolis due to controversy over the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) announced Monday they are pulling their 2015 Women's Conference from the city in response to the legislation Governor Mike Pence signed into law last week. The conference was scheduled from October 9-11 at the JW Marriott.
"The 1.6 million members of AFSCME cannot in good conscience make such a sizable financial investment in Indiana knowing that women and men in that state are deliberately being targeted for discrimination," the organization said in a release.. . .
http://www.wthr.com/story/28651997/afscme-pulls-national-conference-out-of-indianapolis-over-rfra (http://www.wthr.com/story/28651997/afscme-pulls-national-conference-out-of-indianapolis-over-rfra)
So there you have it. When you call those of us who came out of the gate against this nefarious legislation "liars", and insinuate that the issue is "hyperbole", you do the same toward the Mayor of Indianapolis, and the Executive Leadership of almost every single Corporate entity with a presence in this state.
And every single one of us is saying the exact same thing; This law enables discriminatory practices against those leading an alternative lifestyle and is unjust, unfair, unconstitutional, and wrong as hell!
George Takei expresses things quite nicely Here:
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/george-takei-boycott-indiana?cid=sm_fb_msnbc (http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/george-takei-boycott-indiana?cid=sm_fb_msnbc)
. . .I myself am a Buddhist, not a Christian. But I cannot help but think that if Christ ran a public establishment, it would be open to all, and He would be the last to refuse service to anyone. It is, simply put, the most un-Christian of notions.
So let us be clear what this is really about: divisive politics. The far right has lost the war over marriage equality, and quickly. It now has staked out a new ground and shrouded itself ostensibly within the ambit of the First Amendment – for who can deny that we ought to give religious freedom its full and fair due? It seeks refuge in the recent, and regrettable, U.S. Supreme Court opinion in Hobby Lobby, which appeared to open the door for exceptions to "government regulation" in the name of protecting religious beliefs. . . .
. . .We live in a pluralistic and civil society, where our social contract demands we sometimes relinquish individual liberties in the name of a more just and open society. This means that while we are all entitled to our religious beliefs, the extent and impact of those beliefs, and what we may impose because of them, stops at the tips of our noses. This also means we must learn to respect and, yes, even love our neighbors, despite our differences. . .
. . .The doors of a school or a restaurant or a business, held open to the public, must be open to all. The days are over where some may be denied a seat at the table simply because of who they are – or in this case, whom they love. We cannot, and must not, march backward from where we have come. . .
Please give his piece a read, no matter what side of this issue you stand upon.
Mr. Takei is spot on. :yes:
Quote from: Locutus on March 30, 2015, 06:49:02 PM
Mr. Takei is spot on. :yes:
Indeed. And I am convinced that without his lending of his celebrity to the issue early on, it would not have gained the rapid elevation and attention it so desperately required in order to fix the problem. While it isn't done yet, it certainly has become a tsunami of "righteousness"
very rapidly.
Mr Takei reminds me of another "George" that also tended to use his celebrity to breathe life into causes that otherwise may have died a desperate death. Namely, George Harrison. . .
True human beings with just souls; both of them. With voices that are much more than a "cry in the wilderness".
Quote from: Locutus on March 30, 2015, 05:02:57 PM
I have some additional questions HH.
Would you support these efforts of the legislators as indicated above in fixing the legislation so that it is clarified by saying that it specifically can't be used to discriminate against gay people?
Do you think the three men in the picture will support such efforts?
Do you think Mike Pence will sign it or veto it?
^^ ... since you're hanging around with nothing to do. :biggrin:
Quote from: Locutus on March 30, 2015, 08:59:33 PM
^^ ... since you're hanging around with nothing to do. :biggrin:
I have baked a cake, grilled hamburgers, done some launch, and walked my dog....I have verbally responded, but too pooped to one finger a lengthy response on my tablet! I will respond tomorrow, if my work permits.😀
Okey dokey! ;D
Happy Birthday to your daughter BTW.
Quote from: Locutus on March 30, 2015, 09:13:38 PM
Happy Birthday to your daughter BTW.
Thanks locutus!😁
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 30, 2015, 04:20:00 PM
For the life of me, it misspells H Y P O C R I C Y....
Fixed this for you! LMAO! :biggrin:
Quote from: Palehorse on March 30, 2015, 06:33:15 PM
We live in a pluralistic and civil society, where our social contract demands we sometimes relinquish individual liberties in the name of a more just and open society.
This is something the right-wingers don't seem to be able to grasp on virtually any front. They fail to understand that living in a society requires give and take and that one individuals rights end where the next's begin. For them, it's all about me, me, me (and not the one who calls herself that on this forum although there is quite a bit of irony in her having chosen that screen name in this context).
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CBZFU8uVIAAlJjE.jpg:large)
Quote from: Palehorse on March 30, 2015, 06:33:15 PM
George Takei expresses things quite nicely Here:
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/george-takei-boycott-indiana?cid=sm_fb_msnbc (http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/george-takei-boycott-indiana?cid=sm_fb_msnbc)
. . .I myself am a Buddhist, not a Christian. But I cannot help but think that if Christ ran a public establishment, it would be open to all, and He would be the last to refuse service to anyone. It is, simply put, the most un-Christian of notions.
So let us be clear what this is really about: divisive politics. The far right has lost the war over marriage equality, and quickly. It now has staked out a new ground and shrouded itself ostensibly within the ambit of the First Amendment – for who can deny that we ought to give religious freedom its full and fair due? It seeks refuge in the recent, and regrettable, U.S. Supreme Court opinion in Hobby Lobby, which appeared to open the door for exceptions to "government regulation" in the name of protecting religious beliefs. . . .
. . .We live in a pluralistic and civil society, where our social contract demands we sometimes relinquish individual liberties in the name of a more just and open society. This means that while we are all entitled to our religious beliefs, the extent and impact of those beliefs, and what we may impose because of them, stops at the tips of our noses. This also means we must learn to respect and, yes, even love our neighbors, despite our differences. . .
. . .The doors of a school or a restaurant or a business, held open to the public, must be open to all. The days are over where some may be denied a seat at the table simply because of who they are – or in this case, whom they love. We cannot, and must not, march backward from where we have come. . .
Please give his piece a read, no matter what side of this issue you stand upon.
You know it's strange that this has gotten all blown out of proportion like it has. I noticed nothing in that bill that mentions businesses like restaurants, stores, or gay's specifically yet people have read that into it. Why should someone be forced to cater, photograph, or do a floral arrangment at an event they feel uncomfortable at? Why would someone even want to have a photographer, florist, or caterer who feels uncomfortable to work for them? A restauramt, clothing store, or any other business doesn't ask about your personal life or beliefs before they serve you so those types of businesses would not be affected but for some strange reason they have gotten included in this mess it seems. Would you feel that a gay florist, caterer, or photographer who didn't want to do business, with a straight person or an athiest who didn't want to do business with a christian was perfectly acceptable? This law could very well protect them too.
Quote from: Palehorse on March 30, 2015, 12:39:20 PM
Two word; "sexual orientation" need only be added to the protected classes contained within civil rights law in this state, and all of this goes away. Instantly.
But Mikie says no way.
Wonder why?
Okay, I am going to do something that I normally would never do on THIS forum. Admit, that YOU are right ON THIS POINT, to an EXTENT!
I just had a very long discussion with a VP of this company who is a very avid republican participant for the City of Indianapolis. He explained it to me, where I can understand some of the beef.
As he said, this bill is a good bill, BUT, it DOES need to have the "sexual orientation" clause to this new bill or we (Indiana) needs to add Gays and Lesbians as a protected group under the discrimination laws.
I also agree, that the way Pence shoved it through was too similar to what Obama and the democrats did with ObamaCare. It needed time to air. Shoving bills through is too much of a liberal thing..... such as.. Let's pass the bill, then see what is in it (or in this case, not in it).
Pence, IS indeed a Christian Conservative, who I believe he did not see this as a "shot" at the Gays, but fully believes it is there to protect religious views. Which I still support.
But, I am able to grasp the beef by the Gay community.
The bottom line is, The far right and the far left, are both extremely compassionate groups, who are tearing down this Nation.
I can say, I do get it. I DO understand why the Gays are ruffled....I don't agree 100% (or even maybe 50%) but I see their point.
This RFRA does good for groups such as Notre Dame, who is now protected from HAVING to carry abortions on their insurance. The Government can no longer say they HAVE to carry abortions. I think they as a religious group should have that right.
Without this law, the Gov could do make them cover it.
I still say this bill was blown out of the water for mostly political reasons, because I don't think the discrimination against gays would have held in court, but just as I feel strongly with religious protection, I see where THEY (Gays) want it also.
THERE! I said it. You MAY have been trying to tell me that....but I get it. :yes:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 31, 2015, 09:42:27 AM
I just had a very long discussion with a VP of this company who is a very avid republican participant for the City of Indianapolis. He explained it to me, where I can understand some of the beef.
As he said, this bill is a good bill, BUT, it DOES need to have the "sexual orientation" clause to this new bill or we (Indiana) needs to add Gays and Lesbians as a protected group under the discrimination laws.
Because every business that might move to Indianapolis or expand here will need their space either built or remodeled and your company is likely to get at least some of that work. Those companies going elsewhere potentially affect your bottom line.
QuoteI also agree, that the way Pence shoved it through was too similar to what Obama and the democrats did with ObamaCare. It needed time to air. Shoving bills through is too much of a liberal thing..... such as.. Let's pass the bill, then see what is in it (or in this case, not in it).
Because a bill that provides health insurance for millions of people who previously had no access to the health care system is the same as discriminating against gays; right?
QuotePence, IS indeed a Christian Conservative, who I believe he did not see this as a "shot" at the Gays, but fully believes it is there to protect religious views.
Bullshit. Pence is, was and always will be a religious ideologue who absolutely understood that this bill took aim directly at the LGBT community.
QuoteBut, I am able to grasp the beef by the Gay community.
I'm sure the gay community will appreciate your grasping their beef. :biggrin:
Quote from: Exterminator on March 31, 2015, 10:11:19 AM
I'm sure the gay community will appreciate your grasping their beef. :biggrin:
Maybe I should re-word that one.... :no: (
Not that there is anything wrong with that...in my Jerry Seinfield voice)
:biggrin:
Quote from: Exterminator on March 31, 2015, 10:11:19 AM
Because a bill that provides health insurance for millions of people who previously had no access to the health care system is the same as discriminating against gays; right?
No, because shoving a bill through without giving it time for ALL to look at to see what ramifications that are in the bill, who all it impacts and what pork may be in it....is the right thing to do. PERIOD. No matter whose bill it is.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 31, 2015, 10:58:41 AM
No, because shoving a bill through without giving it time for ALL to look at to see what ramifications that are in the bill, who all it impacts and what pork may be in it....is the right thing to do. PERIOD. No matter whose bill it is.
If you think they've bothered to read it even now, you're delusional.
Quote from: Exterminator on March 31, 2015, 11:14:37 AM
If you think they've bothered to read it even now, you're delusional.
Who is "They"?
Pence just had a press conference, he wants clarification added to this bill by the end of the week.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 31, 2015, 11:17:38 AM
Who is "They"?
Pence just had a press conference, he wants clarification added to this bill by the end of the week.
Wonder if the three anti-gay boys from the last signing will be there for this one. :no:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 31, 2015, 11:17:38 AM
Who is "They"?
The people you think should have had the opportunity to scrutinize the ACA. It's been out there for years now; have they read it?
Quote from: Exterminator on March 31, 2015, 11:43:31 AM
The people you think should have had the opportunity to scrutinize the ACA. It's been out there for years now; have they read it?
Yes. They didn't have any chance before it passed. Even Pelosi, didn't know what all was in it. I thought Obama was going to be all about transparency?
Okay, let's stop. I don't want to high jack this thread about one we have already beat on.
I thought the THEY was referring to this bill.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 31, 2015, 11:48:01 AM
Okay, let's stop. I don't want to high jack this thread about one we have already beat on.
Yes, you should continue to beat on the gays' beef. :biggrin:
:spooked:
;D
Quote from: Exterminator on March 31, 2015, 12:02:30 PM
Yes, you should continue to beat on the gays' beef. :biggrin:
Somehow, this took a turn in the discussion that I am now ready to deal with. As open minded as I am trying to be, I'm pretty certain, that i will not be beating any gay beef.....(Not that there is anything wro.....ahh, never mind)
"In conclusion, each signatory to this letter recognizesthe important place that rights to
religious liberty hold in the set of rights we regard as fundamental in the U.S. legal system. Yet,
rather than advancing reasonable concerns about religious freedom, the proposed Religious
Freedom Restoration Act is more a solution in search of a problem, or worse, if passed will
create confusion, conflict, and a wave of litigation that will threaten the clarity of religious
liberty rights in Indiana while undermining the state's ability to enforce other compelling interests."
Pence and the Indiana Legislature were warned by 30 expert law professors! (http://web.law.columbia.edu/sites/default/files/microsites/gender-sexuality/law_professors_letter_on_indiana_rfra.pdf)
C'mon Ex, you should know that people with a far right agenda never let sound advice get in the way of implementing a bad idea. ;D
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 30, 2015, 11:09:48 AM
Nope, Millions. Millions of everyday, hardworking, good people. If you think I'm wrong....then prove it.
I can say this. Exactly 1,264,877 Million of people voted for Mike Pence and several million voted for our state senators and congressmen, and they voted for this bill by a LARGE number.
Just because the Homophobes voted for it and Dingle Berry Pense doesn't make it right or moral. :rant: Hawk you know it is wrong, get right with your god. :pray: :pope:
Hey Troll, why don't you go to a Muslim caterer and have them cater a dinner with ham for the main course then go to a Muslim photographer and hire him for a gay get together where everyone is wearing shirts you purchased from a Muslim and had him put naked women on them Oh, and don't forget to get a copy of the Bible from the Muslim book store. :wink:
Quote from: me on March 31, 2015, 10:45:40 PM
Hey Troll, why don't you go to a Muslim caterer and have them cater a dinner with ham for the main course then go to a Muslim photographer and hire him for a gay get together where everyone is wearing shirts you purchased from a Muslim and had him put naked women on them Oh, and don't forget to get a copy of the Bible from the Muslim book store. :wink:
I doubt you will find many Muslim caterers, photographers, shirt vendors or book store owners in Indianapolis. To find those things, you will most likely have to go to a Muslim country and, according to the laws in that country, you are correct that he will be unable to find those things. Are you suggesting that a Christian version of Sharia law is right for Indiana because it sure sounds that way.
And by the way, I'm pretty sure no one has ever been able to buy a book on satanism in any Christian book store.
So now I see both New York and Connecticut have banned state-sponsored travel to Indiana.
Quote from: Exterminator on April 01, 2015, 07:38:54 AM
I doubt you will find many Muslim caterers, photographers, shirt vendors or book store owners in Indianapolis. To find those things, you will most likely have to go to a Muslim country and, according to the laws in that country, you are correct that he will be unable to find those things. Are you suggesting that a Christian version of Sharia law is right for Indiana because it sure sounds that way.
And by the way, I'm pretty sure no one has ever been able to buy a book on satanism in any Christian book store.
Get a grip Ex, I was being sarcastic.
Quote from: me on April 01, 2015, 08:37:57 AM
Get a grip Ex, I was being sarcastic.
So was I.
Quote from: Bo D on April 01, 2015, 08:25:54 AM
So now I see both New York and Connecticut have banned state-sponsored travel to Indiana.
And UCONN coaches will be boycotting the NCAA finals in Indianapolis!
Is this what you people really want?
In a nutshell, this all about the 2016 election, Liberal demagoguery, and being Anti-Christian......It is an opportunity by the left to exploit something for political gain.
No mater WHAT Pence proposes from this point on, Indiana is screwed. I will say it is the republicans fault for not anticipating this. I think PH was right or at least we need to add LGBT as a protected class. I'm not sure what amendment will be on the Govs desk this Friday, but it won't mean a hill of beans. Indiana is the victim...
This could have been and should have been handled differently. But, this has indeed been magnified and misled for political advantage. THAT is a FACT.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 01, 2015, 10:38:56 AM
Indiana is the victim...
That's like blaming Othello's downfall on Desdemona. :rolleyes:
And no - I will NOT try to explain that to you ....
Quote from: Bo D on April 01, 2015, 11:07:42 AM
And no - I will NOT try to explain that to you ....
I'm not asking you too.....
Will Arkansas shoot theirselves in the foot also? We should know here shortly.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 01, 2015, 11:16:33 AM
I'm not asking you too.....
Who else did you ask? :biggrin:
Quote from: Locutus on April 01, 2015, 11:18:54 AM
Will Arkansas shoot theirselves in the foot also? We should know here shortly.
Walmart is already on it ....
Walmart CEO Doug McMillon is asking Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson to veto a bill that "threatens to undermine the spirit of inclusion."
"Every day, in our stores, we see firsthand the benefits diversity and inclusion have on our associates, customers and communities we serve," McMillon said in a statement on Tuesday night. "It all starts with our core basic belief of respect for the individual."
"[Tuesday's] passage of HB1228 threatens to undermine the spirit of inclusion present throughout the state of Arkansas and does not reflect the values we proudly uphold. For these reasons, we are asking Governor Hutchinson to veto this legislation," McMillon wrote.
Quote from: Locutus on April 01, 2015, 11:18:54 AM
Will Arkansas shoot theirselves in the foot also? We should know here shortly.
Doesn't really matter; no one wants to go to Arkansas anyway. :razz:
Sad but true. (http://www.indystar.com/story/opinion/columnists/matthew-tully/2015/04/01/tully-mike-pence-league-governor/70746540/) If Pence had been a CEO who had brought this kind of bad publicity to the corporation he was running, the board of directors would have already asked for his resignation.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 01, 2015, 10:38:56 AM
In a nutshell, this all about the 2016 election, Liberal demagoguery, and being Anti-Christian......It is an opportunity by the left to exploit something for political gain.
But, this has indeed been magnified and misled for political advantage. THAT is a FACT.
No, this is right-wing douchebaggery coming back to bite them in the ass. I love how you all preach personal responsibility but aren't men enough to admit it when your own actions blown up in your faces.
Asa Hutchinson will NOT sign the bill in its present form.
Jan Brewer says no.
Asa Hutchinson says no.
Mike Pence says......
:biggrin:
Quote from: Exterminator on April 01, 2015, 11:34:18 AM
Doesn't really matter; no one wants to go to Arkansas anyway. :razz:
True! ;D
Quote from: Bo D on April 01, 2015, 11:06:08 AM
That's like blaming Othello's downfall on Desdemona. :rolleyes:
That's an excellent comment that was completely wasted on it's intended recipient.
Quote from: Exterminator on April 01, 2015, 11:42:09 AM
No, this is right-wing douchebaggery coming back to bite them in the ass. I love how you all preach personal responsibility but aren't men enough to admit it when your own actions blown up in your faces.
I have already admitted it was wrong. Go back and read. But, it is indeed all about the 2016 election, Liberal demagoguery, and being Anti-Christian. THAT is a FACT.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 01, 2015, 12:03:49 PM
I have already admitted it was wrong. Go back and read. But, it is indeed all about the 2016 election, Liberal demagoguery, and being Anti-Christian. THAT is a FACT.
No, it isn't.
"Let heaven and men and devils, let them all,
All, all, cry shame against me, yet I'll speak."
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 01, 2015, 12:03:49 PM
I have already admitted it was wrong. Go back and read. But, it is indeed all about the 2016 election, Liberal demagoguery, and being Anti-Christian. THAT is a FACT.
How is it all about the 2016 election, outside of possibly Pence's personal aspirations?
Quote from: Bo D on April 01, 2015, 12:09:32 PM
"Let heaven and men and devils, let them all,
All, all, cry shame against me, yet I'll speak."
:big grin:
Quote from: Bo D on April 01, 2015, 12:09:32 PM
"Let heaven and men and devils, let them all,
All, all, cry shame against me, yet I'll speak."
You left off the part, right before that where it says:
Twill out, 'twill out.—I peace?
No, I will speak as "a" liberal as the north.
Now it makes sense...
:razz:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 01, 2015, 01:16:50 PM
You left off the part, right before that where it says:
Twill out, 'twill out.—I peace?
No, I will speak as "a" liberal as the north.
Now it makes sense... :razz:
:rolleyes:
And you put in an extra "a" which totally distorts the meaning.
"No, I will speak as liberal as the north." i.e. as "
freely" as the north (although in some transcripts it is "I will speak as liberal as the air."
Quote from: Bo D on April 01, 2015, 01:26:59 PM
:rolleyes:
And you put in an extra "a" which totally distorts the meaning.
"No, I will speak as liberal as the north." i.e. as "freely" as the north (although in some transcripts it is "I will speak as liberal as the air."
Bo! I was just making a joke....
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 01, 2015, 01:32:24 PM
Bo! I was just making a joke....
Sorry ... I thought you were just being your usual ignorant self. :biggrin: (Is that a joke too?)
But this legislation is no joking matter.
Quote from: Bo D on April 01, 2015, 01:37:29 PM
Sorry ... I thought you were just being your usual ignorant self. :biggrin: (Is that a joke too?)
But this legislation is no joking matter.
No it is a fiasco...equally brought on by the Liberals playing politics. I'm sick to death of Bullshit politics. Pence blew it, I get it....but the demagoguery by radical liberals is f'ing our state way more than it needs to be.
The repubs are meeting with LGBT folks to try to get this right......
btw, I am not impressed you are able to quote Shakespear...but I'm not surprised either.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 01, 2015, 01:48:36 PM
btw, I am not impressed you are able to quote Shakespear...but I'm not surprised either.
I wasn't trying to impress. It was just germane to the subject at hand.
Quote from: Exterminator on April 01, 2015, 11:57:52 AM
That's an excellent comment that was completely wasted on it's intended recipient.
Thank you. I try - but it's like :wall:
Quote from: Bo D on April 01, 2015, 01:57:40 PM
I wasn't trying to impress. It was just germane to the subject at hand.
bullshit
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 01, 2015, 02:07:58 PM
bullshit
Great comeback! Now get your seventh grade teacher to explain the quote to you and compare it to the situation in Indiana.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 01, 2015, 01:48:36 PM
No it is a fiasco...equally brought on by the Liberals playing politics.
Bullshit. Liberals and conservatives alike are rallying against this blatant attempt at legalizing discrimination.
Quote from: Exterminator on April 01, 2015, 02:18:06 PM
Bullshit. Liberals and conservatives alike are rallying against this blatant attempt at legalizing discrimination.
Believe it or not, Bo, I get it. Just think using an obscure quote from Shakespeare on THIS forum....makes me think you are just trying impress someone. Maybe not! I should have just kept quite about it, and moved on.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 01, 2015, 03:34:33 PM
Believe it or not, Bo, I get it. Just think using an obscure quote from Shakespeare on THIS forum....makes me think you are just trying impress someone. Maybe not! I should have just kept quite about it, and moved on.
Who in the hell would I try to impress on here? :haha:
Yeah ... let's move on.
Quote from: Bo D on April 01, 2015, 03:37:06 PM
Who in the hell would I try to impress on here? :haha:
THAT IS MY POINT! :haha:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 01, 2015, 03:43:27 PM
THAT IS MY POINT! :haha:
Let's face it Henry, your the joke here on the Zone. :haha: :haha:
This will teach ya' to be a bigot and go public with it. :rotfl: They didn't have their own website before they flapped their trap about not serving gays, but now they do. Someone was nice enough to set one up for them.
http://memoriespizza.com
They feature a 48" Dick-Za packed with hearty meat. (only $6.66) ;D
(http://i.imgur.com/rh4Vz03.jpg)
The back story to the above:
After the owner of an Indiana pizza parlor said he wouldn't deliver to a gay wedding, a deluge of harassment forced him to temporarily close, TMZ is reporting.
Indiana's new religious freedom law allows business to refuse service for religious reasons. Memories Pizza, owned by Crystal and Kevin O'Connor, was reportedly the first business to do so.
Apparently, the family's Christian beliefs would prevent them from catering a same-sex wedding.
"If a gay couple came in and wanted us to provide them pizzas for a wedding, we would have to say no," Crystal told an Indiana news station, as Talking Points Memo reported.
Immediately after making these comments, the pizza joint started receiving threatening phone calls and social media comments, Kevin told TMZ, which forced him to temporarily shut down.
Kevin says he doesn't mind if gay people eat at his restaurant — but he doesn't believe in gay marriage so he can't have people attending one eating his pies.
Last week, Indiana Gov. Mike Pence (R) ignited controversy around the country when he signed the Religious Freedom Retaliation Act, which intends to protect his state's religious residents from behaving against their beliefs, into law.
http://www.businessinsider.com/report-the-indiana-pizza-joint-that-vowed-to-never-deliver-a-pizza-to-a-gay-wedding-forced-to-close-2015-4
Well, it appears that the fundies flooded hosting provider of the above website with complaints about the Dick-Za. Between the time I posted the above, and the time of this post, the website has been revised to a simple blurb about discrimination. But at least you got to see what it looked like before it was taken down. :rotfl:
Quote from: Locutus on April 01, 2015, 10:53:51 PM
Memories Pizza, owned by Crystal and Kevin O'Connor...
And...she's a fat redneck with jacked-up teeth...shocking!
Quote from: Locutus on April 01, 2015, 10:53:51 PM
The back story to the above:
After the owner of an Indiana pizza parlor said he wouldn't deliver to a gay wedding, a deluge of harassment forced him to temporarily close, TMZ is reporting.
Indiana's new religious freedom law allows business to refuse service for religious reasons. Memories Pizza, owned by Crystal and Kevin O'Connor, was reportedly the first business to do so.
Apparently, the family's Christian beliefs would prevent them from catering a same-sex wedding.
"If a gay couple came in and wanted us to provide them pizzas for a wedding, we would have to say no," Crystal told an Indiana news station, as Talking Points Memo reported.
Immediately after making these comments, the pizza joint started receiving threatening phone calls and social media comments, Kevin told TMZ, which forced him to temporarily shut down.
Kevin says he doesn't mind if gay people eat at his restaurant — but he doesn't believe in gay marriage so he can't have people attending one eating his pies.
Last week, Indiana Gov. Mike Pence (R) ignited controversy around the country when he signed the Religious Freedom Retaliation Act, which intends to protect his state's religious residents from behaving against their beliefs, into law.
http://www.businessinsider.com/report-the-indiana-pizza-joint-that-vowed-to-never-deliver-a-pizza-to-a-gay-wedding-forced-to-close-2015-4 (http://www.businessinsider.com/report-the-indiana-pizza-joint-that-vowed-to-never-deliver-a-pizza-to-a-gay-wedding-forced-to-close-2015-4)
Okay, here is the OTHER side of the story....
The Huffington Post headline screams:Indiana's Memories Pizza Reportedly Becomes First
Business To Reject Catering Gay Weddings
Memories Pizza is a nine-year-old shop in downtown Walkerton, Indiana, just a few blocks from John Glenn High School. It's owned by an openly-Christian couple, the O'Connors, who decorate their shop with mementos of their faith in Christ. So how does a small business in a small town wind up making headlines around the world as the new avatar of Christian bigotry?
Perhaps, you say, they brought this upon themselves, seeking out publicity for their strict biblical views.
Eh...no.
Some cursory internet forensics shows how it happened...or rather, how it was made to happen.
ABC-57 reporter Alyssa Marino's editor sends her on a half-hour drive southwest of their South Bend studio, to the small town of Walkerton (Pop. ~2,300). According to Alyssa's own account on Twitter, she "just walked into their shop [Memories Pizza] and asked how they feel" about Indiana's new Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
Owner Crystal O'Connor says she's in favor of it, noting that while anyone can eat in her family restaurant, if the business were asked to cater a gay wedding, they would not do it. It conflicts with their biblical beliefs. Alyssa's tweet mentions that the O'Connors have "never been asked to cater a same-sex wedding."
What we have here is — as we called in journalism school jargon — "no story." Nothing happened. Nothing was about to happen.
If I were forced to mark out a story line, it would be this: A nice lady in a small town tries to be helpful and polite to a lovely young reporter from "the big city."
In other words, Memories Pizza didn't blast out a news release. They didn't contact the media, nor make a stink on Twitter or Facebook. They didn't even post a sign in the window rejecting gay-wedding catering jobs. They merely answered questions from a novice reporter who strolled into their restaurant one day – who was sent on a mission by an irresponsible news organization.
Next: ABC-57 anchor Brian Dorman leads the evening newscast dramatically with this:
>
Only on ABC-57 News tonight. We went into small towns looking for reaction to the Religious Freedom Act. We found one business, just 20 miles away from a welcoming South Bend...with a very different view.
Notice that his city of South Bend is "welcoming," but that small-town business is not. It's very different. That's why ABC-57 "went into small towns," as if embarking on a safari to aboriginal lands.
Not only did ABC-57 News create that story (http://www.abc57.com/story/28681598/rfra-first-business-to-publicly-deny-same-sex-service#.VRveGWReCEw.twitter) ex nihilo (out of nothing), but the next day, the station's Rosie Woods reported on the social-media backlash (http://www.abc57.com/story/28691460/social-media-reaction-to-memories-pizza) against the Christian pizza shop owners.
"Our Facebook page has been blowing up with comments after we aired that story last night," said Woods.
At this point, even my old Leftist journalism professors would be grinding their teeth and rending their garments.
You see, not only did ABC-57 manufacture the story with an ambush interview, it then doubled-down by making the reaction to the story into another story to give the sense of momentum, as if it were growing at its own impetus. Yet, everything about it is a fabrication.
Memories Pizza didn't "publicly vow to reject gay weddings" as HuffPo says it. The O'Connors were just, quite literally, minding their own business.
Back in the ABC-57 studio, Rosie Woods read three negative social media comments attacking the pizza shop owners, and then said, "And that's just one side of this debate that's heating up as more people and business owners speak up about the law."
She then quotes one (1) person, the owner of another business, who agreed with the O'Connors. Seems that "just one side of this debate" deserves more attention than the other.
The unnamed ABC-57 editor then sends another reporter door-to-door on Walkerton's rather depressed-looking main drag, trying to get reactions from other business people about the pizza shop owners. And the story inexorably snowballs onward, with only man's yearning for truth to propel it.
All of the blog traffic and social media activity led to about 36,000 Facebook shares at ABC57.com on the original Alyssa Marino story less than 24 hours after it aired.
BuzzFeed (http://www.buzzfeed.com/maryanngeorgantopoulos/indiana-pizzeria-owners-say-theyd-deny-lgbt-people-service-a#.lfn7wjd94N)posted its own inaccurate headline, with the kicker: "The Internet has unleashed its wrath."
All of those eyeballs benefit the TV station, which sells advertising on its website. It also helps several young, minor-market reporters who hustled and stumbled their way into the national spotlight. But don't blame them. Blame the editor.
Meanwhile, over at Yelp.com, more than a thousand "reviews" of Memories Pizza rapidly accumulated, quickly overwhelming the positive comments from actual customers who like the pizza, the hospitality and the small-town charm. Folks who never heard of Walkerton attacked Crystal O'Connor's business, her morality and her Lord. Many of the remarks included racially charged descriptions of genitalia and sex acts. "Reviewers" also posted pictures of naked men, of Adolf Hitler shouting "Ich habe ein pizza" (I have a pizza), and of Jesus gesturing with his middle finger. Over on Facebook, the restaurant's 5-star average rating rapidly plunged to one star, as non-customers slammed away at Crystal's little business.
n Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals, a manifesto of political power, Rule No. 12 says, in part:
>
Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)The Left doesn't care who gets hurt, so long as they get what they want. They're willing — no, they're eager — to sacrifice a small-town business, and it's owners.
Lest you think I'm being too dramatic. Late Wednesday, word comes that Jess Dooley, a female coach at Concord High School 45 minutes away in Elkhart, has been suspended after tweeting (http://www.elkharttruth.com/news/schools/2015/04/01/Concord-High-School-coach-suspended-over-Tweet-about-arson.html):
Who's going to Walkerton, IN to burn down #memoriespizza w me?
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2015/04/01/story-about-1st-business-to-publicly-vow-to-reject-gay-weddings-was-fabricated-out-of-nothing/#ixzz3WA1gMwX9 (http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2015/04/01/story-about-1st-business-to-publicly-vow-to-reject-gay-weddings-was-fabricated-out-of-nothing/#ixzz3WA1gMwX9)
Right wing tripe. :rolleyes:
Quote from: Exterminator on April 02, 2015, 10:13:19 AM
Right wing tripe. :rolleyes:
Whatever, that is always your response. It is a true story. It's just one that doesn't feed into your liberal hyperbole avalanche.
I wouldn't feel too sorry for the pizza place and its backward owners HH. One of Glen Beck's Blaze TV hosts set up a Go Fund Me for the Beck bots to donate to them. And donate they did. As of right now, it's up to $121,543.00. The idiots are donating hundreds of dollars every few seconds.
http://www.gofundme.com/memoriespizza
I guess that just goes to show that there's no such thing as bad publicity. :rolleyes:
Quote from: Locutus on April 02, 2015, 11:26:19 AM
I wouldn't feel too sorry for the pizza place and its backward owners HH. One of Glen Beck's Blaze TV hosts set up a Go Fund Me for the Beck bots to donate to them. And donate they did. As of right now, it's up to $121,543.00. The idiots are donating hundreds of dollars every few seconds.
http://www.gofundme.com/memoriespizza (http://www.gofundme.com/memoriespizza)
This whole thing is getting out of control....I still say our media is the main culprit. Look at what they did in Ferguson! "Hands up..Don't Shoot". The media had a blitz there and stirred the shit.
Come to find out, the cop is not guilty of EVERYTHING the media claimed. Now, folks in Ferguson have a town half burnt and destroyed.
Everybody on Twitter and Facebook, has an opinion, and it is heard around the world now.
People on Yelp, attack this Pizza Place because of the Media. Is this right?
$134,869.00
Crystal O'Conner is now directing people to that Go Fund Me page herself. :rolleyes: She has some $$ signs in her eyes. She's made more money in less than 24 hours than that pizza joint probably makes in 3 or 4 years thanks to the Beck bots.
Quote from: Locutus on April 02, 2015, 12:14:14 PM
$134,869.00
Crystal O'Conner is now directing people to that Go Fund Me page herself. :rolleyes: She has some $$ signs in her eyes. She's made more money in less than 24 hours than that pizza joint probably makes in 3 or 4 years thanks to the Beck bots.
Why does this bother you? Does it effect you any? This is donations by people who want to show their support. I can care less. I am glad they are not going to suffer because of some stupid assed media reporter started all of this, in the first place....
btw...it is now up to....$138,804
It doesn't affect me, nor does it bother me. I just like to point out stupidity when I see it.
1. It was stupid for her to flap her trap to that reporter to begin with, especially after seeing the backlash against the law that was going on across the state.
2. It's stupid for people all across the country to trash their Yelp and Facebook pages.
3. It's stupid for the Beck bots to deliver this backward thinking family a lottery for their bigotry and stupidity.
Give me a few more minutes and I can probably think of something else stupid about the whole thing. ;D It's a tempest in a teapot as far as I'm concerned.
$139,824.00
Quote from: Locutus on April 02, 2015, 12:32:45 PM
It doesn't affect me, nor does it bother me. I just like to point out stupidity when I see it.
1. It was stupid for her to flap her trap to that reporter to begin with, especially after seeing the backlash against the law that was going on across the state.
2. It's stupid for people all across the country to trash their Yelp and Facebook pages.
3. It's stupid for the Beck bots to deliver this backward thinking family a lottery for their bigotry and stupidity.
Give me a few more minutes and I can probably think of something else stupid about the whole thing. ;D It's a tempest in a teapot as far as I'm concerned.
$139,824.00
$140,064...stupid is as stupid does.... :biggrin:
Grassroots! People are making a statement through this pizza joint....
$142,029 :razz:
Quote from: Locutus on April 02, 2015, 12:32:45 PM
1. It was stupid for her to flap her trap to that reporter to begin with, especially after seeing the backlash against the law that was going on across the state.
So, people shouldn't have an opinion? People of faith should just shut up?
eh, I understand, you should be accountable for your actions...and their are consequences to your actions. I think it is funny, she is making a wad on this.
$143,199
$145,039 ;D
whoops, change that to:
$147,024 of $150k Raised by 5,151 people in 19 hours
What's the over/under on the size of the lottery the Beck bots give them? I say they get around $250k.
Quote from: Locutus on April 02, 2015, 12:49:01 PM
What's the over/under on the size of the lottery the Beck bots give them? I say they get around $250k.
At this rate, they could hit that by 5:00 this evening.
I have people in my office talking about it. One guy is donating as we speak. I haven't said a word yet, just listening to them in the break room. They are not Beck folks either. Just hearing about it on the news. WIBC, is already mentioning it.
$150,108 of $150k Raised by 5,254 people in 19 hours
at 1:01
$153,260 of $150k Raised by 5,394 people in 19 hours
at 1:03
$155,553 of $150k Raised by 5,486 people in 19 hours
at 1:07
$158,108 of $175k Raised by 5,570 people in 19 hours
at 1;10
$160,423 of $175k Raised by 5,659 people in 19 hours
Stupid, stupid, stupid. :yes:
Quote from: Locutus on April 02, 2015, 01:04:54 PM
Stupid, stupid, stupid. :yes:
I love it! I think THIS is the REAL VOICE in America!
People from all over the Country are giving $10, 25, 50....and leaving comments, praising God.
$163,421 of $175k
Raised by 5,767 people in 19 hours
Hell Locutus, they may hit $250,00 by 2:00 at this rate.
Nothing stupid about it at all. This is Americans speaking loud and clear.
at 1:22
$167,579 of $175k Raised by 5,917 people in 19 hours
at 1:32
$175,089 of $175k Raised by 6,170 people in 19 hours
Thought of another one:
4. It's stupid for Crystal O'Conner to have thought that a gay couple would want her to cater their wedding with pizza.
I know several gay people, and any self-respecting gay person would never have pizza at their wedding. They're far more classy than that.
Quote from: Locutus on April 02, 2015, 01:27:15 PM
I know several gay people, and any self-respecting gay person would never have pizza at their wedding. They're far more classy than that.
Yeah, you have a point there!
$176,711 of $175k
Raised by 6,224 people in 19 hours
at 1:41
$180,660 of $175k Raised by 6,346 people in 19 hours
I gotta get back to work!! This is amazng!
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 02, 2015, 12:27:30 PM
Why does this bother you? Does it effect you any? This is donations by people who want to show their support. I can care less. I am glad they are not going to suffer because of some stupid assed media reporter started all of this, in the first place....
btw...it is now up to....$138,804
Since you defended them here, did you put your money where your mouth is and donate or are you just flapping your gums?
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 02, 2015, 12:41:25 PM
People of faith should just shut up?
Not just shut up...shut the fuck up.
Quote from: Exterminator on April 02, 2015, 01:51:53 PM
Since you defended them here, did you put your money where your mouth is and donate or are you just flapping your gums?
Nope, I'm just sitting back and watching the money roll in for the good folks!!!
$188,841 of $175k
Raised by 6,635 people in 20 hours
Quote from: Exterminator on April 02, 2015, 01:52:40 PM
Not just shut up...shut the fuck up.
Well their not shutting the fuck up....they are some shouting m'fuckers!
$190,000 of $175k
Raised by 6,690 people in 20 hours
I need to start believing in ole' Jeezus, say some stupid bigoted crap about gay people in the name of my religion, claim persecution as a result of my comments, and set up my own Go Fund Me. :roll eyes:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 02, 2015, 01:16:01 PM
I love it! I think THIS is the REAL VOICE in America!
Unfortunately, you are correct. A couple of weeks ago a good friend of mine had a 6 year old Friesian stallion with colic that needed emergency surgery that the vet would not perform unless she could first prove her ability to pay up to $10,000.00 for its care. She isn't poor but couldn't come up with that much money on such short notice so she set up a Go Fund Me page and even offered to pay back every contribution. She was barely able to raise $1,000.00 to save a life yet these idiots are up to a couple of hundred grand for
nothing just because Glen Beck told people they should give them money.
And you hypocrites want to call liberals sheep?
The only solace I take in this story is that rednecks who suddenly get financial windfalls typically handle them poorly and these parasites will probably be dead within a couple of months. And good fucking riddance!
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 02, 2015, 01:57:36 PM
Nope, I'm just sitting back and watching the money roll in for the good folks!!!
Because that's who you are. You never actually do anything; you just run your mouth.
I wonder if that's taxable income to them. I can't imagine why it wouldn't be.
Quote from: Locutus on April 02, 2015, 02:18:12 PM
I wonder if that's taxable income to them. I can't imagine why it wouldn't be.
Yes, but they won't understand that when they go on their spending spree. I hope the media continues to follow them so I can laugh my ass off when they crash and burn.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 02, 2015, 12:46:41 PM
$145,039 ;D
whoops, change that to:
$147,024 of $150k Raised by 5,151 people in 19 hours
This is a direct measure of discriminatory backers in this nation. I am surprised you do not see this. I wonder how much the tea billies have donated?
$203,120.00
:roll eyes:
Quote from: Palehorse on April 02, 2015, 02:36:19 PM
This is a direct measure of discriminatory backers in this nation. I am surprised you do not see this. I wonder how much the tea billies have donated?
You sound very hateful....
Go a read the comments left by these folks.
All kinds of people. Christian and some who aren't but who are tired of the MEDIA, who are doing EXACTLY what I have been claiming since this all happened...and that is the liberal hyperbole!
I am not wrong on this. Just because a few of you on this liberal forum think that way, I'm here to tell you there are thousands out there, who are not Zealots, not tea billies...but hard working people. I know I work with a bunch of them. They are damn good folks, who get it.
THIS is a reflection of those hard working good people.....
$205,495 of $200k
Raised by 7,228 people in 21 hours
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 02, 2015, 02:53:18 PM
All kinds of people. Christian and some who aren't but who are tired of the MEDIA, who are doing EXACTLY what I have been claiming since this all happened...and that is the liberal hyperbole!
Bullshit; they're a bunch of fucking bigots who started a storm and then want to cry when they get rained on.
QuoteI am not wrong on this. Just because a few of you on this liberal forum think that way, I'm here to tell you there are thousands out there, who are not Zealots, not tea billies...but hard working people. I know I work with a bunch of them. They are damn good folks, who get it.
They are low life scum bags who are rewarding intolerance and you are cheering them on even while you claim not to be a bigot yourself. :rolleyes:
Quote from: Exterminator on April 02, 2015, 03:01:24 PM
They are low life scum bags who are rewarding intolerance and you are cheering them on even while you claim not to be a bigot yourself. :rolleyes:
Whatever mother fucker!!! ;D
$209,752 of $200k
Raised by 7,323 people in 21 hours ;D
3:11
$211,327 of $200k Raised by 7,394 people in 21 hours
Quote from: Locutus on April 02, 2015, 02:06:19 PM
I need to start believing in ole' Jeezus, say some stupid bigoted crap about gay people in the name of my religion, claim persecution as a result of my comments, and set up my own Go Fund Me. :rolleyes:
As normal, you (or your counterparts, are reading from unreliable media)
Glenn Beck didn't start this...
Here is how this went down:
When asked by local press the hypothetical question of whether or not they'd prefer to have their family owned business, Memories Pizza, cater a gay wedding, the owner said no citing their own religious beliefs as the reason.
Rather than allowing this family to simply have their opinion, which they were asked to give, outraged people grabbed the torches and began a campaign to destroy this small business in small town Indiana.
All for having an opinion that is rooted in faith.
No one was turned away. No one was discriminated against. It was a hypothetical question asked by a news reporter who had questionable motives to begin with.
After being interviewed by Dana Loesch on her television show on Blaze TV, we learned that the family may never even reopen the doors to their restaurant as the death threats and vicious online reviews continue to pour in from the arbiters of "tolerance."
My name is Lawrence Jones, and I'm one of the television opinion contributors on Dana's show.
Before the televised interview, producers Rachel, Allison and George discussed the situation with Dana, myself and head writer Ben Howe. We all agreed: this family needs help to get through this assault.
So we set up a GoFundMe page with the modest goal of $25,000. The intent was to help the family stave off the burdensome cost of having the media parked out front, activists tearing them down, and no customers coming in.
Our goal was simply to help take one thing off this family's plate as the strangers sought to destroy them.
But other strangers came to the rescue and the total just keeps going up.
Thank you for helping us do some good for this family who were scared and in hiding just 24 hours before this writing.
All money, save whatever percentage GoFundMe takes, will be transferred directly to whichever bank account the O'Connors wish to use.
Show producers are in direct contact with the family to ensure that they never feel like they are being left out of what is going on.
Thank you to everyone for your generosity.
http://www.gofundme.com/MemoriesPizza (http://www.gofundme.com/MemoriesPizza)
$212,806 of $200k Raised by 7,471 people in 21 hours
Quote from: Locutus on April 02, 2015, 11:26:19 AM
I wouldn't feel too sorry for the pizza place and its backward owners HH. One of Glen Beck's Blaze TV hosts set up a Go Fund Me for the Beck bots to donate to them. And donate they did. As of right now, it's up to $121,543.00. The idiots are donating hundreds of dollars every few seconds.
http://www.gofundme.com/memoriespizza
^^ You must have missed that part right there. :wink:
The Go Fund Me was announced on her show on Beck's Blaze network.
Quote from: Locutus on April 02, 2015, 03:20:36 PM
^^ You must have missed that part right there. :wink:
The Go Fund Me was announced on her show on Beck's Blaze network.
Dana has her own TV program, On Becks network, she also has a syndicated radio show. It was also talked about on WIBC, FM Indy radio here, I heard that Limbaugh is talking about it on his show.
$215,103 of $200k Raised by 7,579 people in 21 hours
Quote from: Locutus on April 02, 2015, 03:20:36 PM
^^ You must have missed that part right there. :wink:
The Go Fund Me was announced on her show on Beck's Blaze network.
He's not real big on reading comprehension. :rolleyes:
Quote from: Exterminator on April 02, 2015, 03:43:50 PM
He's not real big on reading comprehension. :rolleyes:
No, it is you who seems to have the comprehension problem. It was announced on his network, yes, but not by him so he did not start the campaign like ya'll are trying to say.
This is also a result of unfair reporting done by the lame stream media by trying to make something out of nothing for sensationalism. So they don't believe in same sex marriage, so what, they still serve gays in their restaurant so they aren't discriminating, they also didn't say they wouldn't cater a gay wedding they said they would prefer not to they did not say they wouldn't. They were tricked to put it bluntly and should have been asked if they
would cater a gay wedding if asked. The answer would have most likely been they would even though they preferred not to. We'll never know for sure now though because they have been ruined for the sake of a sensational story and people like you just fan the flames.
QuoteWhen asked by local press the hypothetical question of whether or not they'd prefer to have their family owned business, Memories Pizza, cater a gay wedding, the owner said no citing their own religious beliefs as the reason.
Rather than allowing this family to simply have their opinion, which they were asked to give, outraged people grabbed the torches and began a campaign to destroy this small business in small town Indiana.
Quote from: Locutus on April 02, 2015, 11:26:19 AM
I wouldn't feel too sorry for the pizza place and its backward owners HH. One of Glen Beck's Blaze TV hosts set up a Go Fund Me for the Beck bots to donate to them. And donate they did. As of right now, it's up to $121,543.00. The idiots are donating hundreds of dollars every few seconds.
http://www.gofundme.com/memoriespizza
^^ You also must have missed that part right there. :roll eyes:
Quote from: Exterminator on April 02, 2015, 03:01:24 PM
They are low life scum bags who are rewarding intolerance and you are cheering them on even while you claim not to be a bigot yourself. :rolleyes:
Prove it asswipe! Just because somebody has a different opinion than YOU, you call them bigots. WHO in the hell is being intolerant now!!!! This lowlife scumbag, has their OWN business. That was doing quite well, until, they voiced an opinion....they you hateful motherfuckers, went to yelp and threatened them and anybody that goes to it. Talk about some low life scum bags!!
You are the epitome of low life scum bags!!
There, that felt SOOOOO f'ing good!!! :yes:
Quote from: Locutus on April 02, 2015, 04:10:23 PM
^^ You also must have missed that part right there. :roll eyes:
big, deal, who gives a flip WHERE is started? It is National now, and good people are giving generously. To prove a point! I think this is fantastic, in the light of the hateful MFing liberals...who are preaching tolerance.....it is funny as hell.
Quote from: Locutus on April 02, 2015, 04:10:23 PM
^^ You also must have missed that part right there. :roll eyes:
No, I did not miss that part. These people are the victims of unfair media reporting and people are getting tired of seeing the victims made out like the bad guys. They could lose everything just because some ass wipe wanted to make a name for himself.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 02, 2015, 12:54:36 PM
At this rate, they could hit that by 5:00 this evening.
$241,650 of $200k
Raised by 8,596 people in 23 hours
Quote from: me on April 02, 2015, 04:49:43 PM
No, I did not miss that part. These people are the victims of unfair media reporting and people are getting tired of seeing the victims made out like the bad guys.
No; they're victims of their own stupidity (see my stupidity posts earlier in this thread). She should have known exactly what that reporter was about when they walked in there, especially considering the backlash against the law that was going on at the time. She didn't do that, though, and the wrath of social media was rained down upon them.
Quote from: me on April 02, 2015, 04:49:43 PM
They could lose everything just because some ass wipe wanted to make a name for himself.
They're not going to lose a damn thing because other idiots and like minded bigots have now given them over a quarter of a million dollars. :rolleyes: It would take their little pizza shop in butt-fuck Indiana 10 years to make that kind of money.
They're not hurting at all.
Quote from: Locutus on April 02, 2015, 05:33:45 PM
No; they're victims of their own stupidity (see my stupidity posts earlier in this thread). She should have known exactly what that reporter was about when they walked in there, especially considering the backlash against the law that was going on at the time. She didn't do that, though, and the wrath of social media was rained down upon them.
They're not going to lose a damn thing because other idiots and like minded bigots have now given them over a quarter of a million dollars. :rolleyes: It would take their little pizza shop in butt-fuck Indiana 10 years to make that kind of money.
They're not hurting at all.
:rolleyes:
Quote from: Locutus on April 02, 2015, 05:33:45 PM
No; they're victims of their own stupidity (see my stupidity posts earlier in this thread). She should have known exactly what that reporter was about when they walked in there, especially considering the backlash against the law that was going on at the time. She didn't do that, though, and the wrath of social media was rained down upon them.
They're not going to lose a damn thing because other idiots and like minded bigots have now given them over a quarter of a million dollars. :rolleyes: It would take their little pizza shop in butt-fuck Indiana 10 years to make that kind of money.
They're not hurting at all.
That isn't the point, she was asked a hypothetical question, and she gave her opinion what she may do............the bigoted liberal pricks began threatening her, trashed her business all because she answered a hypothetical question.....
Only because of the hard working, kind hearted Americans decided enough was enough, they bestowed this lady with amazing blessings!
Don't preach to me about bigotry until you take a long hard look into a mirror!
271k plus at this time.
They could not have SOLD their business for that. . . So at this point in time the bigots are out of business and they can write off the loss against the capital gain this nefarious account provides them. At a huge profit I am sure.
Moreover, the general public is now less one bigoted business to deal with, and the courts are not going to have to hear the discrimination litigation their former business would have eventually generated.
It is very discouraging to see that bigotry is so well supported in this nation. (No surprise there though, as the last decade has clearly demonstrated).
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 02, 2015, 07:25:52 PM
That isn't the point, she was asked a hypothetical question, and she gave her opinion what she may do............the bigoted liberal pricks began threatening her, trashed her business all because she answered a hypothetical question.....
A hypothetical question that she should have known better than to answer given the ongoing backlash that was occurring statewide at the time. I don't think her opponents should have trashed her business, though, and if you think I do, refer back to stupidity post #2 from earlier today. All I'm saying is that in this age of social media, and with the ongoing backlash, she should have known exactly what that reporter was up to the minute they walked through the front door. I sure would have, but then I'm probably more savvy than she is.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 02, 2015, 07:25:52 PM
Only because of the hard working, kind hearted Americans decided enough was enough, they bestowed this lady with amazing blessings!
Don't preach to me about bigotry until you take a long hard look into a mirror!
You're suggesting that I'm a bigot when I point out obvious bigotry in others? Let me tell you something again Hank, and I've said this before on this very thread. The LGBT community was/is the target of this legislation in Indiana and other states whether you and 'me' want to admit it or not.
Every time you have bills that have the words "freedom" or "women's health" in their titles, you can bet your bottom dollar they're about to attempt to infringe on someone's rights and/or discriminate.
So hating someone for stating an opinion is OK? That is the definition of a bigot! Maybe some of you should get a dictionary out and read it, and look up hypocrite while you are at it.
Also, I have never seen this much hatred towards someone who hasn't actually done anything wrong. She just answerd a HYPOTHETICAL question!
Now people have a real reason to be ashamed of Hoosiers, if wasn't for the fact that several wonderful Hoosiers showed her love and kindness by opening up there pocketbooks and leaving sweet messages.
That restores a warmth in my heart that only my God has been able to accomplish!
Here's another interesting little tidbit about this whole thing. This is from the Go Fund Me website:
QuotePurpose: To relieve the financial loss endured by the proprietors' stand for faith.
The purpose is to relieve financial loss. How much financial loss do you really suspect that pizza joint would have suffered as a result of this?
Quote from: Locutus on April 02, 2015, 07:47:32 PM
Here's another interesting little tidbit about this whole thing. This is from the Go Fund Me website:
The purpose is to relieve financial loss. How much financial loss do you really suspect that pizza joint would have suffered as a result of this?
Why does this bother you! It hasn't cost you a penny. This is what God loving people do when a brother or sister is in a need. Her cup runnith over.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 02, 2015, 07:57:05 PM
Why does this bother you! It hasn't cost you a penny. This is what God loving people do when a brother or sister is in a need. Her cup runnith over.
It's not bothering me other than it's bigots supporting other bigots. I guess they're all "God loving" up to and until we start talking about gay people. :rolleyes:
How much financial loss do you really think that pizza place would have suffered had not a penny been raised?
Here's a hint. Not much. :no:
Quote from: Locutus on April 02, 2015, 07:59:20 PM
It's not bothering me other than it's bigots supporting other bigots. I guess they're all "God loving" up to and until we start talking about gay people. :rolleyes:
How much financial loss do you really think that pizza place would have suffered had not a penny been raised?
Here's a hint. Not much. :no:
It is not about just keeping her pizza joint open, it is about supporting someone for standing up for her convictions. Even though liberals aren't tolerant of other people who think differently than they do. That locutus is a bigot! Look it up! You sir, are a bigot by definition. But I will not call you one because I think I know you well enough to know that you are a good man!
Think about it, there were Christians slaughtered today in Kenya, I don't see a lot of compassion by any media....but people are ready to burn down a pizza joint in Indiana because someone gave an opinion that the wouldn't want to cater a gay weeding with their pizza. She even said that gays are welcome to come in and eat she just said it would make her uncomfortable to attend and cater a gay wedding. She hasn't dine nothing wrong but voiced her opinion yet you call me a bigot!
Wow! What a messed up time this is!
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 02, 2015, 08:14:12 PM
It is not about just keeping her pizza joint open, it is about supporting someone for standing up for her convictions. Even though liberals aren't tolerant of other people who think differently than they do. That locutus is a bigot! Look it up! You sir, are a bigot by definition. But I will not call you one because I think I know you well enough to know that you are a good man!
So where does the discriminatory line get drawn Hank? How can we have a society where certain businesses don't allow gay people; others don't allow those stupid filthy nig*ers; others don't allow atheists; others don't allow Muslims; others may not allow Christians? Would you really want to live in a society where wanton discrimination is allowed and condoned?
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 02, 2015, 08:14:12 PM
Think about it, there were Christians slaughtered today in Kenya, I don't see a lot of compassion by any media....but people are ready to burn down a pizza joint in Indiana because someone gave an opinion that the wouldn't want to cater a gay weeding with their pizza. She even said that gays are welcome to come in and eat she just said it would make her uncomfortable to attend and cater a gay wedding. She hasn't dine nothing wrong but voiced her opinion yet you call me a bigot!
Wow! What a messed up time this is!
And she has every right to voice that opinion. It's just amazing that in this day and age, with the lightning fast speed of social media, that idiots like her still spew their opinion, and then seem shocked when there are consequences.
The only thing a business owner really should be concerned about, if operating a business and serving the public, is the color of the money of their customers. That's it; that's all.
As Y said the other day, when you open your business to serve the public, certain laws against discrimination begin to apply. If you don't feel comfortable serving all members of the public who may want to buy your product or service, you really shouldn't be in business to begin with.
But our Constitution says Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...are you saying that if you are a Christian you must give up your exercise of faith if you want to own your own business????
Cmon locutus, we are not saying we can not serve whoever we want, we just want that right to not participate at an event where it goes against our faith. There are laws in place that say you cannot discriminate, but a person of faith should be prohibited the free exercise of their faith, because plain and simple our forefathers made that our very first rule to live by as an American!
Not that it has been a big problem, but a person can be sued for not wanting to cater a gay wedding.....I'm tired of that example, but it works. A civil court costs money, enough to harm a small or medium sized business. That is wrong and there millions of Americans of faith who WANT that religious freedom. That does not make them bigots. If they refused to allow gays to come in there shop, THAT is wrong and no christian of good faith would ever do that....not that there aren't some fd up Christians out there just as there are some fd up liberals out there who atr indeed bigots! The bigotry is exploding right now by those who want to burn down a woman's pizzeria because they are intolerant of her opinion.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 02, 2015, 09:01:17 PM
But our Constitution says Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...are you saying that if you are a Christian you must give up your exercise of faith if you want to own your own business????
Yes; we've had this conversation. Corporations are not people. When you open your business to serve the public, anti-discrimination laws kick in. Government regulates commerce all the time.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 02, 2015, 09:01:17 PM
Cmon locutus, we are not saying we can not serve whoever we want, we just want that right to not participate at an event where it goes against our faith. There are laws in place that say you cannot discriminate, but a person of faith should be prohibited the free exercise of their faith, because plain and simple our forefathers made that our very first rule to live by as an American!
What if your faith says you don't serve atheists, or nig*ers, or any other group of people for that matter? Should that be protected as a free expression of religion, or not allowed because of what it really is?
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 02, 2015, 09:01:17 PM
Not that it has been a big problem, but a person can be sued for not wanting to cater a gay wedding.....I'm tired of that example, but it works. A civil court costs money, enough to harm a small or medium sized business. That is wrong and there millions of Americans of faith who WANT that religious freedom. That does not make them bigots. If they refused to allow gays to come in there shop, THAT is wrong and no christian of good faith would ever do that....not that there aren't some fd up Christians out there just as there are some fd up liberals out there who atr indeed bigots! The bigotry is exploding right now by those who want to burn down a woman's pizzeria because they are intolerant of her opinion.
You said one thing right here. It hasn't been a big problem, ergo, these kinds of laws are really solutions looking for problems that largely don't exist. However they absolutely are targeting the LGBT community.
Again, if you're going into business to serve the public, you're under an obligation to serve all of the public who is willing to pay for the products and services you provide. If you're an individual who has a talent playing the piano, and a gay couple asks you to play the piano at their wedding, it's perfectly within your rights to deny them based on your religious beliefs. The same is not true when you open up your business to the public.
And we can go on and on about this and I am wore out doing the one finger input on my tablet!!!
I am tapping out tonight! But have a rebuttal in store for tomorrow!
😊
BTW, it is now $366,000 with over 12,000 donators!
On the eve of Good Friday, I am proud to profess my faith in Christ!
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 02, 2015, 09:20:23 PM
. . .
On the eve of Good Friday, I am proud to profess my faith in Christ!
A man who according to the Bible and theologians, spent his time in the company of the outcasts of society in his time. A man that welcomed those that society deemed a scourge. A man that it is highly likely, would have sided with those that deemed this law as discriminatory and oppressive , and acted in a similar manner.
Even the almighty corporations, which the SCOTUS granted constitutional rights guaranteed to individuals, (Which you yourself so vehemently supported), came out solidly on the side of the LGBT community which this legislation so blatantly targeted.
So I ask; who is the hypocrite in this?
Good words PH!
(https://scontent-lga.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpf1/v/t1.0-9/11080975_909446692410802_1831631213536673085_n.jpg?oh=9a38d45fddfd71a4b5d975fc8e16228f&oe=55A6BC4A)
BTW, I'll give you three guesses who's going to get the credit for this financial windfall that these people have now encountered, but the first two don't count.
I'll even give you a hint on this one too. It isn't going to be Dana Loesch.
Any guesses? ;D
Quote from: Palehorse on April 02, 2015, 09:50:54 PM
A man who according to the Bible and theologians, spent his time in the company of the outcasts of society in his time. A man that welcomed those that society deemed a scourge. A man that it is highly likely, would have sided with those that deemed this law as discriminatory and oppressive , and acted in a similar manner.
Even the almighty corporations, which the SCOTUS granted constitutional rights guaranteed to individuals, (Which you yourself so vehemently supported), came out solidly on the side of the LGBT community which this legislation so blatantly targeted.
So I ask; who is the hypocrite in this?
But he STILL declared that a sin is a sin. Jesus did NOT encourage gays to marry or prostitutes to continue their ways. He spoke out strongly against immoral sex.....1 Corinthians 6:9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men[a]
or
Jude 5 Now I want to remind you, although you once fully knew it, that Jesus, who saved a people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe. 6 And the angels who did not stay within their own position of authority, but left their proper dwelling, he has kept in eternal chains under gloomy darkness until the judgment of the great day— 7 just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.
I'm no preacher, but I can win all day long pointing out where Jesus was strongly against sexual immorality. Yes, he hung out with them, he LOVED them as he loved EVERYONE. He wanted them to change, and live by the word.
With that being said....Why would you call me a hypocrite?
I do NOTHING to bring harm to gays. I have NO hatred towards them. I have worked with them, ate with them and have friends that are gay. Why do you just assume that if you are a Christian, you hate Gays. I merely believe that their lifestyle is wrong. I also believe that if you cheat on your wife, it is JUST as wrong.
I am to the point though, Gay marriage is such a non-issue to me personally. I think this country has MUCH bigger problems. But, I firmly believe our Government should not condemn or punish anyone who does not want to partake their business in something that goes against their RELIGIOUS beliefs, as long as it does not bring any physical harm to them.
I want to make it perfectly clear, I do not HATE the LGBT community...I strongly disagree with them, but have zero hate. That comes from the flat middle of my heart.
BTW...
$500,221 of $200k Raised by 16,956 people in 1 day
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 02, 2015, 04:13:53 PM
Prove it asswipe! Just because somebody has a different opinion than YOU, you call them bigots. WHO in the hell is being intolerant now!!!! This lowlife scumbag, has their OWN business. That was doing quite well, until, they voiced an opinion....they you hateful motherfuckers, went to yelp and threatened them and anybody that goes to it. Talk about some low life scum bags!!
You are the epitome of low life scum bags!!
There, that felt SOOOOO f'ing good!!! :yes:
Doesn't surprise me in the least that one low-life scum bag would so vehemently defend another. :rolleyes:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 03, 2015, 07:49:39 AM
Jesus did NOT encourage gays to marry or prostitutes to continue their ways. He spoke out strongly against immoral sex.....1 Corinthians 6:9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men[a]
Jesus didn't say that. Do you know who wrote it?
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 03, 2015, 07:49:39 AM
Jude 5 Now I want to remind you, although you once fully knew it, that Jesus, who saved a people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe. 6 And the angels who did not stay within their own position of authority, but left their proper dwelling, he has kept in eternal chains under gloomy darkness until the judgment of the great day— 7 just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.
Of course, Jesus didn't say that either.
Quote from: Bo D on April 03, 2015, 09:54:42 AM
Jesus didn't say that. Do you know who wrote it?
Yes
Quote from: Bo D on April 03, 2015, 09:54:42 AM
Of course, Jesus didn't say that either.
But, the apostles, who were taught by Christ himself, clearly understood exactly what the message was/is.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 03, 2015, 10:11:16 AM
But, the apostles, who were taught by Christ himself, clearly understood exactly what the message was/is.
Hatred and intolerance?
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 03, 2015, 10:11:16 AM
YesBut, the apostles, who were taught by Christ himself, clearly understood exactly what the message was/is.
Not the point. You wrote "Jesus did NOT encourage gays to marry or prostitutes to continue their ways. He spoke out strongly against immoral sex.....1 Corinthians 6:9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men"
Since we're quoting the Bible .....
Acts 10:28 And he said to them, "You yourselves know how unlawful it is for a Jew to associate with or to visit anyone of another nation, but God has shown me that I should not call any person common or unclean."
Romans 14:2-6 One person has faith that he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats vegetables only. The one who eats is not to regard with contempt the one who does not eat, and the one who does not eat is not to judge the one who eats, for God has accepted him. Who are you to judge the servant of another? To his own master he stands or falls; and he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand.
John 8:7 - ...He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone ...
Quote from: Bo D on April 03, 2015, 10:33:54 AM
Since we're quoting the Bible .....
Acts 10:28 And he said to them, "You yourselves know how unlawful it is for a Jew to associate with or to visit anyone of another nation, but God has shown me that I should not call any person common or unclean."
Romans 14:2-6 One person has faith that he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats vegetables only. The one who eats is not to regard with contempt the one who does not eat, and the one who does not eat is not to judge the one who eats, for God has accepted him. Who are you to judge the servant of another? To his own master he stands or falls; and he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand.
John 8:7 - ...He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone ...
I agree with you. What is your point? Just because a Christian may not WANT to participate in a Gay wedding does not mean he saying he is without sin.
I have one for ya!
1 Timothy 1:9-10 ESV
Understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine,
I totally get this and agree with it as do most Christians that I know...
Jesus also told the woman who was caught in adultery to "Go and sin no more." IT was wrong, He knew it and called her out on it...... He warned people that not only the act of adultery was wrong, but even THINKING about adultery was wrong......He shamed the woman at the well by pointing out to her that he knew she was living with a man who was not her husband....It was wrong and He pointed it out, he didn't condone it. Yet, he loves everyone and we all have a path he wants us to go down.
Again, I don't care what Paul wrote. I only care about quotes directly attributable to Jesus. I kind of like the Jefferson Bible.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 03, 2015, 07:49:39 AM
. . .
I do NOTHING to bring harm to gays. I have NO hatred towards them. I have worked with them, ate with them and have friends that are gay. Why do you just assume that if you are a Christian, you hate Gays. I merely believe that their lifestyle is wrong. I also believe that if you cheat on your wife, it is JUST as wrong.
I am to the point though, Gay marriage is such a non-issue to me personally. I think this country has MUCH bigger problems. But, I firmly believe our Government should not condemn or punish anyone who does not want to partake their business in something that goes against their RELIGIOUS beliefs, as long as it does not bring any physical harm to them.
I want to make it perfectly clear, I do not HATE the LGBT community...I strongly disagree with them, but have zero hate. That comes from the flat middle of my heart.
And yet you feel free to judge them, and support laws that would harm them.
Matthew 7:1 - 1 "Judge not, that you be not judged."
Luke 6:37 - "Judge not, and you shall not be judged. Condemn not, and you shall not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven."
Romans 14:13 - "Therefore let us not judge one another anymore, but rather resolve this, not to put a stumbling block or a cause to fall in our brother's way."
Quote from: Palehorse on April 03, 2015, 11:03:53 AM
And yet you feel free to judge them, and support laws that would harm them.
Matthew 7:1 - 1 "Judge not, that you be not judged."
Luke 6:37 - "Judge not, and you shall not be judged. Condemn not, and you shall not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven."
Romans 14:13 - "Therefore let us not judge one another anymore, but rather resolve this, not to put a stumbling block or a cause to fall in our brother's way."
How is it going to harm them if a Christian doesn't want to cater their wedding? Show me an example where a gay is going to be harmed by this law.
You can quote Bible verses all day long, but the bottom line boils down to this.
It is just as wrong, from a civic and legal perspective, to deny selling a wedding cake to a gay couple as it was to deny people of color the right to sit at the same breakfast counter. Religious beliefs, if they are bigoted and oppressive, cannot be "legalized" in a country which values human dignity and in which universal human rights are the cornerstone of the whole system of justice.
Exclusion of LGBT persons, on the basis of one's religious belief, is another example of religion being used for bigotry and exclusion in a country which promotes equality and inclusion. Our laws should not permit that. Inside the church walls, or inside the walls of your own home, you can say whatever you want to about your beliefs about another person's lifestyle, orientation and/or sinfulness and damnation. But you cannot force them, in the legal community and in society, to drink from a different water fountain, or to go to a different bakery.
It really is just that simple if you think about it.
Quote from: Locutus on April 03, 2015, 11:11:25 AM
It really is just that simple if you think about it.
Yes. It really is!!! The problem lies with the last five words there.
Quote from: Locutus on April 03, 2015, 11:11:25 AM
It really is just that simple if you think about it.
It is OBVIOUS that it is not that simple. Good people on both sides of the fence are torn over this. It is bigotry to say if a Christian wants to be a businessman he/she MUST give up their principals and values. THAT is clearly a violation of our Constitution......it
prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion
It really IS that simple, in the minds of millions across this land.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 03, 2015, 11:23:28 AM
It is OBVIOUS that it is not that simple. Good people on both sides of the fence are torn over this. It is bigotry to say if a Christian wants to be a businessman he/she MUST give up their principals and values. THAT is clearly a violation of our Constitution......it prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion
It really IS that simple, in the minds of millions across this land.
Where do you draw the line Henry? Can I claim my religious freedom allows me to turn away service to black people? Even you can't be so dense that you don't see that what you're a proponent of is
the exact same thing.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 03, 2015, 10:47:23 AM
I agree with you. What is your point? Just because a Christian may not WANT to participate in a Gay wedding does not mean he saying he is without sin.
I have one for ya!
1 Timothy 1:9-10 ESV
Understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine,
I totally get this and agree with it as do most Christians that I know...
Jesus also told the woman who was caught in adultery to "Go and sin no more." IT was wrong, He knew it and called her out on it...... He warned people that not only the act of adultery was wrong, but even THINKING about adultery was wrong......He shamed the woman at the well by pointing out to her that he knew she was living with a man who was not her husband....It was wrong and He pointed it out, he didn't condone it. Yet, he loves everyone and we all have a path he wants us to go down.
1 Timothy :
. . .
5 Now the end of the commandment is
charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned:6 From which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling;
7 Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.
8
But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully;9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;
11 According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.
12 And I thank Christ Jesus our Lord, who hath enabled me,
for that he counted me faithful, putting me into the ministry;
13 Who was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious: but I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief.14 And the grace of our Lord was exceeding abundant with faith and love which is in Christ Jesus.
15 This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief. . . .
Once we expand upon your quotation we get a firmer grasp on its true message and intention.
The irony is that you are using the words of a former "blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious" individual that was shown mercy by the Christ, to validate the persecution of others.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 03, 2015, 11:07:17 AM
How is it going to harm them if a Christian doesn't want to cater their wedding? Show me an example where a gay is going to be harmed by this law.
It isn't the single act, which poses but a moment of discomfort, but rather the precedent that single act represents and the ramifications of same.
- How long before a tailor says I cannot mend your clothing?
- How long before a physician says I cannot heal you?
How long before a landlord says I cannot rent to you? And how long before one man says to you, "I cannot do business with you because you have blue eyes"?
Jesus represented tolerance and acceptance, and humankind has been killing in his name for centuries.
Jesus said that prostitution was a sin, and yet he readily forgave those that practiced it. And it would appear based upon recent archeological discoveries, that he married one.
Quote from: Bo D on April 03, 2015, 11:14:47 AM
Yes. It really is!!! The problem lies with the last five words there.
Maybe that's where I'm going wrong. ;D
I have asked a lawyer that represents this company about this, he says in order for a religious person can keep from being sued, he must PROVE that it IS a violation of his religious beliefs. There needs to be doctrine stating the belief, and show that he is practicing said religion. It still is not a simple person claiming a belief and expect the law to side with them.
And that is the way it should be. That is what separates this bill from discrimination.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 03, 2015, 11:53:16 AM
I have asked a lawyer that represents this company about this, he says in order for a religious person can keep from being sued, he must PROVE that it IS a violation of his religious beliefs. There needs to be doctrine stating the belief, and show that he is practicing said religion. It still is not a simple person claiming a belief and expect the law to side with them.
And what is to prevent someone from having a religion of one whose doctrine states whatever that person wants it to?
Quote from: Exterminator on April 03, 2015, 12:01:26 PM
And what is to prevent someone from having a religion of one whose doctrine states whatever that person wants it to?
That is up to the courts to decide if it is sincere and if it violates a proceeding law.
(http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/wp-content/blogs.dir/470/files/2012/04/i-1dedeecd642589de98491a43a8261698-religious_principles.jpeg)
:wink:
I don't usually post entire articles, but this is to educate certain folks here as to how other parts of the country perceive Indiana, Mike Pence, our legislature, and us as Indiana citizens in general:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/31/opinion/in-indiana-using-religion-as-a-cover-for-bigotry.html?_r=0
In Indiana, Using Religion as a Cover for Bigotry
By THE EDITORIAL BOARDMARCH 31, 2015
Gov. Mike Pence of Indiana, who last week signed a religious-freedom law driven by bigotry against gays and lesbians, has been complaining that the law's opponents — which include top business leaders and civil-rights groups — are spreading "misinformation."
It is true that the law does not, as some opponents claim, specifically permit businesses to refuse to serve gays and lesbians. Its drafters were too smart to make that explicit. Instead, the law allows individuals or corporations facing discrimination lawsuits to claim that serving gays and lesbians "substantially" burdens their religious freedom.
But nobody is fooled as to the law's underlying purpose. As its most prominent backers have said quite clearly, it is meant to protect "Christian businesses and churches from those supporting homosexual marriages." In other words, it should allow them to refuse service to gay couples.
The law has understandably spawned a nationwide call for boycotts of the state, not to mention the rebuke of the Indiana Chamber of Commerce, companies like Apple, and the N.C.A.A., whose college basketball tournament is holding the Final Four in Indianapolis this coming weekend.
The tactic of using so-called religious freedom laws to justify and support anti-gay discrimination is relatively new. A decade ago, states could discriminate against gay couples openly by banning same-sex marriages, as dozens did. In recent years, with federal and state courts striking down those marriage bans as unconstitutional (Indiana's was struck down in 2014), opponents of marriage equality have resorted to using other strategies.
Religious-freedom laws, which were originally intended to protect religious minorities from burdensome laws or regulations, have become increasingly invoked by conservative Christian groups as gay rights in general — and marriage equality in particular — found greater acceptance nationally. Besides Indiana, 19 states have adopted such laws, but the laws in the other states apply to disputes between individuals and the government; Indiana's law also applies to disputes between private citizens.
The Supreme Court helped the cause of Christian conservatives with its 2014 Hobby Lobby decision, which held that family-owned corporations may invoke the federal religious-freedom law in refusing to comply with a law requiring employer-paid health plans to cover contraception benefits. The wording in Indiana's religious-freedom law tracks that ruling in protecting corporations.
If Mr. Pence is genuinely concerned about why people may be misunderstanding the law, he could start by looking in the mirror. Under persistent questioning on ABC News's "This Week" on Sunday morning, Mr. Pence insisted that the law "is not about discrimination," but about "empowering people."
That claim is impossible to square with his refusal to consider a statewide law protecting gays and lesbians from discrimination (about a dozen Indiana cities, including most of the largest ones, already have such laws). On Sunday, Mr. Pence said he agreed that it would be helpful to "clarify" the law's intent, even though it is already perfectly clear. The freedom to exercise one's religion is not under assault in Indiana, or anywhere else in the country. Religious people — including Christians, who continue to make up the majority of Americans — may worship however they wish and say whatever they like.
But religion should not be allowed to serve as a cover for discrimination in the public sphere. In the past, racial discrimination was also justified by religious beliefs, yet businesses may not refuse service to customers because of their race. Such behavior should be no more tolerable when it is based on sexual orientation.
$764,812 of $200k Raised by 26,257 people in 1 day
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 03, 2015, 11:53:16 AM
I have asked a lawyer that represents this company about this, he says in order for a religious person can keep from being sued, he must PROVE that it IS a violation of his religious beliefs. There needs to be doctrine stating the belief, and show that he is practicing said religion. It still is not a simple person claiming a belief and expect the law to side with them.
And that is the way it should be. That is what separates this bill from discrimination.
I suspect you're either misquoting what the attorney actually said, you didn't understand it, or you're lying. There wouldn't be much of an onus of 'proof' placed on the business. You should know that because people against this bigoted and racist legislation have been trumpeting from the rooftops from the beginning.
Besides religion being goofy from the get go, there are some REALLY crazy religions and beliefs out there, of which even yours, Protestant X-tianity, has PLENTY to go around. But anyway, here's just one example that uses racism. Don't let that throw you off though because it's DIRECTLY applicable to homosexuality and a host of other human peccadilloes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Identity
Christian Identity (also known as Identity Christianity) refers to a wide variety of loosely affiliated believers and churches with a white supremacist theology.[1][2] Most promote a racist interpretation of Christianity.http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/orgs/american/christian-identity/religion-white-racists.html
Christian Identity:
A Religion for White Racists
"Christian Identity" is the name of a religious movement uniting many of the white supremacist groups in the United States. Identity's teachers promote racism and sometimes violence.Unless there is an existing overriding statute which absolutely precludes such discrimination, a member of that 'religion' owning a business could easily hide behind that type of BS 'religious freedom' legislation just like your run of the mill gay hating xtian can hide behind it. Most of you oddball Protestant sects ascribe to homosexual bigotry.
Are you talking to me, or are just talking in general?
Because you speak with so much ignorance it is pitiful.
I don't even know how to respond to most of your rants, because you say something every time that is inaccurate or flat out wrong....or you go off on a tangent that has NOTHING to do with what I was talking about. Just because you speak or write in an intelligent format, I know bullshit when I see it Y.
Y, you are WRONG. Period. You don't understand most Christian folks. You have such a hatred towards them, you have generalized everyone to that group.
You really have anger issues, and that is very, very obvious. You mask it by quoting and speaking about subjects you have recently read or just listened to something, but it is INDEED obvious.
It is the same stuff every time you post. :yes:
Other than that, how is life treating you?
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 03, 2015, 03:54:08 PM
$764,812 of $200k Raised by 26,257 people in 1 day
To tell the truth, who really cares?
There is a point being made by you each time you post that, and it's the same point others have addressed here - you are a bigot/racist supporting other bigots/racists.
Now a point I'll make is that for all the BS you and your RW/TPers, spew about 'personal responsibility', what you really mean is that y'all are for 'personal responsibility' only for others - those outside of your group and supporters.
Another point I'll make is the same for your 'free market' BS. You only want the 'free market' to work the way YOU want, for YOU. When it comes down to the real 'free market' making itself known over the bigoted pizza shop owners, then suddenly it's all wrong and to be prevented.
You RW/TPers are nothing if not consistent - consistently self serving and hypocrites.
Quote from: Y on April 03, 2015, 04:23:28 PM
To tell the truth, who really cares?
There is a point being made by you each time you post that, and it's the same point others have addressed here - you are a bigot/racist supporting other bigots/racists.
Now a point I'll make is that for all the BS you and your RW/TPers, spew about 'personal responsibility', what you really mean is that y'all are for 'personal responsibility' only for others - those outside of your group and supporters.
Another point I'll make is the same for your 'free market' BS. You only want the 'free market' to work the way YOU want, for YOU. When it comes down to the real 'free market' making itself known over the bigoted pizza shop owners, then suddenly it's all wrong and to be prevented.
You RW/TPers are nothing if not consistent - consistently self serving and hypocrites.
You just did it again. You have NO clue to what real people are thinking and doing. You live in a shoe box. (or may as well). You live in a world where you sterotype people and that is the way it is.
You are the very definition of a bigot.
big·ot
ˈbiɡət/
noun
noun: bigot; plural noun: bigots
a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions.
That is you to a TEE!
I have NO problems towards Gay people. You have many issues with those who think differently than you do. You display it every time you are on here.
And speaking of that pizza place and its owners, I suspect there's something fishy about it.
1. In all the clips I've seen of the place, in not one did I see any customers or them doing any business.
2. I've seen nothing from the police or the media verifying ANY death threats to the owners as the owners have claimed.
3. Without any verified 'death threats', it looks more like they closed the business because they weren't doing business and could use this to milk the situation.
4. Who would want to go to pizza place and get proselytized at anyway? That doesn't sound like a good business plan.
Quote from: Y on April 03, 2015, 04:44:15 PM
And speaking of that pizza place and its owners, I suspect there's something fishy about it.
1. In all the clips I've seen of the place, in not one did I see any customers or them doing any business.
2. I've seen nothing from the police or the media verifying ANY death threats to the owners as the owners have claimed.
3. Without any verified 'death threats', it looks more like they closed the business because they weren't doing business and could use this to milk the situation.
4. Who would want to go to pizza place and get proselytized at anyway? That doesn't sound like a good business plan.
Did they even serve beer there? Who could eat pizza without beer? :spooked:
$786,626 of $200k Raised by 27,025 people in 1 day
I'm not sure if you even took time to read how this all went down, but here it is if you are interested in the truth....
Religious liberty is under assault in Indiana and that's never been clearer than with the O'Connor family.
When asked by local press the hypothetical question of whether or not they'd prefer to have their family owned business, Memories Pizza, cater a gay wedding, the owner said no citing their own religious beliefs as the reason.
Rather than allowing this family to simply have their opinion, which they were asked to give, outraged people grabbed the torches and began a campaign to destroy this small business in small town Indiana.
All for having an opinion that is rooted in faith.
No one was turned away. No one was discriminated against. It was a hypothetical question asked by a news reporter who had questionable motives to begin with.
After being interviewed by Dana Loesch on her television show on Blaze TV, we learned that the family may never even reopen the doors to their restaurant as the death threats and vicious online reviews continue to pour in from the arbiters of "tolerance."
My name is Lawrence Jones, and I'm one of the television opinion contributors on Dana's show.
Before the televised interview, producers Rachel, Allison and George discussed the situation with Dana, myself and head writer Ben Howe. We all agreed: this family needs help to get through this assault.
So we set up a GoFundMe page with the modest goal of $25,000. The intent was to help the family stave off the burdensome cost of having the media parked out front, activists tearing them down, and no customers coming in.
Our goal was simply to help take one thing off this family's plate as the strangers sought to destroy them.
But other strangers came to the rescue and the total just keeps going up.
Thank you for helping us do some good for this family who were scared and in hiding just 24 hours before this writing.
All money, save whatever percentage GoFundMe takes, will be transferred directly to whichever bank account the O'Connors wish to use.
Show producers are in direct contact with the family to ensure that they never feel like they are being left out of what is going on.
Thank you to everyone for your generosity.
Quote from: Bo D on April 03, 2015, 04:46:34 PM
Did they even serve beer there? Who could eat pizza without beer? :spooked:
I don't know the answer that one, but BOY, do I agree with you! Pizza and Beer is the BEST!
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 03, 2015, 04:36:43 PM
You just did it again. You have NO clue to what real people are thinking and doing. You live in a shoe box. (or may as well). You live in a world where you sterotype people and that is the way it is.
You are the very definition of a bigot.
big·ot
ˈbiɡət/
noun
noun: bigot; plural noun: bigots
a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions.
That is you to a TEE!
I have NO problems towards Gay people. You have many issues with those who think differently than you do. You display it every time you are on here.
First, you'd better get your dictionary out because as usual you toss words around and butcher the language.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bigot
Full Definition of BIGOT
: a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigotry
Bigotry is a state of mind where a person obstinately, irrationally, unfairly or intolerantly dislikes other people, ideas, etc.[1][2] Some examples include personal beliefs, race, religion, national origin, gender, disability, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, or other group characteristics.Secondly, I will admit to having a prejudice against stupidity, pedagogues, ideologues, authoritarians, hypocrites etc. - all those things that seem to run rampant with the RW, religious, sub 100 IQ etc..
Thirdly, if anyone is lost in an insular world, it's you, Hank. You obviously surround yourself with self affirming people, media, religion etc..
Fourth, not trying to be rude, but you're not very intelligent. You're good at regurgitation, but real thinking, not. That's a reason you're stuck parroting your better's RW idiocy. That's why you can't craft analytical responses and end up with C/P.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 03, 2015, 04:47:07 PM
I'm not sure if you even took time to read how this all went down, but here it is if you are interested in the truth....
That's NOT the 'truth'. It's simply something those associated with that nutcase Glen Beck spewed on the Go Fund Me site. There are no facts, links to facts, etc. supporting ANY of those claims being made about the incident.
Your doing that just proves exactly what I pointed out, you can't think and you just parrot others RW tripe...but you have to have a real functioning brain to understand that.
Quote from: Bo D on April 03, 2015, 04:46:34 PM
Did they even serve beer there? Who could eat pizza without beer? :spooked:
I'd think that would be a big resounding NO!
At least that would have been some sort of real business plan - proselytizing and brew! I can see the sign now! Hell, they could market it to the churches! :biggrin:
I'm beginning to suspect this pizza place deal and the results smell of 'astroturfing' in support of this type of discriminatory RW legislation.
What's better for a cause than a hand picked 'martyr' that doesn't actually lose anything - and may actually gain from the process?
Quote from: Y on April 03, 2015, 04:12:38 PM
I suspect you're either misquoting what the attorney actually said, you didn't understand it, or you're lying. There wouldn't be much of an onus of 'proof' placed on the business. You should know that because people against this bigoted and racist legislation have been trumpeting from the rooftops from the beginning.
Besides religion being goofy from the get go, there are some REALLY crazy religions and beliefs out there, of which even yours, Protestant X-tianity, has PLENTY to go around. But anyway, here's just one example that uses racism. Don't let that throw you off though because it's DIRECTLY applicable to homosexuality and a host of other human peccadilloes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Identity
Christian Identity (also known as Identity Christianity) refers to a wide variety of loosely affiliated believers and churches with a white supremacist theology.[1][2] Most promote a racist interpretation of Christianity.
http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/orgs/american/christian-identity/religion-white-racists.html
Christian Identity:
A Religion for White Racists
"Christian Identity" is the name of a religious movement uniting many of the white supremacist groups in the United States. Identity's teachers promote racism and sometimes violence.
Unless there is an existing overriding statute which absolutely precludes such discrimination, a member of that 'religion' owning a business could easily hide behind that type of BS 'religious freedom' legislation just like your run of the mill gay hating xtian can hide behind it. Most of you oddball Protestant sects ascribe to homosexual bigotry.
Why did you fail to mention the Rev Wright whoes church preaches against the white race? I guess you could be onto something there but it must run both ways.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 02, 2015, 09:01:17 PM
But our Constitution says Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...are you saying that if you are a Christian you must give up your exercise of faith if you want to own your own business????
That clause does not mean what you think it means. It is also NOT a license for anything and everything, so yes you must give up your bigoted/racist etc. discriminatory practices once you become the public persona of a business.
I don't know why a xtian would go into business anyway? Don't you believe in the teachings of Jesus?
Matthew 6:25-27
Do Not Worry
25"For this reason I say to you, do not be worried about your life, as to what you will eat or what you will drink; nor for your body, as to what you will put on. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothing? 26"Look at the birds of the air, that they do not sow, nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not worth much more than they? 27"And who of you by being worried can add a single hour to his life?...Why do you think the early xtians lived in communes and practiced communal living? They were - GASP! - COMMUNISTS!
Not like the so called hypocrites that call themselves xtians in this day and age - especially in this country.
Quote from: me on April 03, 2015, 06:28:33 PM
Why did you fail to mention the Rev Wright whoes church preaches against the white race? I guess you could be onto something there but it must run both ways.
GAWD! You don't have a clue! It's not the same. Do some actual, and non-self serving research.
Quote from: Bo D on April 03, 2015, 04:46:34 PM
Did they even serve beer there? Who could eat pizza without beer? :spooked:
Me 'cause I don't like beer. :razz:
Quote from: Y on April 03, 2015, 05:15:21 PM
That's NOT the 'truth'. It's simply something those associated with that nutcase Glen Beck spewed on the Go Fund Me site. There are no facts, links to facts, etc. supporting ANY of those claims being made about the incident.
Your doing that just proves exactly what I pointed out, you can't think and you just parrot others RW tripe...but you have to have a real functioning brain to understand that.
ī
Wow, there is no sense discussing anything with you! You are so biased you make shit up to suit your logic! If you don't want to believe something you blame it on a rw source a laugh it off.
This is exactly why I stopped discussing with you a while ago.
Quote from: Y on April 03, 2015, 06:30:49 PM
GAWD! You don't have a clue! It's not the same. Do some actual, and non-self serving research.
Oh that's right I forgot, black people aren't racist. How silly of me. I guess that would make them the true christians. Well, either that or they're all white supremists, bigots, and whatever you tagged the white religions as being too or they're just traitors to their race.
Quote from: me on April 03, 2015, 06:41:37 PM
Oh that's right I forgot, black people aren't racist. How silly of me. I guess that would make them the true christians. Well, either that or they're all white supremists, bigots, and whatever you tagged the white religions as being too they're just traitors to their race.
See, and THAT's not the same thing as the other thing that wasn't the same thing! :biggrin:
You just ramble on.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 03, 2015, 06:37:22 PM
ī
Wow, there is no sense discussing anything with you! You are so biased you make shit up to suit your logic! If you don't want to believe something you blame it on a rw source a laugh it off.
This is exactly why I stopped discussing with you a while ago.
Where are those facts and links to facts from that GFM garbage? Anyone? Anyone?
It's not a RW source?!?!?!?
Hank, you forget I've known you for years. You parrot, you regurgitate, you don't discuss/debate. You can't. That's why you don't respond. I've torn your C/P RW propaganda apart for years, and you wind up with this same impotent response.
And that's exactly what's happened here again.
Complete bullshit y, I have delivered stellar responses with links to support my stance and every time you ALWAYS come back with this very shit you are saying right now!
You think you are clever but you are just rude and nasty with horrible debating skills. You try to bully your way to victory. It don't work with me.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 03, 2015, 07:55:45 PM
Complete bullshit y, I have delivered stellar responses with links to support my stance and every time you ALWAYS come back with this very shit you are saying right now!
You think you are clever but you are just rude and nasty with horrible debating skills. You try to bully your way to victory. It don't work with me.
Don't you believe you'll go to Hell for lying, because you're flat out lying there.
You regurgitate/parrot/Cut & Paste garbage from your RW mouthpieces and call it 'stellar responses'.
Because you have no conception of actual evidence, facts, and logic you simply resort to claiming you've done something you can't do - provide any cogent response - which is why you've always resorted to whining.
And again, your response - which lacks even the pretense of answering the points I made or providing the evidence for your GFM parroting - proves your complete inability to provide any substantive debate/discussion or any sign of intelligence.
Quote from: Y on April 03, 2015, 08:54:13 PM
Don't you believe you'll go to Hell for lying, because you're flat out lying there.
You regurgitate/parrot/Cut & Paste garbage from your RW mouthpieces and call it 'stellar responses'.
Because you have no conception of actual evidence, facts, and logic you simply resort to claiming you've done something you can't do - provide any cogent response - which is why you've always resorted to whining.
And again, your response - which lacks even the pretense of answering the points I made or providing the evidence for your GFM parroting - proves your complete inability to provide any substantive debate/discussion or any sign of intelligence.
Boom, there it is!
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 03, 2015, 09:08:42 PM
Boom, there it is!
:confused:
Boom? There what is?
HH, I don't want to get too involved in the personal spat between you and Y, but don't you see that when you respond in that manner to a post that he has made, that you're proving the very things he's saying about you?
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 03, 2015, 03:54:08 PM
$764,812 of $200k Raised by 26,257 people in 1 day
You want to know the ironic thing about this?
These people are raising all of this money for two people who say they were injured over expressing their position siding with a piece of nefarious legislation designed by a nefarious government.
That same government will take 49% of the total sum raised in taxation of same, so they're funding the federal opposition at almost the same rate as they are these two people. (I believe the state of Indiana will take 2% as well, unless of course they claim it as their "injured business entity" in which case they will tax it at a higher rate). :biggrin:
Quote from: Locutus on April 03, 2015, 09:16:34 PM
:confused:
Boom? There what is?
HH, I don't want to get too involved in the personal spat between you and Y, but don't you see that when you respond in that manner to a post that he has made, that you're proving the very things he's saying about you?
U
I said exactly what I meant to say, and I figured my buds on here to pretty much respond as you just did. That is how you guys roll on the left.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 03, 2015, 09:37:09 PM
U
I said exactly what I meant to say, and I figured my buds on here to pretty much respond as you just did. That is how you guys roll on the left.
I don't know what that means.
Quote from: Palehorse on April 03, 2015, 09:29:10 PM
You want to know the ironic thing about this?
These people are raising all of this money for two people who say they were injured over expressing their position siding with a piece of nefarious legislation designed by a nefarious government.
That same government will take 49% of the total sum raised in taxation of same, so they're funding the federal opposition at almost the same rate as they are these two people. (I believe the state of Indiana will take 2% as well, unless of course they claim it as their "injured business entity" in which case they will tax it at a higher rate). :biggrin:
It's also minus 7.9% in transaction fees, plus 30 cents per donation. The donation window has closed now, BTW.
The IRS and the State of Indiana are after the initial fees, so:
Total donations: $842,387.00
7.9 % fees: ($66,548.57)
30 cents each donation: ($8,748.00)
Net before taxes: $767,090.43
Quote from: Y on April 03, 2015, 04:12:38 PM
I suspect you're either misquoting what the attorney actually said, you didn't understand it, or you're lying. There wouldn't be much of an onus of 'proof' placed on the business. You should know that because people against this bigoted and racist legislation have been trumpeting from the rooftops from the beginning.
Besides religion being goofy from the get go, there are some REALLY crazy religions and beliefs out there, of which even yours, Protestant X-tianity, has PLENTY to go around. But anyway, here's just one example that uses racism. Don't let that throw you off though because it's DIRECTLY applicable to homosexuality and a host of other human peccadilloes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Identity
Christian Identity (also known as Identity Christianity) refers to a wide variety of loosely affiliated believers and churches with a white supremacist theology.[1][2] Most promote a racist interpretation of Christianity.
http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/orgs/american/christian-identity/religion-white-racists.html
Christian Identity:
A Religion for White Racists
"Christian Identity" is the name of a religious movement uniting many of the white supremacist groups in the United States. Identity's teachers promote racism and sometimes violence.
Unless there is an existing overriding statute which absolutely precludes such discrimination, a member of that 'religion' owning a business could easily hide behind that type of BS 'religious freedom' legislation just like your run of the mill gay hating xtian can hide behind it. Most of you oddball Protestant sects ascribe to homosexual bigotry.
Quote from: me on April 03, 2015, 06:28:33 PM
Why did you fail to mention the Rev Wright whoes church preaches against the white race? I guess you could be onto something there but it must run both ways.
Quote from: Y on April 03, 2015, 06:30:49 PM
GAWD! You don't have a clue! It's not the same. Do some actual, and non-self serving research.
Quote from: me on April 03, 2015, 06:41:37 PM
Oh that's right I forgot, black people aren't racist. How silly of me. I guess that would make them the true christians. Well, either that or they're all white supremists, bigots, and whatever you tagged the white religions as being too or they're just traitors to their race.
Quote from: Y on April 03, 2015, 07:27:33 PM
See, and THAT's not the same thing as the other thing that wasn't the same thing! :biggrin:
You just ramble on.
From your post:
Quote
Christian Identity:
A Religion for White Racists
"Christian Identity" is the name of a religious movement uniting many of the white supremacist groups in the United States. Identity's teachers promote racism and sometimes violence.
There are many, probably more, blacks who call themselves christian and are of many different faiths so, according to what you posted, lumped together as you like to do you have to include them which is why I posted what I did. I bolded it for you.
Quote from: Locutus on April 03, 2015, 09:40:06 PM
I don't know what that means.
OK I blame BoD for mentioning pizza and beer yesterday, because that is what i ended uo having for supper and I think I passed my limit because as I read back, I am not exactly sure what I meant either.😇
I do know that Dana, the lady who started this, has set them up with a financial firm to help them with this.
Quote from: Locutus on April 02, 2015, 10:33:23 PM
BTW, I'll give you three guesses who's going to get the credit for this financial windfall that these people have now encountered, but the first two don't count.
I'll even give you a hint on this one too. It isn't going to be Dana Loesch.
Any guesses? ;D
^^ :rolleyes:
Earlier this week, Memories Pizza in Walkerton, Indiana, shut down after receiving backlash over anti-gay comments.
The pizzeria is co-owned by Kevin O'Connor and his daughter, Crystal O'Connor. And although they've said they "don't have a problem with gay people," catering gay weddings goes against their beliefs. "If a gay couple came in and wanted us to provide pizzas for their wedding, we would have to say no," Crystal told local news station ABC 57. "We are a Christian establishment."
Angry Yelp reviews and threatening messages started pouring in, and the O'Connors closed the pizzeria down. But a "Support Memories Pizza" GoFundMe campaign was created shortly afterward to keep the establishment open, and raised more than $500,000 in 48 hours.
As of Saturday morning, "Support Memories Pizza" had raised over $800,000. In an interview with Fox News Business' Neil Cavuto, Crystal said that although she's not quite ready to open the pizzeria again, she believes God is responsible for the support that's poured in.
God has blessed us for standing up for what we believe, and not denying him," Crystal told Cavuto.
Additionally, a local choir called Ripple Effect set up camp across the street from Memories in an attempt to bring the community together again.
"We're not here to condemn or condone the owners of the establishment. We're here to show them and the community that we can show love to people in spite of our differences," choir direct Sherry Klinedinst told Indiana news station WSBT 22.
Support may be pouring in on a local level, but on a larger scale there's still quite a bit of outrage over the O'Connors' statements. On Sirius XM, Rosie O'Donnell, a former co-host on "The View," joked that pizza joints aren't often called upon to cater gay weddings anyway.
"Remember that they were saying that, the pizza lady, that gays were going to cater their weddings with pizza," she said. "Not even lesbians would do that. We might do a potluck. We might make some chili, you know, if situations are tough."http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/04/anti-gay-pizzeria_n_7003596.html
Told ya'! The ole' Sky Daddy gets the credit. :rolleyes:
The stupidity is absolutely astounding.
Could be karma ya know. :wink:
Quote from: Locutus on April 05, 2015, 10:42:14 PM
Told ya'! The ole' Sky Daddy gets the credit. :rolleyes:
I'm sure that while he was busy with this fund-raiser, somewhere there were children being raped.
"...not ready to reopen..."
LMAO!
What did I tell ya'. It looks like they're going to take the money and run. Apparently, phoney martyrs can be bought and paid for! Praise gawd! :wink:
Of course they're not ready to reopen. In a little over 48 hours, they made more money from stupid bigots than that pizza joint will make in 10+ years. :rolleyes:
Quote from: Locutus on April 06, 2015, 08:18:36 PM
Of course they're not ready to reopen. In a little over 48 hours, they made more money from stupid bigots than that pizza joint will make in 10+ years. :rolleyes:
And more than they would have been able to obtain if they sold the place as a turnkey business opportunity or as business real estate.
They may as well slap a for sale sign on it and add a little more to their nest egg. . . :rolleyes:
Quote from: Palehorse on April 06, 2015, 08:20:53 PM
And more than they would have been able to obtain if they sold the place as a turnkey business opportunity or as business real estate.
They may as well slap a for sale sign on it and add a little more to their nest egg. . . :rolleyes:
Bingo! :yes: Also at an increased asking price because of the notoriety.
http://crooksandliars.com/2015/04/bizarro-world-jindal-says-gays-dont-need
"Businesses that don't want to choose between their Christian faith -- their sincerely held religious beliefs -- and being able to operate their businesses,"
We been talking about this, that when you become a public entity, a business, that if you're 'religious' you do have to make that choice because you push your own private 'religious' discriminatory agenda through your very public business.
Another thing that gets me is that why would a so-called xtian want to be in business anyway? Don't you xtians believe in the literal word of your Jesus or adhere to and live according to his tenets?
For examples:
1 John 2:15 KJV
Do Not Love the World
15 Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.
John 15:19 KJV
If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.
The choice isn't that of choosing to follow your xtian prejudices and discriminate while being a business, but to follow the Jesus of your religion and not be 'of the world' and be in business. It's quite obvious you can't follow Jesus and be a capitalist. :wink:
Quote from: Locutus on April 06, 2015, 08:18:36 PM
Of course they're not ready to reopen. In a little over 48 hours, they made more money from stupid bigots than that pizza joint will make in 10+ years. :rolleyes:
I'd say 'EVER'. I've seen pizza joint after pizza joint fold trying to survive in small towns.
Quote from: Palehorse on April 06, 2015, 08:20:53 PM
And more than they would have been able to obtain if they sold the place as a turnkey business opportunity or as business real estate.
They may as well slap a for sale sign on it and add a little more to their nest egg. . . :rolleyes:
IF they can sell it. Selling buildings in small towns is also extremely hard to do.
Quote from: Y on April 06, 2015, 08:33:53 PM
http://crooksandliars.com/2015/04/bizarro-world-jindal-says-gays-dont-need
"Businesses that don't want to choose between their Christian faith -- their sincerely held religious beliefs -- and being able to operate their businesses,"
We been talking about this, that when you become a public entity, a business, that if you're 'religious' you do have to make that choice because you push your own private 'religious' discriminatory agenda through your very public business.
Another thing that gets me is that why would a so-called xtian want to be in business anyway? Don't you xtians believe in the literal word of your Jesus or adhere to and live according to his tenets?
For examples:
1 John 2:15 KJV
Do Not Love the World
15 Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.
John 15:19 KJV
If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.
The choice isn't that of choosing to follow your xtian prejudices and discriminate while being a business, but to follow the Jesus of your religion and not be 'of the world' and be in business. It's quite obvious you can't follow Jesus and be a capitalist. :wink:
LOL! I didn't think Hank would touch this. :biggrin:
Is there some cogent reason as to why you don't want to touch that, Hank?
I would think you'd be up on the apologetics for your claimed beliefs. :wink:
According to the paper they reopened yesterday.
Quote from: Anne on April 10, 2015, 03:10:32 PM
According to the paper they reopened yesterday.
Quote from: Y on April 06, 2015, 08:12:18 PM
"...not ready to reopen..."
LMAO!
What did I tell ya'. It looks like they're going to take the money and run. Apparently, phoney martyrs can be bought and paid for! Praise gawd! :wink:
:wink:
WALKERTON, Ind. (AP) —
A northern Indiana pizzeria that closed after its owner said his religious beliefs wouldn't allow him to cater a gay wedding opened Thursday to a full house of friends, regulars and people wanting to show their support.
"It's a relief to get going again and try to get back to normal," said Kevin O'Connor, owner of Memories Pizza.
O'Connor closed the shop for eight days after comments by him and his daughter, Crystal, to a local television station supporting a new religious objections law. The law, which has since been revised, sparked a boycott of Indiana.
O'Connor said the criticism hasn't changed his beliefs. He said gays are welcome in his restaurant in the small, one-traffic-light town of Walkerton, 20 miles southwest of South Bend, but that he would decline to cater a same-sex wedding because it would conflict with his Christian beliefs.
"I'd do the same thing again. It's my belief. It's our belief. It's what we grew up on," he said. "I'm just sorry it comes to this because neither one of us dislike any of those people. I don't hold any grudges."
A crowdfunding campaign started by supporters raised more than $842,000 with donations from 29,160 contributors in 48 hours. O'Connor said he hasn't received the money yet, but said he plans to give some to charity and use some money to make improvements to the restaurant.
The 61-year-old father of eight who has owned the restaurant for nine years said he never thought about taking the money and retiring.
"I enjoy it. I don't want to leave here," he said. "I want this to be something that my daughter can enjoy."
Crystal O'Connor said the amount of money was overwhelming.
"We were like, 'Stop! Stop! Stop!'" she said.
"It was really making us uncomfortable," her father said.
The restaurant reopened about 4 p.m. Thursday. He says that within an hour, all eight tables were filled and six people were waiting for carryout orders. There were no protests as of 7 p.m.
Jeanne and Ken Gumm from outside LaPorte, about 20 miles northwest of Walkerton, said they had been waiting for the pizzeria to reopen so they could show their support.
"We couldn't wait to get down here," said Ken Gumm, 66, a tank truck driver. "To us this whole thing isn't about gay marriage. It's mostly about freedom of religion."
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 10, 2015, 03:45:58 PM
:wink:
LMAO!
You know Hank, even when you troll and prove yourself a hypocrite, you can't even get it right and do the proper reading/comprehension.
Quote from: Y on April 06, 2015, 08:12:18 PM
"...not ready to reopen..."
LMAO!
What did I tell ya'. It looks like they're going to take the money and run. Apparently, phoney martyrs can be bought and paid for! Praise gawd! :wink:
If you weren't such an uneducated dunce when it comes to the English language, you wouldn't make yourself look like an idiot quite so often. :yes:
:biggrin:
(https://scontent-iad.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xat1/v/t1.0-9/10472741_10153769045603327_2819240071661950929_n.jpg?oh=b2d811988485cdda1f1e31320757751b&oe=55AEB869)
I like this!
North Dakota coffee shop bans lawmakers opposing gay rights bill
Joe Curry, one of the worker-owners of the Red Raven Espresso Parlor, posted a newspaper page in the shop this month that showed the 55 Republican state House members who rejected a bill that would have prohibited discrimination based on sexual orientation in housing, government, public services and the workplace. It was accompanied by a sign saying the legislators were banned, "Unless accompanied by a lesbian, gay, bisexual or transsexual, queer, intersex or asexual person."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/north-dakota-coffee-shop-bans-lawmakers-opposing-gay-rights-bill/2015/04/12/5af4cb1e-e15e-11e4-b510-962fcfabc310_story.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/north-dakota-coffee-shop-bans-lawmakers-opposing-gay-rights-bill/2015/04/12/5af4cb1e-e15e-11e4-b510-962fcfabc310_story.html)
Typical Liberal Hypocrisy... :yes:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 13, 2015, 09:20:53 AM
Typical Liberal Hypocrisy... :yes:
Bull CRAP!
You didn't bother to read the article, I see. (Or maybe you did and you're just so damned obstinate that you don't understand.)
Here's a quote from the article ... with some words bolded to help you ...
"The ban was, I thought,
very tongue in cheek, requiring them to be escorted by someone from the LBGT community," Curry said Wednesday. "I hope that they thought about it, at least, and
I hope some of them giggled. But in the end,
they are all welcome here."
Quote from: Bo D on April 13, 2015, 09:35:57 AM
You didn't bother to read the article, I see.
He can't read.
I read it, I just think it is typical liberal hypocrisy to think that way, and find it humorous. If it was the other way around, many libs, would complain about such a thought.
Personally, I don't care. I like an owner having, in the least a since of humor, to express him/herself. IT IS A FREE COUNTRY, to express yourself, at least that is what the Pizza lady thought in Indiana.....
Yes, because humor and intolerance are the same thing; right? :rolleyes:
Quote from: Exterminator on April 13, 2015, 11:51:28 AM
Yes, because humor and intolerance are the same thing; right? :rolleyes:
The only intolerance that seems to be going on, is liberals being intolerant with religious freedoms.....
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 13, 2015, 11:58:56 AM
The only intolerance that seems to be going on, is liberals being intolerant with religious freedoms.....
When are you people going to understand that we have no problem with your right to practice whatever religion you choose as long as you don't discriminate against those who disagree with your choice in the public arena?
Quote from: Locutus on April 12, 2015, 04:51:00 PM
(https://scontent-iad.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xat1/v/t1.0-9/10472741_10153769045603327_2819240071661950929_n.jpg?oh=b2d811988485cdda1f1e31320757751b&oe=55AEB869)
And although this was posted as a cartoon, what if that really happened? It seems to fit your idea of refusing service to sinners who don't practice your brand of beliefs.
Quote from: Bo D on April 13, 2015, 12:08:08 PM
And although this was posted as a cartoon, what if that really happened? It seems to fit your idea of refusing service to sinners who don't practice your brand of beliefs.
:yes:
And read the list of other 'sins' on the sign there. The possibilities are endless.
Quote from: Bo D on April 13, 2015, 12:08:08 PM
And although this was posted as a cartoon, what if that really happened? It seems to fit your idea of refusing service to sinners who don't practice your brand of beliefs.
AGAIN, like most of the left, you are just flat out getting it WRONG. NOBODY is saying, they cannot refuse to serve someone. They are just wanting to reserve the RIGHT to NOT participate in something that violates their religious beliefs.
THAT is ALL the RFRA is all about. YOU STILL cannot discriminate. You just want the right to NOT do something that forces you to compromise your beliefs.
How would it be if a Jewish catering business was asked to serve at a Nazi Convention? Is that discrimination? Should they be forced to serve or face a lawsuit?
Flip it around, if a Muslim caterer was asked by a Jewish organization to serve them.....If they didn't, the Jewish organization could sue them out of business and move on the the next....and run out all of the muslim caterers......their should be some protection to deny crossing the line with your religious beliefs.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 13, 2015, 12:42:32 PM
AGAIN, like most of the left, you are just flat out getting it WRONG. NOBODY is saying, they cannot refuse to serve someone.
But the pizza joint did just that! By saying they would refuse to cater a gay wedding, they were saying they would refuse to serve gays as a regular course of their business.
Quote from: Bo D on April 13, 2015, 12:05:57 PM
When are you people going to understand that we have no problem with your right to practice whatever religion you choose as long as you don't discriminate against those who disagree with your choice in the public arena?
Never because as Y points out, these people are ideologues who want nothing more than to impose their version of Sharia law onto the rest of society. They are no less radical or less dangerous to a free society than the Muslims they constantly seek to demonize. In fact, both seek to marginalize many of the same groups of people for exactly the same reasons.
Quote from: Bo D on April 13, 2015, 12:53:51 PM
But the pizza joint did just that! By saying they would refuse to cater a gay wedding, they were saying they would refuse to serve gays as a regular course of their business.
The were willing to make the cakes, just not participate in the wedding service.
NOW! The whole thing with ALL Of this is nothing but political BS.
It sucks that some gay couple decided to pick on a particular florist or or caterer....I'm SURE they knew damn well they were Christian, and wanted to make this a movement for the gay community. They could have easily found a gay florist or caterer, RIGHT? but NO. Lets make this a legal issue. Lets sue a small Christian businessman just to make a point.
Again, NOBODY so far, has said a gay couple couldn't buy any cake from anybody or whatever they wanted to buy.......THAT is discrimination. Forcing someone to ATTEND a Service, THAT would be merely being an ass! Just for legal ramifications.
THAT is what this is ALL about!
Quote from: Exterminator on April 13, 2015, 01:07:58 PM
Never because as Y points out, these people are ideologues who want nothing more than to impose their version of Sharia law onto the rest of society. They are no less radical or less dangerous to a free society than the Muslims they constantly seek to demonize. In fact, both seek to marginalize many of the same groups of people for exactly the same reasons.
BULLSHIT!
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 13, 2015, 01:09:10 PM
BULLSHIT!
Nope; absolute fact! You're just like them...be proud! :rolleyes:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 13, 2015, 01:08:35 PM
The were willing to make the cakes, just not participate in the wedding service.
I have attended a TON of weddings and I don't recall EVER seeing a caterer participating in the wedding service. Maybe I'm wrong but doesn't a caterer usually cater the reception AFTER the service?
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 13, 2015, 01:08:35 PM
The were willing to make the cakes, just not participate in the wedding service.
Participate how? How does a baker normally "participate" in a wedding beyond simply making the cake? You're either a complete idiot or lying out of your ass about the original intent of this legislation (or both, which is the most likely answer).
Quote from: Bo D on April 13, 2015, 12:08:08 PM
It seems to fit your idea of refusing service to sinners who don't practice your brand of beliefs.
Which are quite the hodge podge considering how they pick and choose which parts of the bible are convenient to them.
Quote from: Bo D on April 13, 2015, 01:13:37 PM
I have attended a TON of weddings and I don't recall EVER seeing a caterer participating in the wedding service. Maybe I'm wrong but doesn't a caterer usually cater the reception AFTER the service?
What difference does it make?
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 13, 2015, 01:27:05 PM
What difference does it make?
Uh...it speak directly to this?
QuoteThe were willing to make the cakes, just not participate in the wedding service.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 13, 2015, 01:27:05 PM
What difference does it make?
It makes all the difference in the world. The service/ceremony seems to be your sticking point here. But the reception is the PARTY AFTER the service.
Let me ask you this, should the pizza joint be able to refuse catering a gay Super Bowl party?
It's looking more and more like you think they have a right just to refuse service (a catering service) to a party.
Quote from: Bo D on April 13, 2015, 01:49:45 PM
It makes all the difference in the world. The service/ceremony seems to be your sticking point here. But the reception is the PARTY AFTER the service.
Let me ask you this, should the pizza joint be able to refuse catering a gay Super Bowl party?
It's looking more and more like you think they have a right just to refuse service (a catering service) to a party.
I think exactly that, if a company does not feel comfortable servicing a gay party, they absolutely should have that right to refuse. I think our FREE MARKET would decide if these guys are being assholes or truly feel uncomfortable (due to religious reasons)....If they are being assholes about it, then people could quit utilizing them....it would be bad for their business.
I only think this is being a problem, because of hypothetical situations are being asked, and people are answering honestly. The case of the Gay couple and the florist, the gay couple found a company to do their wedding, then they sued the company that didn't want too. All for political reasons.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 13, 2015, 03:29:08 PM
I think exactly that, if a company does not feel comfortable servicing a gay/black/Irish/(choose your bigotry) party, they absolutely should have that right to refuse.
The truth finally surfaces.
What if my religion is assholism? :biggrin:
Quote from: Bo D on April 13, 2015, 03:32:25 PM
The truth finally surfaces.
We are strictly talking religion Bo.....the law say you MUST demonstrate that serving a gay wedding would "substantially burden" his/her religious beliefs, and that his/her beliefs are sincere. You have to have a strong doctrine to even win this. You cannot just make up a religion and expect a judge to side with you. This law gives the judge the flexibility to utilize common sense. So people cannot abuse it, but at the same time, not be forced to do something that CLEARLY violates his/her religious beliefs.
This is so simple.
Quote from: Exterminator on April 13, 2015, 03:36:00 PM
What if my religion is assholism? :biggrin:
You could be the SAVIOR of that religion.......instead of a cross, they could just have a picture of YOU on there!!!! :biggrin:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 13, 2015, 04:45:17 PM
We are strictly talking religion Bo.....
YOU took the aspect of religion out of it with this answer ....
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 13, 2015, 03:29:08 PM
I think exactly that, if a company does not feel comfortable servicing a gay party, they absolutely should have that right to refuse.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 13, 2015, 04:45:17 PM
This is so simple.
It really is now. Now we're down to bigotry - pure and simple.
Quote from: Bo D on April 13, 2015, 04:49:52 PM
It really is now. Now we're down to bigotry - pure and simple.
No WAY, No How! You guys are making it out to be, when it is CLEARLY NOT! It is about religious freedom...PERIOD. Clearly part of our 1st amendment!
Maybe the new requirements should be that any business not wishing to do business with individuals that lead lives that they object to due to religious requirements, MUST prefix the name of their business with the word "Christian"; as in "Christian Memories Pizza".
That way everyone knows right out of the gate whether or not they want to go in the place.
:wink:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 13, 2015, 05:06:39 PM
No WAY, No How! You guys are making it out to be, when it is CLEARLY NOT! It is about religious freedom...PERIOD. Clearly part of our 1st amendment!
You said it clearly ....
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 13, 2015, 03:29:08 PM
I think exactly that, if a company does not feel comfortable servicing a gay party, they absolutely should have that right to refuse.
The whole point is they would have to be there and would not have wanted to be. They would make the food just not be there to serve it and they should have that choice.
Quote from: me on April 14, 2015, 06:12:55 AM
The whole point is they would have to be there and would not have wanted to be. They would make the food just not be there to serve it and they should have that choice.
The choice not to be around gay people? Then that line of reasoning would lead to them banning gays from their pizza joint.
Quote from: Bo D on April 14, 2015, 08:14:56 AM
The choice not to be around gay people? Then that line of reasoning would lead to them banning gays from their pizza joint.
No, it would not. I have never had a restaurant ask my sexual preference when I went in with another woman nor have I ever had to state that in any other type of store and they would have to do that, ask, to find out.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 13, 2015, 04:46:15 PM
You could be the SAVIOR of that religion.......instead of a cross, they could just have a picture of YOU on there!!!! :biggrin:
At least I'm real! :razz:
Quote from: Exterminator on April 15, 2015, 09:27:44 AM
At least I'm real! :razz:
a REAL ASSHOLE! :razz: :razz: :razz: :razz:
sorry! :no:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 15, 2015, 09:42:44 AM
a REAL ASSHOLE! :razz: :razz: :razz: :razz:
Everybody has to be good at something!
Quote from: Exterminator on April 15, 2015, 10:12:34 AM
Everybody has to be good at something!
:biggrin: I could probably be your VP!
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 13, 2015, 05:06:39 PM
No WAY, No How! You guys are making it out to be, when it is CLEARLY NOT! It is about religious freedom...PERIOD. Clearly part of our 1st amendment!
:rolleyes:
No, it's not...on either count. It's about enshrining and codifying your bigotry and racism into law under the cover of your phoney 'religion' - as I and others have stated all along.
It's the same with you and your ilk's BS idea of 'right of refusal of service'. That's just another cover for your bigotry and racism. You're just trying to bring back the 'Jim Crow' concept that was used to discriminate against blacks and use it against homosexuals.
Once you enter into business and become a public entity, you HAVE to leave your personal prejudices at the door. I don't know how many times you have to be told that before it sinks in.
Are you saying that as long as an activity is legal any person in business would have to participate in that activity by photography, catering, decorating, providing transportation or venue?
Right-wing hypocrites are now coming out in support of refusing to provide services to the LGBT community as a way to get rich off of their fellow bigots. (http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/17/us/michigan-business-bans-openly-gay-people/index.html)
Quote from: Exterminator on April 17, 2015, 10:34:25 AM
Right-wing hypocrites are now coming out in support of refusing to provide services to the LGBT community as a way to get rich off of their fellow bigots. (http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/17/us/michigan-business-bans-openly-gay-people/index.html)
LMAO!!! Someone just posted this on his Facebook page. Squeaky clean Christian he is. </sarcasm>
https://opencourtrecords.org/case.php?id=11259&hc_location=ufi
Defendant Case Number Language
Klawiter, Brian Warren 1998-CM-0004393
Mailing address Race Sex Height
660 Summerset Dr
Jenison , MI 49428
DOB Weight Hair Eyes
01/07/1980
Attorney Firm Attorney Phone Judge
Amy Preston Sherlund, Faber & Vanmeter PLLC 6167743020 Benjamin H. Logan
Charges
Offense Date Date Closed Offense Description Disposition Disposition Date
11/10/1998 10/13/1999 Assault and Battery Guilty 08/12/1999
11/10/1998 03/14/2001 Probation Violation Guilty 03/14/2001
Date Judge
11/20/1998 New Case Filed Benjamin H. Logan
11/21/1998 See Previous Case ROA History Benjamin H. Logan
10/13/1999 Found Guilty (9.132(1) Assault and Battery) Benjamin H. Logan
02/14/2000 Hearing Scheduled (Probation OTSC 02/22/2000 11:00 AM) Benjamin H. Logan
02/22/2000 Hearing result for Probation OTSC held on 02/22/2000 11:00 AM: Not Guilty Plea, schedule a PV hearing in front of BHL. Benjamin H. Logan
02/22/2000 appointed an attorney for pv hearing per BHL Benjamin H. Logan
03/01/2000 Court Appointed Attorney Public defender Thomas Panik Benjamin H. Logan
03/01/2000 Hearing Scheduled (Probation Hearing 03/06/2000 09:00 AM) Benjamin H. Logan
03/01/2000 Notice To Appear Issued and Sent Benjamin H. Logan
03/06/2000 Hearing result for Probation Hearing held on 03/06/2000 09:00 AM: Guilty Plea to the probation violation - 15 days in jail work release - prob cont'd plus 100 costs for the hearing - to be paid 3/6/00 Benjamin H. Logan
03/06/2000 @ Prob Hearing - Def was sentenced to 15 days work release plus $100 f/cc's No Judge
03/07/2000 Hearing Scheduled (Review 05/30/2000 10:00 AM) Review to Janet for W/R. No Judge
04/08/2000 WORK RELEASE COMPLETED PER PEGGY. No Judge
06/29/2000 Hearing result for Review held on 05/30/2000 10:00 AM: Hearing Held - PER PEGGY @ KCJ, DEF. COMPLETED WORK RELEASE 15D. No Judge
07/06/2000 Hearing Scheduled (Review 01/05/2001 09:00 AM) REV BOND REL No Judge
08/02/2000 Hearing Scheduled (Review 12/21/2000 08:30 AM) No Judge
09/20/2000 Petition and Order for Extension has been granted. Benjamin H. Logan
09/20/2000 Petition for extension of probation for 12 months filed. Benjamin H. Logan
12/26/2000 Hearing result for Review held on 12/21/2000 08:30 AM: Hearing Held Benjamin H. Logan
01/04/2001 Hearing Scheduled (Review 11/23/2001 09:00 AM) No Judge
01/08/2001 OTSC issued for Failure to Appear - Failure to Appear - Charge # 1, Assault and Battery Appearance date: 01/22/2001
01/23/2001 OTSC issued for Failure to Appear - Failure to Appear - Charge # 1, Assault and Battery Appearance date: 02/06/2001
02/13/2001 Hearing Scheduled (Probation OTSC 03/14/2001 10:45 AM) Benjamin H. Logan
02/19/2001 OTSC issued for Failure to Appear - Failure to Appear - Charge # 1, Assault and Battery Appearance date: 03/05/2001
03/14/2001 Hearing result for Probation OTSC held on 03/14/2001 10:45 AM: Guilty Plea - prob revoked - def to serve 30 days in jail - work rel auth....def may report on 3-22-01 at 8:am Benjamin H. Logan
03/14/2001 Case status changed: adjudicated Benjamin H. Logan
03/14/2001 Found Guilty (666666 Probation Violation) Benjamin H. Logan
03/14/2001 OTSC issued for Failure to Appear - Failure to Appear - Charge # 2, Probation Violation Appearance date: 03/28/2001
03/15/2001 Petition and Order for Revocation has been issued. Benjamin H. Logan
03/20/2001 Prob revocation signed 03/15/2001 Benjamin H. Logan
03/22/2001 DFT. REPORTED TO KCJ FOR 30D. FAXED JUDGMENT TO KCJ. Benjamin H. Logan
03/22/2001 COM'D KCJ (30D.) No Judge
04/05/2001 Hearing result for Review held on 11/23/2001 09:00 AM: Hearing cancelled No Judge
04/05/2001 Case status changed: closed No Judge
04/17/2001 WORK CREW HOURS (25.5) SUSPENDED DUE TO PROBATION REVOCATION (30 DAYS) Benjamin H. Logan
What bothers me with this is, there are always going to be assholes. It is EASY to find them. Just because you find Christian Assholes, doesn't mean ALL Christians are ASSHOLES.
There are MILLIONS of Christians, who are not assholes. But every time one f's up...you guys jump on it. Forget about the Christians who do wonderful things EVERY DAY, who give their time and money to help others.
I find it very offensive to do what you do. but, big fucking deal huh... :rolleyes:
The problem you have there Hank is that the asshole Christians are the vocal ones who do things just like this asshole is doing.
He may have some ramifications that he hasn't thought of though. Cummins, which I assume is a supplier that he needs, is distancing themselves from him and has asked him to stop using their logo. Also, he's operating that business without a license from the city of Grand Rapids due to some really quirky thinking.
"This is a blatant and intentioned violation of the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution," Klawiter told the council on Jan. 26. "I dispute your lawful ability to do what you claim. I will not sign the application. I cannot and will not give up my civil rights, especially when requested by a government entity for which the Constitution was designed to limit the power of.
http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2015/04/no_business_license_for_auto_s.html
Exterminator has pointed this out before I believe:
(https://scontent-iad.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xtf1/v/t1.0-9/11128719_830111860357894_4493621450761504735_n.jpg?oh=07445ad89d50f716efbe100e1eae97c5&oe=55A1725C)
Quote from: Locutus on April 17, 2015, 12:32:25 PM
The problem you have there Hank is that the asshole Christians are the vocal ones who do things just like this asshole is doing.
It works both ways....there are vocal leftists that stir the pot when it doesn't need stirred. The bottom line is, this buttcrust will probably ruin himself. The majority of the people are good. They get it, even if they disagree with others.........the free enterprise system will prevail.
Quote from: Locutus on April 17, 2015, 12:33:03 PM
Exterminator has pointed this out before I believe:
And I agree, but because of the whacko liberal extremists who WE think fits that description to a tee! It works both way dude.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 17, 2015, 12:28:09 PM
What bothers me with this is, there are always going to be assholes. It is EASY to find them. Just because you find Christian Assholes, doesn't mean ALL Christians are ASSHOLES.
There are MILLIONS of Christians, who are not assholes. But every time one f's up...you guys jump on it. Forget about the Christians who do wonderful things EVERY DAY, who give their time and money to help others.
I find it very offensive to do what you do. but, big fucking deal huh... :rolleyes:
Valid points, Hank. But the problem remains one of discrimination. How many assholes are you willing to make excuses for before you, as a Christian, speak up and say it just isn't right to allow discrimination of any sort?
Do you look down at the bottom of the page on the link EX posted? There are even more stories on these scumbags ...
Pediatrician refuses to treat gay couple's child
Georgia florist won't serve gay couples
Ben Carson: Prison proves being gay is a choice.
Quote from: Bo D on April 17, 2015, 12:46:07 PM
Valid points, Hank. But the problem remains one of discrimination. How many assholes are you willing to make excuses for...
Which is what you typically do...
Quote from: Bo D on April 17, 2015, 12:46:07 PM
Valid points, Hank. But the problem remains one of discrimination. How many assholes are you willing to make excuses for before you, as a Christian, speak up and say it just isn't right to allow discrimination of any sort?
Do you look down at the bottom of the page on the link EX posted? There are even more stories on these scumbags ...
Pediatrician refuses to treat gay couple's child
Georgia florist won't serve gay couples
Ben Carson: Prison proves being gay is a choice.
We already have laws against discrimination. These guys have substantially prove that any burdens they are against goes against any religious belief that they sincerely hold. You just can't have an opinion and expect it to hold up in court.
Can you provide any evidence where people ARE BEING DISCRIMINATED against? If there IS, I can promise you, the Christian community by large would NOT support them. All the RFRA does is it simply allows religious people to challenge government activities that encroach on their beliefs.....PERIOD!
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 17, 2015, 01:22:57 PM
We already have laws against discrimination. These guys have substantially prove that any burdens they are against goes against any religious belief that they sincerely hold. You just can't have an opinion and expect it to hold up in court.
Can you provide any evidence where people ARE BEING DISCRIMINATED against? If there IS, I can promise you, the Christian community by large would NOT support them. All the RFRA does is it simply allows religious people to challenge government activities that encroach on their beliefs.....PERIOD!
C'mon, Hank! you can do better than that. This mechanic asshole in Michigan isn't refusing service to gays over his religious beliefs. The man is a convicted felon! He's a bigot, pure and simple. And more and more of these cases are surfacing every day.
Quote from: Bo D on April 17, 2015, 01:29:43 PM
This mechanic asshole in Michigan isn't refusing service to gays over his religious beliefs.
Neither is anyone else.
From http://www.laweekly.com/music/henry-rollins-governor-mike-pence-threw-god-under-the-bus-5499649 (http://www.laweekly.com/music/henry-rollins-governor-mike-pence-threw-god-under-the-bus-5499649):
"I wasn't offended by the postings from those who stood up for the freedom to be prejudiced, even when they lacked the intellectual courage to come in through the front door and state their business, as the Westboro Baptist Church does. But even the WBC can't say what it really means. It should change the wording of its now famous slogan by replacing 'God' with 'I' and finally tell the truth, but it can't. No guts."Another interesting observation from the article is that Pence had absolutely no plan to change the legislation despite the outcry of people not only in Indiana but across the country. It was only when money entered the equation that he relented, proving definitively that it and not the citizens dictates the actions of our politicians.
Quote from: Bo D on April 17, 2015, 01:29:43 PM
C'mon, Hank! you can do better than that. This mechanic asshole in Michigan isn't refusing service to gays over his religious beliefs. The man is a convicted felon! He's a bigot, pure and simple. And more and more of these cases are surfacing every day.
Then he is discriminating and even if they don't sue him, his business WILL SUFFER. Like I said, MOST people are good people and will not tolerate that shit. Despite what you guys think of me, I would NEVER discriminate against ANYBODY.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 17, 2015, 03:45:39 PM
Then he is discriminating and even if they don't sue him, his business WILL SUFFER. Like I said, MOST people are good people and will not tolerate that shit. Despite what you guys think of me, I would NEVER discriminate against ANYBODY.
I sense that about you. So why do you defend those who do discriminate in the name of religion?
Why would ANY true Christian practice discrimination?
Quote from: Bo D on April 17, 2015, 03:47:39 PM
I sense that about you. So why do you defend those who do discriminate in the name of religion?
Why would ANY true Christian practice discrimination?
They don't. At the same time, I feel there ARE INDEED EXCEPTIONS, when a person can be put into a compromising situation, where his/her religious values could be challenged....and it isn't a hateful thing, but merely a principled, religious value that they don't feel comfortable with in going against it. (Did I word this correctly?)
Now, if you go back, I was NEVER, EVER a 100% supporter of the Pence Bill. I even told Locutus, I felt FORCED to take a side, because of all the trashing that was going on. My PERSONAL take is, Pence screwed up. Not that I think it is a horrible bill, but rather one that we didn't necessarily HAVE to HAVE. I don't think it was worth the ramifications it brought on.
By default, being the Conservative of the Zone, I felt a duty, to side with it, ;) :razz: ...and especially after all of the bandwagon facebookers, who took sides against it, just because of the Media's massive attack. (Pence should have been able to "KNOW BETTER"....and NOT take on this bill, at least at this point of his career....it shows a lack of using common sense as a leader, imo)
I don't think he remotely saw this sort of backlash was coming.....or he thought he could muster through it, but he was wrong, and it is more than likely the end of his career...especially on a National Level.
I saw this one coming an hour and a half ago when the question was first asked. :biggrin:
Quote from: Bo D on April 17, 2015, 03:47:39 PM
Why would ANY true Christian practice discrimination?
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 17, 2015, 05:01:41 PM
They don't.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/No_True_Scotsman
No True Scotsman is a logical fallacy by which an individual attempts to avoid being associated with an unpleasant act by asserting that no true member of the group they belong to would do such a thing; this fallacy also applies to defining a term or criteria biasedly as to defend it from counterargument which can be identified as a biased, persuasive, or rhetorical definition. Instead of acknowledging that some members of a group have undesirable characteristics, the fallacy tries to redefine the group to exclude them. Sentences such as "all members of X have desirable trait Y" then become tautologies, because Y becomes a requirement of membership in X. :wink:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 17, 2015, 05:01:41 PM
They don't. At the same time, I feel there ARE INDEED EXCEPTIONS, when a person can be put into a compromising situation, where his/her religious values could be challenged....and it isn't a hateful thing, but merely a principled, religious value that they don't feel comfortable with in going against it. (Did I word this correctly?)
Now, if you go back, I was NEVER, EVER a 100% supporter of the Pence Bill. I even told Locutus, I felt FORCED to take a side, because of all the trashing that was going on. My PERSONAL take is, Pence screwed up. Not that I think it is a horrible bill, but rather one that we didn't necessarily HAVE to HAVE. I don't think it was worth the ramifications it brought on.
By default, being the Conservative of the Zone, I felt a duty, to side with it, ;) :razz: ...and especially after all of the bandwagon facebookers, who took sides against it, just because of the Media's massive attack. (Pence should have been able to "KNOW BETTER"....and NOT take on this bill, at least at this point of his career....it shows a lack of using common sense as a leader, imo)
I don't think he remotely saw this sort of backlash was coming.....or he thought he could muster through it, but he was wrong, and it is more than likely the end of his career...especially on a National Level.
I think I am moving beyond Pence and Indiana. I see this as disturbing on a national, indeed - on an international level.
I'll ask you this. What kind of Christian would use "religious values" as a basis for discrimination? Are they truly following the teachings of Jesus? Who are they to judge? Do they think Jesus taught or condoned discrimination?
Ponder this ...
"Not everyone can accept this teaching, but only those to whom it is given. For there are
eunuchs [gays] who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let anyone accept this who can." (Matthew 19:11-12)
Bo, I lean towards your way of thinking or I certainly do not argue that a Christian should not put themselves above others.....for my personal belief is that we are ALL sinners....and we need to worry about our own well being and not judge others on if their sin is bigger than my sin, because my belief is God can careless, that He already set the bar for all of us and it is pretty simple, but we make it way more difficult than it needs to be.
With that being said, I understand how some people can feel the way they do and NOT WANT to support a particular lifestyle.
It has nothing to do with hate.
I will go on record and say I have no problem with two people who honestly love one another no matter what their sex is. I despise those who give "love" a bad name....those who cheat on their spouses, those who have no regards for any outcome of their actions.
That is where I believe Jesus stood on all of this.
Here's what Jesus sayeth:
(https://scontent-atl.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfa1/v/t1.0-9/11026585_10200369504357503_6093114294065843195_n.jpg?oh=8ac0a916c19bcbd1988e001654563e33&oe=559B6B2B)
:biggrin:
Quote from: Anne on April 17, 2015, 10:06:07 AM
Are you saying that as long as an activity is legal any person in business would have to participate in that activity by photography, catering, decorating, providing transportation or venue?
That's exactly what he's saying, and what all of us have been saying all along. Once you open up a
public business, and start making money off of the
public, you can't discriminate against segments of the
public based on your own biases and bigotry.
It was wrong when it was done to black people, and it's just as wrong with gay people. In other words, you must "fixeth the gay car, and serveth the gay pizza," or the Hispanic pizza or car, or the Jewish pizza or car, or the Polish pizza or car, or whatever adjective you choose to insert there.
Wow! We are still on two different wave lengths.....NOBODY CAN DISCRIMINATE!!!!!!!!
But we all have our rights to not participate, even business owners, in anything that goes against their sincere belief. Nobody has yet to turn away someone from their business strictly because they didn't like them......THAT is discrimination......why is this hard to follow?
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 17, 2015, 07:22:11 PM
But we all have our rights to not participate, even business owners, in anything that goes against their sincere belief.
FIFY. :wink:
---------V
Quote from: Y on April 15, 2015, 05:06:41 PM
Once you enter into business and become a public entity, you HAVE to leave your personal prejudices at the door. I don't know how many times you have to be told that before it sinks in.
Show me where it says that! Remember corporations are people....the scotus says so!
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 17, 2015, 07:39:02 PM
Show me where it says that! Remember corporations are people....the scotus says so!
You still think that's a good idea, obviously. :rolleyes:
And actually, anti-discrimination laws say
exactly that.
Just wait until one of these things you incessantly tout as being "good ideas" around here comes back around and bites you in the ass. As Y said early on in this thread, you'll be howling and bitching all the way to the moon and back.
Quote from: Locutus on April 17, 2015, 07:43:53 PM
You still think that's a good idea, obviously. :rolleyes:
And actually, anti-discrimination laws say exactly that.
Just wait until one of these things you incessantly tout as being "good ideas" around here comes back around and bites you in the ass. As Y said early on in this thread, you'll be howling and bitching all the way to the moon and back.
If it can be substantially proven that any burdens they are against goes against any religious belief that they sincerely hold then that is what it is ,all about!
Quote from: Locutus on April 17, 2015, 07:04:57 PM
That's exactly what he's saying, and what all of us have been saying all along. Once you open up a public business, and start making money off of the public, you can't discriminate against segments of the public based on your own biases and bigotry.
It was wrong when it was done to black people, and it's just as wrong with gay people. In other words, you must "fixeth the gay car, and serveth the gay pizza," or the Hispanic pizza or car, or the Jewish pizza or car, or the Polish pizza or car, or whatever adjective you choose to insert there.
Opens up some interesting possibilities, doesn't it?
Quote from: Anne on April 18, 2015, 10:01:42 AM
Opens up some interesting possibilities, doesn't it?
I think some of the possibilities have been brought up on this very thread. Do you have some new examples to add?
Time will tell, that is the bottom line.
(http://i475.photobucket.com/albums/rr111/hlovett_2008/11150542_861381180618584_8840501707559669689_n_zpscev0y2z5.jpg) (http://s475.photobucket.com/user/hlovett_2008/media/11150542_861381180618584_8840501707559669689_n_zpscev0y2z5.jpg.html)
I am glad of one thing, with Pense signing this stupid bill he killed his chance for running for president. Thanks to his god. :haha: But if we lose the NCCA because of this, the stupid bastard needs to be hung. :hanged: I guess the stupid Republican voters of this stupid state, we will get him for 4 more years a Governor. :doh:
Quote from: Locutus on April 18, 2015, 03:12:19 PM
I think some of the possibilities have been brought up on this very thread. Do you have some new examples to add?
Sure, if everyone on here owned/operated a photography business and a member of the KKK wanted them to photograph a meeting cross/burning (I looked it up and if the cross burning can't be proved to be threatening is done on private property with the owner's permission in a spot not generally open to the public it is legal) how many would jump at that. What if someone wanted to film killing a bunch of pets at a shelter for their personal use, how would that set? Maybe a late term abortion. I didn't go back and read all of the previous posts so if these have already been discussed, I apologize.
Someone asked how catering is participating in an event. In my experience when you cater an event you provide the food and personnel and probably the plates, knives, forks, etc., and do the clean up. You are in a way participating personally in the celebration of the event. If you just drop the food off at the door it is something else, IMO.
Or how about if someone asked you to take a video of them taking a shit while they had diarrhea? :rolleyes:
Quote from: Anne on April 22, 2015, 01:35:09 PM
Sure, if everyone on here owned/operated a photography business and a member of the KKK wanted them to photograph a meeting cross/burning (I looked it up and if the cross burning can't be proved to be threatening is done on private property with the owner's permission in a spot not generally open to the public it is legal) how many would jump at that. What if someone wanted to film killing a bunch of pets at a shelter for their personal use, how would that set? Maybe a late term abortion. I didn't go back and read all of the previous posts so if these have already been discussed, I apologize.
Someone asked how catering is participating in an event. In my experience when you cater an event you provide the food and personnel and probably the plates, knives, forks, etc., and do the clean up. You are in a way participating personally in the celebration of the event. If you just drop the food off at the door it is something else, IMO.
Anne, answer a question. If a mother is going to have a baby and a test proves that the child was going to be a homosexual. Would you then believe in abortion of that child? :rolleyes: :confused:
Quote from: The Troll on April 24, 2015, 01:37:56 PM
Anne, answer a question. If a mother is going to have a baby and a test proves that the child was going to be a homosexual. Would you then believe in abortion of that child? :rolleyes: :confused:
Most excellent hypothetical inquiry Troll. . . 8)
Quote from: Palehorse on April 24, 2015, 07:49:19 PM
Most excellent hypothetical inquiry Troll. . . 8)
Most stupid hypothetical question IMO. A hypothetical question which was only partially answered and then misrepresented is one of the problems with the pizza restaurant thing.
Quote from: me on April 26, 2015, 08:24:31 AM
Most stupid hypothetical question IMO. A hypothetical question which was only partially answered and then misrepresented is one of the problems with the pizza restaurant thing.
Hi Baby Cakes, nice to hear from you. :kiss: :toothless:
Quote from: The Troll on April 26, 2015, 12:31:02 PM
Hi Baby Cakes, nice to hear from you. :kiss: :toothless:
Why thank ya Troll. Nice to be back.... :yes: ;D
Quote from: Exterminator on April 22, 2015, 01:40:19 PM
Or how about if someone asked you to take a video of them taking a shit while they had diarrhea? :rolleyes:
Another possibility, actually you can probably find quite a bit of that type of video on you tube. Not sure if someone would actually pay to have that video taken, though.
Quote from: Palehorse on April 24, 2015, 07:49:19 PM
Most excellent hypothetical inquiry Troll. . . 8)
I don't support any abortions, as so aptly pointed out in other threads, not my baby, not my choice.
So, no one would have a problem participating in any of those three events? Interesting.
Quote from: Anne on April 26, 2015, 03:31:28 PM
I don't support any abortions, as so aptly pointed out in other threads, not my baby, not my choice.
Don't support abortion, but support discrimination. Let us pray. :pray: :preach: :pope: :huh1:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on April 17, 2015, 07:22:11 PM
Wow! We are still on two different wave lengths.....NOBODY CAN DISCRIMINATE!!!!!!!!
But we all have our rights to not participate, even business owners, in anything that goes against their sincere belief. Nobody has yet to turn away someone from their business strictly because they didn't like them......THAT is discrimination......why is this hard to follow?
No, you're wrong - as usual. There's a big difference in the rights you have as a private individual and those held by becoming a public concern - a business. I don't know why you folks can't get that through your head.
I know, I know, the Roberts court has done its damnedest to blur the line and muddy the waters, but they have yet to destroy that line.
'Sincere belief', don't make me laugh. There's already been a myriad of examples that have been pointed out your inane 'sincere belief' is whatever one of those idiots wants to say it is.
Anyway, on the other issue, how do you know that no one has been 'turned away' on those grounds?
Quote from: Anne on April 22, 2015, 01:35:09 PM
Sure, if everyone on here owned/operated a photography business and a member of the KKK wanted them to photograph a meeting cross/burning (I looked it up and if the cross burning can't be proved to be threatening is done on private property with the owner's permission in a spot not generally open to the public it is legal) how many would jump at that. What if someone wanted to film killing a bunch of pets at a shelter for their personal use, how would that set? Maybe a late term abortion. I didn't go back and read all of the previous posts so if these have already been discussed, I apologize.
Someone asked how catering is participating in an event. In my experience when you cater an event you provide the food and personnel and probably the plates, knives, forks, etc., and do the clean up. You are in a way participating personally in the celebration of the event. If you just drop the food off at the door it is something else, IMO.
I think everyone on here knows of my opinions of racism and racists.
Now let me tell you that I have on more than one occasion in my music career performed for the KKK, members of the KKK, and establishments tied to the KKK. I wasn't being hired for either my opinions on racism, the KKK, or their actions/beliefs. I was hired for my talent's entertainment value and that's it.
I also think everyone here knows my opinion of the religious ilk.
For the decade I had my music stores open, I did lots of business with churches and the religious - regardless that I find them to be corrupt, back stabbing, etc.. I stopped giving them credit, but I never stopped doing business with them. They weren't interested in my opinions on religion or their actions/beliefs either. They were interested in, and patronized my stores for, the products I had available, and that was it.
Most people here know I'm sort of a curmudgeon, and even though somewhat gregarious/talkative, not much of a people person - prolly from dealing with the public most of my life.
I performed for, and worked with, drunks most of my life, and even way back when I drank I never cared for most drunks. Most drunks are neither fun nor enjoyable, and I never understood why anyone drank if it wasn't fun and/or it made you a person no one wanted to be around. But, I wasn't being hired for my opinions or acceptance of drunks etc., I was hired, and worked with, for my talent and entertainment value.
I taught for about forty years, and there were plenty of folks I wouldn't have given the time of day to had it not been in a business transaction situation.
All of that is to point out the difference between personal beliefs (private) and business transactions (public), and how they are to be handled.
As on this particular issue, you don't force your personal religious beliefs into business situations. If you can't do that, then you don't belong in business...
...and as I've pointed out, if you're truly 'religious', what are you doing in business anyway - and why are you supporting Capitalism?
Quote from: Y on May 03, 2015, 04:12:30 PM
I performed for, and worked with, drunks most of my life, and even way back when I drank I never cared for most drunks. Most drunks are neither fun nor enjoyable, and I never understood why anyone drank if it wasn't fun and/or it made you a person no one wanted to be around. But, I wasn't being hired for my opinions or acceptance of drunks etc., I was hired, and worked with, for my talent and entertainment value.
[interjection]
"If you're an a$$hole drunk, it is not that the alcohol made you that way, it's because that's what you were before you got drunk." --- followsthewolf
[/interjection]
Quote from: Y on May 03, 2015, 04:12:30 PM
I think everyone on here knows of my opinions of racism and racists.
Now let me tell you that I have on more than one occasion in my music career performed for the KKK, members of the KKK, and establishments tied to the KKK. I wasn't being hired for either my opinions on racism, the KKK, or their actions/beliefs. I was hired for my talent's entertainment value and that's it.
I also think everyone here knows my opinion of the religious ilk.
For the decade I had my music stores open, I did lots of business with churches and the religious - regardless that I find them to be corrupt, back stabbing, etc.. I stopped giving them credit, but I never stopped doing business with them. They weren't interested in my opinions on religion or their actions/beliefs either. They were interested in, and patronized my stores for, the products I had available, and that was it.
Most people here know I'm sort of a curmudgeon, and even though somewhat gregarious/talkative, not much of a people person - prolly from dealing with the public most of my life.
I performed for, and worked with, drunks most of my life, and even way back when I drank I never cared for most drunks. Most drunks are neither fun nor enjoyable, and I never understood why anyone drank if it wasn't fun and/or it made you a person no one wanted to be around. But, I wasn't being hired for my opinions or acceptance of drunks etc., I was hired, and worked with, for my talent and entertainment value.
I taught for about forty years, and there were plenty of folks I wouldn't have given the time of day to had it not been in a business transaction situation.
All of that is to point out the difference between personal beliefs (private) and business transactions (public), and how they are to be handled.
As on this particular issue, you don't force your personal religious beliefs into business situations. If you can't do that, then you don't belong in business...
...and as I've pointed out, if you're truly 'religious', what are you doing in business anyway - and why are you supporting Capitalism?
Everyone in the US "supports" capitalism. You think if you have religious or moral convictions you shouldn't have a business? I guess maybe you are right if you will compromise what you believe in.
Quote from: Anne on May 17, 2015, 05:00:07 PM
Maybe because communism has resulted in oppression, poverty, cruelty and corruption in every modern attempt.
I submit that the Tea Billies are looking to drive us toward the very same results. :yes:
Quote from: Palehorse on May 18, 2015, 06:22:48 PM
I submit that the Tea Billies are looking to drive us toward the very same results. :yes:
and I would submit it HAS been the Democrat party that has done all of those things to our nation, single handedly.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on May 18, 2015, 08:49:49 PM
and I would submit it HAS been the Democrat party that has done all of those things to our nation, single handedly.
You're not only wrong but blind and naive. :rolleyes:
EX, you're to nice to this man who is an idoit. He doesn't know shit about anything and he proves it every time he opens his mouth. :trustme: