- Joined
- Jun 11, 2009
- Messages
- 19,657
- Reaction score
- 8,454
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
Any sources? Also, wasn't the Indiana law under Pence a pro-religious freedom bill that liberals tacked on an "anti-LGBT" tag to?
Any sources? Also, wasn't the Indiana law under Pence a pro-religious freedom bill that liberals tacked on an "anti-LGBT" tag to?
This is probably the worst week in recent memory to be gay and a member of the GOP. Not only did Trump pick antigay Governor Pence, who dragged his own state's name through the mud just to advance a blatant anti gay law, as his VP but the GOP passed one of the most anti gay platforms in modern history! It even supported conversion therapy which has been outright rejected by the medical community and is opposed by a super majority of Americans! Apparently protection of children from discredited and unpopular quack medicine is now encroachment of big bad government. :roll:
I have a theory that gay Republicans are really just masochists who get off on being denied even the tiniest amount of respect or recognition by their political affiliates.
Any sources? Also, wasn't the Indiana law under Pence a pro-religious freedom bill that liberals tacked on an "anti-LGBT" tag to?
This is probably the worst week in recent memory to be gay and a member of the GOP. Not only did Trump pick antigay Governor Pence, who dragged his own state's name through the mud just to advance a blatant anti gay law, as his VP but the GOP passed one of the most anti gay platforms in modern history! It even supported conversion therapy which has been outright rejected by the medical community and is opposed by a super majority of Americans! Apparently protection of children from discredited and unpopular quack medicine is now encroachment of big bad government. :roll:
I have a theory that gay Republicans are really just masochists who get off on being denied even the tiniest amount of respect or recognition by their political affiliates.
Any sources? Also, wasn't the Indiana law under Pence a pro-religious freedom bill that liberals tacked on an "anti-LGBT" tag to?
This is probably the worst week in recent memory to be gay and a member of the GOP. Not only did Trump pick antigay Governor Pence, who dragged his own state's name through the mud just to advance a blatant anti gay law, as his VP but the GOP passed one of the most anti gay platforms in modern history! It even supported conversion therapy which has been outright rejected by the medical community and is opposed by a super majority of Americans! Apparently protection of children from discredited and unpopular quack medicine is now encroachment of big bad government. :roll:
I have a theory that gay Republicans are really just masochists who get off on being denied even the tiniest amount of respect or recognition by their political affiliates.
Any sources? Also, wasn't the Indiana law under Pence a pro-religious freedom bill that liberals tacked on an "anti-LGBT" tag to?
Any sources? Also, wasn't the Indiana law under Pence a pro-religious freedom bill that liberals tacked on an "anti-LGBT" tag to?
Basically. "Not Celebrating" has become "Hate" :roll:
It was a state version of the Federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which was originally put forward by that famous right-wing nut, Ted Kennedy. But, you know, in the ever-shifting "truth" of PC culture, yesterday's lions must be today's demons, if only so that we can signal virtue ourselves.
And, of course, Pence backed down on Religious Liberty once he came under pressure over it, rather shamelessly.
https://www.google.com/amp/amp.time...atform/?source=dam?client=ms-android-verizon#
Official: RFRA cost Indy up to 12 conventions and $60M
I think you have it backwards. It was an antigay law the conservatives called "Religous Freedom" so they could pretend they were not
trying to give people a free license to discriminate against LGBT just by citing religion (exactly like they did in the segregation days). Feel free to bring that debate
back up though because there is a lot more evidence now of exactly what motivated it than what existed a few months back.
That might be criticism but is certainty not critical analysis.
Basically. "Not Celebrating" has become "Hate" :roll:
It was a state version of the Federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which was originally put forward by that famous right-wing nut, Ted Kennedy. But, you know, in the ever-shifting "truth" of PC culture, yesterday's lions must be today's demons, if only so that we can signal virtue ourselves.
And, of course, Pence backed down on Religious Liberty once he came under pressure over it, rather shamelessly.
Not celebrating is a straw man. The law dealt with acts not thoughts (and you know better) and the balance between the right to discriminate versus the right to practice a religion.
And it was broader than the federal law (applied to non-governmental entities) and it set a higher standard than federal law ("essential to furthering" in the Indiana law, versus "in furtherance of" in federal law. So, no, it wasn't a state version. And amendments to make it like federal law were rejected. Furthermore, if the courts found that the state RFRA law trumped local laws, the LGBT protections passed by local governments were at least in jeopardy if not effectively overridden. Also, the proponents of the law made no secret, and when this was debated here at the time we quoted them, saying the purpose was to essentially allow private businesses to discriminate against LGBT.
So, no, it wasn't like the federal law and everyone in the state involved in drafting it knew it, and many of the differences that explicitly tilted the balance against LGBT rights were deliberate. So the argument that they were the same is ignorant or disingenuous.
Yeah, shamelessly backed down on the "religious liberty" to discriminate against the gays. Coward!
What he really did was figure out a pretty simple equation. He could support the ability of a few dead enders to discriminate against LGBT and alienate most of the business community and nearly all the big business community, or support changes to the law. He's not the brightest bulb in politics, but he ain't that dumb, and neither were big majorities in the state legislature who also 'backed down' pretty quickly.
Why can't you guys be honest about your own damn legislation?
Why can't you guys be honest about your own damn legislation?
Not celebrating? That's odd, if a Jewish person enters a business to purchase goods and services that isn't seen as celebrating Judaism.Basically. "Not Celebrating" has become "Hate" :roll:
It was a state version of the Federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which was originally put forward by that famous right-wing nut, Ted Kennedy. But, you know, in the ever-shifting "truth" of PC culture, yesterday's lions must be today's demons, if only so that we can signal virtue ourselves.
And, of course, Pence backed down on Religious Liberty once he came under pressure over it, rather shamelessly.
Not celebrating is a straw man. The law dealt with acts not thoughts (and you know better) and the balance between the right to discriminate versus the right to practice a religion.
And it was broader than the federal law (applied to non-governmental entities) and it set a higher standard than federal law ("essential to furthering" in the Indiana law, versus "in furtherance of" in federal law. So, no, it wasn't a state version. And amendments to make it like federal law were rejected. Furthermore, if the courts found that the state RFRA law trumped local laws, the LGBT protections passed by local governments were at least in jeopardy if not effectively overridden. Also, the proponents of the law made no secret, and when this was debated here at the time we quoted them, saying the purpose was to essentially allow private businesses to discriminate against LGBT.
So, no, it wasn't like the federal law and everyone in the state involved in drafting it knew it, and many of the differences that explicitly tilted the balance against LGBT rights were deliberate. So the argument that they were the same is ignorant or disingenuous.
Yeah, shamelessly backed down on the "religious liberty" to discriminate against the gays. Coward!
What he really did was figure out a pretty simple equation. He could support the ability of a few dead enders to discriminate against LGBT and alienate most of the business community and nearly all the big business community, or support changes to the law. He's not the brightest bulb in politics, but he ain't that dumb, and neither were big majorities in the state legislature who also 'backed down' pretty quickly.
Basically. "Not Celebrating" has become "Hate" :roll:
It was a state version of the Federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which was originally put forward by that famous right-wing nut, Ted Kennedy. But, you know, in the ever-shifting "truth" of PC culture, yesterday's lions must be today's demons, if only so that we can signal virtue ourselves.
And, of course, Pence backed down on Religious Liberty once he came under pressure over it, rather shamelessly.
I'm wondering when the right to practice religion became the right to discriminate. That crap didn't fly in 1964 when they passed the civil rights act. And there were people saying that their religion forbade them to serve black people or Jewish people.
Why should that same exact argument carry any weight now?
Because gay people are not the same as black or Jewish. Gay people are actually wrong. There was some confusion as to the other two groups being wrong, but now we know who is actually wrong and immoral. It's written in the bible. You can't deny that. :2razz:
The bill was for "Religious Freedom" just like the Texas bill was for "Women's Health".
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?