Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

WestCoastRunner · February 22, 2014

Arizona's latest crazy antic is to pass a bill by a 33-27 vote that would allow business owners, as long as they assert their religious beliefs, to deny service to gay and lesbian customers. It now goes to Gov. Jan Brewer, a Republican and onetime small business owner who vetoed similar legislation last year but has expressed the right of business owners to deny service.

As far as I can tell, if you are of the LGBT community, of Mexican descent or even a pregnant unwed woman, you better not move to Arizona.

And if I were a business owner thinking of locating to Arizona, I'd run the other way.

Shady · February 22, 2014

Can you provide a link? "As far as you can tells" isn't good enough.

Edited February 22, 2014 by Shady

eyeball · February 22, 2014

C'mon, you mean to say can't intuit this too by simply putting yourself in a gay person's shoes for even half a minute? You don't need a link to do that, a little empathy won't make you gay or anything.

Shady · February 22, 2014

C'mon, you mean to say can't intuit this too by simply putting yourself in a gay person's shoes for even half a minute? You don't need a link to do that, a little empathy won't make you gay or anything.

I don't think it's unreasonable to ask that when somebody starts a thread on a particular subject, that one links or references to the subject they're starting. What you're asking about usually follows that process.

eyeball · February 22, 2014

Well, rather than pining and waiting for everyone else to display your level of internet etiquette you could highlight the thread title, right click on it then select Search Google for Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill.

Shady · February 22, 2014

Well, rather than pining and waiting for everyone else to display your level of internet etiquette you could highlight the thread title, right click on it then select Search Google for Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill.

That's not my job. It's the job of the person creating the thread. I've never started a thread without linking to the subject at hand. This topic is irrelevant until this particular member does so. Goodbye.

Black Dog · February 22, 2014

Not that hard guys.

Arizona's anti-gay law

Straight Jim Crow shit right here.

Wilber · February 22, 2014

Why am I not surprised.

kimmy · February 22, 2014

It's not anti-gay, guys! It's Pro-Religious Freedom!

-k

Wilber · February 22, 2014

Jason Jones depiction of today's Russia being the ultimate far right Conservative paradise is looking truer every day.

WestCoastRunner · February 22, 2014

Thanks for the link Black Dog. The story is mainstream, not that hard to find.

There must be something in the water in AZ.

Shady · February 22, 2014

This is one of those tricky issues, where somebody's religious freedom collides with somebody else's rights. I'm not sure what the remedy is in these situations. Unless we want the state to use force and insist that a photographer MUST take pictures at a gay wedding. Anyways, I think this is moot because I don't the the governor will sign the law. But if the federal government can force religious institutions to provide contraception and abortion services, what goes around comes around.

Shady · February 22, 2014

Thanks for the link Black Dog. The story is mainstream, not that hard to find.

There must be something in the water in AZ.

It probably isn't hard to find. But just a heads up, when you start a topic, you're suppose to provide a reference. Read the forum rules if you're unaware.

sharkman · February 22, 2014

Thanks for the link Black Dog. The story is mainstream, not that hard to find.

Really? Then why couldn't you find a link?

WestCoastRunner · February 22, 2014

I have provided links in the past many times. This one is so mainstream, I thought that it would speak for itself.

WestCoastRunner · February 22, 2014

Take me out in the backshed and slap me silly then.

kimmy · February 22, 2014

This is one of those tricky issues, where somebody's religious freedom collides with somebody else's rights. I'm not sure what the remedy is in these situations. Unless we want the state to use force and insist that a photographer MUST take pictures at a gay wedding. Anyways, I think this is moot because I don't the the governor will sign the law. But if the federal government can force religious institutions to provide contraception and abortion services, what goes around comes around.

Are you aware of the laws regarding public accommodation established in the Civil Rights Act of 1964? If you're running a business that provides service to the general public, you don't get to arbitrarily refuse members of the general public. It provides exemption for religious institution. A flower shop, hot-dog stand, or Hobby Lobby, is not a religious institution, however devout the owner may be.

-k

bush_cheney2004 · February 22, 2014

Haven't we already been down this road, with states and provinces legislating legal discrimination against males, females, and transgender people in single gender health clubs ?

kimmy · February 22, 2014

Haven't we already been down this road, with states and provinces legislating legal discrimination against males, females, and transgender people in single gender health clubs ?

"Clubs" is a key word there, Dick. Now get out of those Speedos and stop hanging out near Spa Lady.

-k

bush_cheney2004 · February 22, 2014

"Clubs" is a key word there, Dick. Now get out of those Speedos and stop hanging out near Spa Lady.

Irrelevant...the point is that state legislatures have enacted discriminatory laws for businesses serving the public, mostly for "females only" gyms.

Personal attacks are not permitted in this forum.

Wilber · February 22, 2014

Irrelevant...the point is that state legislatures have enacted discriminatory laws for businesses serving the public, mostly for "females only" gyms.

Personal attacks are not permitted in this forum.

Not on religeous grounds.

bush_cheney2004 · February 22, 2014

Not on religeous grounds.

Right....on far lesser "grounds"....women want privacy from males while they work off that 'baby fat'.

Wilber · February 22, 2014

Right....on far lesser "grounds"....women want privacy from males while they work off that 'baby fat'.

So I guess it will now be legal for Muslim and Jewish merchants to refuse sevice to Christians. Or will this just be a Christian "freedom"?

Shady · February 22, 2014

Are you aware of the laws regarding public accommodation established in the Civil Rights Act of 1964? If you're running a business that provides service to the general public, you don't get to arbitrarily refuse members of the general public. It provides exemption for religious institution. A flower shop, hot-dog stand, or Hobby Lobby, is not a religious institution, however devout the owner may be.

-k

Freedom of religion applies to individuals as well as institutions. Since gay marriage is relatively new, this will have to be hashed out in the courts to decide the proper limits of both sides. But I don't see how this is much different than any other discriminatory practice that seems to be embraced by the same people who are outaged over this issue. Discriminatory hiring practices targeted against white males for instance. How about conservatives running for office, being asked by musicians to stop using their music for their campaign themes? You agree then that those musicians should be forced to let conservatives use their music right? As long as they pay the normal royalty fee. Right? Or are you saying that discrimination based on politics is acceptable, but discrimination based on religion is not? If so, how so?