RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


dcnovice -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/28/2015 5:08:18 PM)

quote:

wasnt seeing the sarcasm either, and I am fluent in sarcasm, it failed...miserably

You have cmail. [;)]




BamaD -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/28/2015 5:08:44 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

I think the one some idiot tried to put on the ballot in California was a bit of an overreach [:D]

Since there are so many California laws that fit this description which one are you talking about.


making sodomy a capital crime

No wonder it didn't get on the ballot.




dcnovice -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/28/2015 6:09:31 PM)

FR

http://www.indystar.com/story/opinion/columnists/tim-swarens/2015/03/28/swarens-gov-mike-pence-push-clarification-religious-freedom-law/70611906/




LookieNoNookie -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/28/2015 7:11:32 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

The Governor of Indiania, Mike Pence, signed into law a bill that allows businesses to refuse customers they think are gay, lesbian, bi-sexual, or even transgendered. While he tried to explain it as not being that; only those supporting the GOP/TOP would be dumb enough not to figure this out as being the wrong idea. Pushing religious dogma down the citizen's throats, it is now legal for a business to refuse to serve someone they think is homosexual. Likewise, means they can refuse....anyone....and later claim "I thought they were gay/lebsian/bisexual/transgendered". So that black guy whom is heterosexual, can be refused, right along with the combat veteran, blind/deaf person, and anyone not of the same religion (i.e. muslims).

All the business owner has to say is "I thought they were gay/lesbian/bisexual/transgendered."

This....*IS*....an example of tyranny! I expect all those Indianans whom have guns to immediately resist this law pass by both a state legislature and executive branches. Otherwise, we can cross that myth off the list of other firearm myths in the nation.

On a more serious note, how the FUCK does this get past the citizens? That I can see this law being used abusively onto US Citizens and even tourists. Right off the bat, two major groups have stated they will be moving their events eleswhere unless this law is purged: Gen Con and the Disciples of Christ church group. For those that dont know, Gen Con is like the 'Mecca of the Gaming World' (thing Comic Con, meets PAX East and Dungeon & Dragons). That is a HUGE amount of future tourist dollars being lost by area businesses.

The NCAA is also considering removing itself from this state. A major lost for students enrolled in area schools.

Gov. Pence is considered one of the possible 2016 contenders. This bill is help satisfy conservatives, that he is a 'defender of Christian freedom' (at the expense of all other religions and views of Christianity of others). Its a bill pushed for petty political points, not, solid and reasonable government. When signing the bill into law, Gov. Pence had this to say:

"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..."

Yeah, if someone else's faith in philosophy or religion was not affected by gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgender person; how does this law help them? It doesn't. These people's religious viewpoints are irrelevant according to the Governor of their state!

He goes on to say:

"This was a measure that frankly, Indiana should have enacted many years ago. It gives our courts guidance about evaluating government action and puts the highest standard -- it essentially says, if a government is going to compel you to act in a way that violates your religious beliefs, there has to be a compelling state interest."

I wonder how the citizens of Indiana are enjoying that religious fanatical fascism they elected to public office? Maybe they should be a bit more careful...WHO....they elect to government, eh?

SOURCE



I didn't even read this whole thing past the first sentence....

Seattle's Mayor just eliminated all travel to Indiana, but the article didn't say why.

Is this true?

(Didn't bold this).





Kirata -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/28/2015 7:23:07 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata
quote:

ORIGINAL: joether
So why are you supporting the law you have been defending all this time?

You really are a fucking idiot.

That lacked a little je ne sais quoi as a witty come-back, K. Just saying.

Sometimes the truth just doesn't allow for aesthetics, PFH.

Ain't that right. What we have here is a psycho penguin who gets his "facts" from the ComedyNewsNetwork screaming in outrage that "Indiania" can now "discriminant" against anybody! Oh the horror! GOP/Tea Party Christians, "pushing religious dogma down the citizen's throats." "Tyranny," thump! "Fanatics," thump! "Fascism," thump!

Meanwhile (blissfully ignored though pointed out on the very first page) the Indiana law is materially the same as the RFRA, which lest we forget was introduced by Democrat Chuck Shumer, overwhelmingly passed by both houses of Congress, signed into law by Bill Clinton, and relied on by the Supreme Court in its Hobby Lobby decision.

It just don't get any funnier than this, folks.

(except maybe the claim that I'm defending it)

K.




BamaD -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/28/2015 9:45:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata
quote:

ORIGINAL: joether
So why are you supporting the law you have been defending all this time?

You really are a fucking idiot.

That lacked a little je ne sais quoi as a witty come-back, K. Just saying.

Sometimes the truth just doesn't allow for aesthetics, PFH.

Ain't that right. What we have here is a psycho penguin who gets his "facts" from the ComedyNewsNetwork screaming in outrage that "Indiania" can now "discriminant" against anybody! Oh the horror! GOP/Tea Party Christians, "pushing religious dogma down the citizen's throats." "Tyranny," thump! "Fanatics," thump! "Fascism," thump!

Meanwhile (blissfully ignored though pointed out on the very first page) the Indiana law is materially the same as the RFRA, which lest we forget was introduced by Democrat Chuck Shumer, overwhelmingly passed by both houses of Congress, signed into law by Bill Clinton, and relied on by the Supreme Court in its Hobby Lobby decision.

It just don't get any funnier than this, folks.

(except maybe the claim that I'm defending it)

K.


If the evil gop isn't trying to pick on gays that will kill this thread.




JVoV -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/28/2015 11:32:02 PM)

FR

Religious freedom is a founding principle of this country, and that absolutely needs to be protected, cherished, and fought for.

But it would be great if those that claim to be Christians actually understood the words of Christ.




eulero83 -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/29/2015 1:36:26 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

I think the one some idiot tried to put on the ballot in California was a bit of an overreach [:D]

Since there are so many California laws that fit this description which one are you talking about.


making sodomy a capital crime

No wonder it didn't get on the ballot.


for what I heard they are collecting the signatures and if they reach the legal number there would be a balot about...




Lucylastic -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/29/2015 3:40:19 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

I think the one some idiot tried to put on the ballot in California was a bit of an overreach [:D]

Since there are so many California laws that fit this description which one are you talking about.


making sodomy a capital crime

No wonder it didn't get on the ballot.


for what I heard they are collecting the signatures and if they reach the legal number there would be a balot about...


http://www.vox.com/2015/3/22/8270411/california-lgbt-executions
Here is the link Eulero, its one of my posts, so he wont see it




DesideriScuri -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/29/2015 5:25:43 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV
FR
Religious freedom is a founding principle of this country, and that absolutely needs to be protected, cherished, and fought for.
But it would be great if those that claim to be Christians actually understood the words of Christ.


This law isn't just for Christians, but, I agree with your statements.




DesideriScuri -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/29/2015 5:33:17 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83
for what I heard they are collecting the signatures and if they reach the legal number there would be a balot about...

http://www.vox.com/2015/3/22/8270411/california-lgbt-executions
Here is the link Eulero, its one of my posts, so he wont see it


How could a guy like that become a lawyer? Anti-sodomy law? Seriously? Sodomy was originally meant to be anal sex. Period. So, even a man and a woman enjoying anal sex would be committing sodomy. Nowadays, it refers to anal or oral sex. I wonder if this guy has ever had a blowjob. If he has, does he get to be the first with a bullet in the head?

Apparently, many Californians from both sides of the aisle are fucked in the head (pun intended).




DaddySatyr -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/29/2015 5:40:29 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV
FR
Religious freedom is a founding principle of this country, and that absolutely needs to be protected, cherished, and fought for.
But it would be great if those that claim to be Christians actually understood the words of Christ.


This law isn't just for Christians, but, I agree with your statements.



Spot on, DS!

When I was just a young skad, I went into a Glatt Kosher deli and asked for a Roast Beef and Swiss on whole wheat. The guy behind the counter looked at me like I'd just pissed on his grandmother. I didn't get it.

He explained to me that in the highest order of Kosher, it wasn't considered proper to put two products from the same animal on the same plate. Okay. I was raised to respect other peoples' religion, even if I didn't understand it.

Now, in respect to this law, if I were a rouser of rabbles, I could travel to Indiania, go to a Kosher deli, repeat the same order, and then claim that the deli man didn't serve me what I wanted because I'm ¼ Cherokee. I would have a case (as far as the lefty PPLs are concerned) that he discriminanted against me. I would, of course, be wrong. The man would be following the tenets of his religion.

You know, I'm not even a practicing Catholic, anymore but I haven't eaten meat on a Friday in 43+ years and, if you're invited to my house for dinner, on a Friday night, steak will not be on the menu.

Now, we're not talking about someone's house, of course, but people that are religious shouldn't be forced by the government (or by unsympathetic rabble-rousers, out to push an agenda) to abandon their religious tenets as they exit their front door.

Don't do business with them. I don't go to Glatt Kosher deli's anymore. My life hasn't been altered too terribly.



Michael




Kirata -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/29/2015 5:41:23 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

Apparently, many Californians from both sides of the aisle are fucked in the head (pun intended).


At first I thought it was probably intended to demonstrate how ridiculous and exploitable California's ballot initiative process is. The proposal reads like satire. If the guy is serious, then it really demonstrates how ridiculous and exploitable California's ballot initiative process is. Sometimes I wonder if geological faults affect people's mental stability. I once spent a year out in SoCal, and I would be willing to bet that it has more neoNazis per square inch than anywhere else in the U.S.

K.





Lucylastic -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/29/2015 5:49:37 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83
for what I heard they are collecting the signatures and if they reach the legal number there would be a balot about...

http://www.vox.com/2015/3/22/8270411/california-lgbt-executions
Here is the link Eulero, its one of my posts, so he wont see it


How could a guy like that become a lawyer? Anti-sodomy law? Seriously? Sodomy was originally meant to be anal sex. Period. So, even a man and a woman enjoying anal sex would be committing sodomy. Nowadays, it refers to anal or oral sex. I wonder if this guy has ever had a blowjob. If he has, does he get to be the first with a bullet in the head?

Apparently, many Californians from both sides of the aisle are fucked in the head (pun intended).


its not just californians.....
it Is christianity




Lucylastic -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/29/2015 5:50:43 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

Apparently, many Californians from both sides of the aisle are fucked in the head (pun intended).


At first I thought it was probably intended to demonstrate how ridiculous and exploitable California's ballot initiative process is. The proposal reads like satire. If the guy is serious, then it really demonstrates how ridiculous and exploitable California's ballot initiative process is. Sometimes I wonder if geological faults affect people's mental stability. I once spent a year out in SoCal, and I would be willing to bet that it has more neoNazis per square inch than anywhere else in the U.S.

K.



yes, cali is now trying to make it more"less nutter friendly* to do the ballot initiative, thats partly why its "high profile"




slvemike4u -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/29/2015 6:38:29 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV
FR
Religious freedom is a founding principle of this country, and that absolutely needs to be protected, cherished, and fought for.
But it would be great if those that claim to be Christians actually understood the words of Christ.


This law isn't just for Christians, but, I agree with your statements.



Spot on, DS!

When I was just a young skad, I went into a Glatt Kosher deli and asked for a Roast Beef and Swiss on whole wheat. The guy behind the counter looked at me like I'd just pissed on his grandmother. I didn't get it.

He explained to me that in the highest order of Kosher, it wasn't considered proper to put two products from the same animal on the same plate. Okay. I was raised to respect other peoples' religion, even if I didn't understand it.

Now, in respect to this law, if I were a rouser of rabbles, I could travel to Indiania, go to a Kosher deli, repeat the same order, and then claim that the deli man didn't serve me what I wanted because I'm ¼ Cherokee. I would have a case (as far as the lefty PPLs are concerned) that he discriminanted against me. I would, of course, be wrong. The man would be following the tenets of his religion.

You know, I'm not even a practicing Catholic, anymore but I haven't eaten meat on a Friday in 43+ years and, if you're invited to my house for dinner, on a Friday night, steak will not be on the menu.

Now, we're not talking about someone's house, of course, but people that are religious shouldn't be forced by the government (or by unsympathetic rabble-rousers, out to push an agenda) to abandon their religious tenets as they exit their front door.

Don't do business with them. I don't go to Glatt Kosher deli's anymore. My life hasn't been altered too terribly.



Michael


People seeking fair and equitable treatment do not qualify as rabble rousers.
Discriminating against people based on their sexual orientation should not,under any circumstances be codified nor offered up as religious protection.
I don't expect you to see this though....figuratively or literally




slvemike4u -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/29/2015 6:40:15 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

Apparently, many Californians from both sides of the aisle are fucked in the head (pun intended).


At first I thought it was probably intended to demonstrate how ridiculous and exploitable California's ballot initiative process is. The proposal reads like satire. If the guy is serious, then it really demonstrates how ridiculous and exploitable California's ballot initiative process is. Sometimes I wonder if geological faults affect people's mental stability. I once spent a year out in SoCal, and I would be willing to bet that it has more neoNazis per square inch than anywhere else in the U.S.

K.



yes, cali is now trying to make it more"less nutter friendly* to do the ballot initiative, thats partly why its "high profile"

It was my understanding that the woman whose position calls fro her to actually place this in front of the voters is seeking legal cover to ensure this never makes it to a ballot....she has higher ambitions.




hot4bondage -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/29/2015 7:37:10 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83
for what I heard they are collecting the signatures and if they reach the legal number there would be a balot about...

http://www.vox.com/2015/3/22/8270411/california-lgbt-executions
Here is the link Eulero, its one of my posts, so he wont see it


How could a guy like that become a lawyer? Anti-sodomy law? Seriously? Sodomy was originally meant to be anal sex. Period. So, even a man and a woman enjoying anal sex would be committing sodomy. Nowadays, it refers to anal or oral sex. I wonder if this guy has ever had a blowjob. If he has, does he get to be the first with a bullet in the head?

Apparently, many Californians from both sides of the aisle are fucked in the head (pun intended).



Sometimes I wonder how much of today's animosity is based on the definition of sodomy. You think it originally meant anal sex. I think it originally meant attempted angel rape. Ether way, the definition seems to have expanded over time.




JVoV -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/29/2015 8:14:05 AM)

The governor is on the Sunday political shows.




eulero83 -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/29/2015 8:48:43 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83
for what I heard they are collecting the signatures and if they reach the legal number there would be a balot about...

http://www.vox.com/2015/3/22/8270411/california-lgbt-executions
Here is the link Eulero, its one of my posts, so he wont see it


How could a guy like that become a lawyer? Anti-sodomy law? Seriously? Sodomy was originally meant to be anal sex. Period. So, even a man and a woman enjoying anal sex would be committing sodomy. Nowadays, it refers to anal or oral sex. I wonder if this guy has ever had a blowjob. If he has, does he get to be the first with a bullet in the head?

Apparently, many Californians from both sides of the aisle are fucked in the head (pun intended).



It might be a provocation to point out how every loonatic can file a ballot proposal with just 200$ and too few signatures, but for what I heard he started another ballot proposal in the past to allow the use of the bible as textbook in schools.
Anyway he might have become crazy after taking the bar exam.




Page: <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875