Indiana Gov. Mike Pence signs controversial 'religious freedom' bill

a reply to: HooHaa

I might as well walk into a Jewish kosher meat store and order pork or better yet a Muslim store and order pork chops.. then when they refuse me , scream, cry, whine, fart, poop and hollar just like we've seen done..

That is rant.

Let me put this in a simple concept for you to understand.

You walk into a Pizza Hut restaurant and you demand Big Mac. They said they can't make you that. According to you you should scream, cry, whine, fart, poop, holler and whatnot.

Pizza Hut don't make Big Macs hello?

originally posted by: HooHaa
I don't see a problem here.. what happen to a business having the right to refuse service to someone for any reason?

The problem is that it doesn't exist. They have to have a reason. It can't be any old arbitrary reason.

It varies from state to state a little but in general you have to have a "Reasonable Excuse" for why you are refusing their business or else it's called discrimination.

Look it up.

Who am I kidding?? As if you care to know the facts or the truth about anything. How about I look it up for you and you can have someone else read it to you while you ignore everything they say so you can continue to live as if your opinions are how the world works. The Right to Refuse Service

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE

In this thread there is obvious hate of religious people...because they "hate" gay people. Hypocrites.

What part of Equal Rights and Special Rights are you having difficulty with?

In this case it is the religious trying to give themselves Special Rights to keep gays from having Equal Rights.

Yeah...the right to choose who you wish to do business with. Like the right to choose who you work for. All the same, or at least should be.

a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

Fine. When you're determining who to do business with, just make sure you:

Stay off our roads.
Don't use our electric, water or gas utilities.
Don't use our banking, monetary or credit systems.
Etc.

("Our" being defined here as "the American public")

a reply to: Deaf Alien

would you feel comfortable in Westboro Baptist Church?

sorry I had to ask.

There was a lady I worked with that told me this story and I don't see any reason not to believe her.
She lived out in the sticks somewhere around here in the blue ridge mountains. And well a mexican man had wandered into their little town. They beat the crap out of him! His kind just didn't belong there.
You can't legislate prejudice out of people you can just make harsh penalties for when it arises to try to control it. But commerce is another story. Historically speaking if we had not overlooked our prejudices and instead dealt only with those we saw eye to eye with the fine silk would have never made it to the kings and queens of europe and the spices wouldn't have flowed too dang far!! That is commerce!
Hobby Lobby seems to have no problem dealing within a country where the gov't uses the companies to enforce their one child policy (unless they have finally done away with it) for the sake of commerce. And yet when it comes to their employees they feel that they have the right to manipulate them into accepting their ideas when it comes to birth control. And I am pretty sure the baker likewise is giving no care whatsoever as to the morality of the suppliers they are buying their goods from as long as they are offering the cheapest price for the desired quality. But then they are turning around and deciding on their moral grounds who they should serve and who they shouldn't?? And quite possibly while they are doing this they may be demanding that their employees do things that are against the employee's moral compass.

For some reason I don't think that this is as much about we the people being allowed to be true to our religious beliefs as much as it is the business world being giving the power to decide what our moral compass should be!

a reply to: dawnstar

Perfect post. Points directly to a question that I've been asking: how does the individual religious proprietor know if they can do business with a given customer? What if that customer has been involved in "something sinful"?

And I ask this question because it points directly at the complete absurdity and stupidity of anyone saying "By doing business with others I share in their sin."

Guess what ... YOU don't need to be in business.

Businesses do business with the public as part of the social contract.

(Dawnstar, of course, I'm referring to a generic "YOU" out there, not you, yourself. )

originally posted by: elysiumfire
Personally (and I don't know why it should), it shocks me that modern Americans in Indiana can have such a mindset.

The vast majority of people in Indiana do not support this law, everything I have seen from the public perception there is against this law, they know how damaging it is and they know it's embarrassing their state.

This was the Republicans and their Christian fundies, not the average Hoosier.

I cannot believe that some folk on here are still saying this new Bill in Indiana is acceptable. If you believe this then you are on the wrong side of history. The same folk (religious Fundies) that believe you need this law would probably have been the same folk against interracial marriage back in the 50's.

Indiana is now the laughing stock which is a shame for the more sane people of Indiana. Governors and Mayors in other states are now banning all travel with state funds to Indiana. Big Business is now leaving Indiana and will not invest in Indiana.

Has anyone seen who was at the signing of this bill? Mike Pence stated the RFRA was not intended to discriminate based on sexual orientation and yet look who he invited to the bill signing!

Micah Clark - Executive Director of the American Family Association of Indiana
Quote - Homosexuality has no social benefit... and its individually destructive and dangerous.

Curt Smith - President of the Indiana Family Institute
Quote - I believe homosexuality is harmful to all, including society

Eric Miller - Founder and Executive Director of Advance America
Quote - Homosexuality is wrong! Homosexual Marriages are wrong!

These are the same religious fanatics (Christian Jihads) that go to Africa and give money to the governments who introduce the death penalty for homosexuality. The only difference between these Christian Jihadist and ISIS is money, these Christian groups keep under the radar and use money to get what they want with third world governments

IMOH they should all be prosecuted for "Genocide". This is by far the worst thing that could happen in the states. I can now see within the next decade, churches being fire bombed and religious folks having to keep their faith private for fear of attack, and you know what, they can blame the Nazis they voted into power!

a reply to: Gryphon66

but I don't believe the "If I do business with the sinners I share in their sin." is really that prominent in the business world or in american society in general. If it were I think we would have very few chinese goods in this country!
And speaking historically I think that the only time when religious beliefs were used as an excuse in commerce was when the Holy Roman Empire would blacklist countries and areas and forbid the followers - individuals, or states- from trading with them usually because of disagreements with kings and other nobility.
Just seems like the businesses would have more power to control "sin" is they had gone the reverse route and refused to buy their supplies from the sinners instead of refusing to sell their products to them. but they won't do that since profit is their god.
they look like hypocrites and I can wait till one of the supporters of the insanity goes to buy a car for his wife and it told by the company selling the car that nope he won't sell that car to them because it is for her to drive!

originally posted by: olaru12
a reply to: Gryphon66

1. How will proprietors in Indiana make sure that their customers are acceptable to their religious beliefs?

Perhaps those unacceptable to religious businesses will have to wear an armband or have a symbol stitched on their clothing.
And have official documents to be surrendered to the authorities when asked.

Sound familiar?

How about nobody wear any sort of armband and everybody be permitted to go about their own business as they see fit without government mandates--you know, freedom.

a reply to: NavyDoc
there is at least one community in the area that will beat the heck out of a mexican because he was out of place! The whole community just about has that mindset. Now so you want to give that community the power to decide weather or not the mexican driving through can buy gas at the gas station so he can get out of their lovely little village as fast as he can??/

business is commerce and there are alot of mandates associated with operating one. one has to get a license and sales tax number, and well take steps to assure that what is sold is not illegal or dangerous. shall we drop all the mandates and go on our happy way? the lemon laws and all the rest??

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Rocker2013

originally posted by: NavyDoc
Kind of like the "spirit" of the EEOC and Civil rights laws that are essentially racism in a different direction?

Okay, all credibility is now lost.

If you think civil rights laws are "reverse racism" then there is no rational debate to be had with you on this issue.
If you really think white people were unfairly treated by black people, and that EQUALITY is "racism" then I think we should all just give up on trying to discuss anything sensibly with you.

I wish there was a vomit face I could add to finish this post.

How is there credibility lost? A law that demands that people be judged by race for governmental contracts or jobs or university admission is racist because preferring one race over another is the entire definition of racism. Just because you like the racism involved does not make it any less racist.

You don't want equality, you just want preferences.

It really sucks that Equality has to be forced. Imagine if it didn't.

The idea that everyone should just take care of themselves, do what they need to do, don't step on anyone's toes, etc - - because everyone comes from a place of integrity and compassion - - - doesn't even work in a family of 5 - - - let alone and entire country of millions of people.

In a family of 5 you have different ages, different abilities, different likes and dislikes - - - you're always adjusting to create fairness.

Black people only got equality and rights in MY lifetime. Too bad for "whities" that some programs were put in place to create stepping ladders to help them catch up.

So how long do you have to discriminate to not discriminate? Why is it okay for the federal government--something nobody can get away from or avoid--to discriminate but a private citizen can't when one could just go down the block to another store?

If someone does not want to serve me, I take my money somewhere else. If the government does not want to serve me, or treat me equitably, and I "take my money somewhere else", they put me in jail for tax evasion.

Logically, giving government that much ability to force your wants on your fellow man is a dangerous game because in doing so you give the government the the ability to let your fellow man force his wants and desires upon you.

I realize you have your own idealistic concept of how you think life should be.

But, not everyone agrees with you.

I've lost jobs because I don't speak Spanish. My fault. I should have learned Spanish.

There are very brilliant children born in poverty that should have the right to develop their brains and succeed in life.

Why should some dumb loser get a college education because his wealthy parents pay for it - - - over someone who really wants it?

Sometimes Fairness has to be created. That's just the way it is.

So the government should have forced the company to keep you hired even though you didn't speak Spanish because of discrimination? Because that's the salient point here.

How does anyone "create fairness" by being unfair to other people? In my medical school, asians were not a "poor minority" and did not get preferential treatment for admissions even though the individuals may have come from impoverished backgrounds whereas the AA minorites did, even though they drove BMWs to class. Race alone is a blind and ignorant measuring stick.

I'm not taking this any further.

You have your own idealistic concept of how things should be.

I'm saying it won't even work in a family of 5. Because in a family of 5 there is constant adjustments to create fairness and equality of all involved.

The government is not, nor should be your parent and it is foolish to put politicians in that role.

What I see here is that many here are perfectly fine with discrimination as long as they agree with it, can justify it in their own minds, and dislike those discriminated against.


Part of a free society is upholding the rights of those you disagree with because that it what a truly free society is all about.

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: olaru12
a reply to: Gryphon66

1. How will proprietors in Indiana make sure that their customers are acceptable to their religious beliefs?

Perhaps those unacceptable to religious businesses will have to wear an armband or have a symbol stitched on their clothing.
And have official documents to be surrendered to the authorities when asked.

Sound familiar?

How about nobody wear any sort of armband and everybody be permitted to go about their own business as they see fit without government mandates--you know, freedom.

You're on the wrong side of History on this Navydoc, as much as I respect your Libertarian views, this is taking the US back decades and nothing to do with the voting populace and more to do with the money gained for the governors election pot by the "American Family Association" as proved by who attended the signing of this bill last week.

originally posted by: mOjOm

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
It always amazes me how some people hate religious people claiming that they are bad because they hate people. Usually the same people (liberals) also spread hate about "the rich", the right, etc. They preach hate toward the people they don't like, but claim they hate them only because they hate people they do like. The only ones who deserve protection are the ones THEY like. They are no different than a bigot or racist. They simply direct their hate toward a different group of people claiming that their hate is righteous.

In this thread there is obvious hate of religious people...because the "hate" gay people. Hypocrites.

Wrong. 100% false accusation.

I would stand with anyone who is being unjustly treated. I even stand by every individuals right to hate other people on a personal level. If a person chooses to hate other groups of people, that's your right. However, that still doesn't give you the right to act on your hatred and infringe on others liberties or equal protection.

This is about business also not personal ethics. If businesses started denying service to Christians simply for being Christian I would stand with the Christians in opposition to that as well.

You are just flat out wrong with everything you said and are letting your own personal bias cloud your judgement on this issue. You think you're being persecuted for your beliefs but you're not. You can believe whatever you want. But when your misguided beliefs lead you to act in ways that infringe on the liberty of someone else you've taken it too far.

Please explain how one has a right to the service of another.

Certainly, where taxpayer funded and government entities are concerned, every citizen has the same rights to the services their government provides. However, how does that extend to a private citizen? Do I have the right to your labor? Your time? Why?

a reply to: NavyDoc

This bill is abhorrent in today's society, for god sake the US is meant to be the leader of the Free World but its looking more and more like the American Christians are installing their own Christian sharia law. Its a slippery slope Navydoc and once Pandora's Box is opened, it cannot be closed.

You keep stating that individuals have the right to deny service to folk and that is true, but not to discriminate against folk. If the internet was around in 1950's then we would be having the same debate about interracial marriage, and out of interest, where would you have been on that debate?

originally posted by: ownbestenemy
I am not advocating this law, but I still have yet to see the apocalyptic effects that people are proclaiming it will have.

Of course you have yet to see it. It doesn't go into effect until July.

The Indiana law is NOT the same as the other states and the federal law. If you did some research, you'd know that. You can start with the link in my signature.

originally posted by: xuenchen
What if a group of Muslims wanted to make a point about a restaurant serving pork and alcohol?

That's not at all relevant and it's a very tired argument. No one is asking Christians to do business with gay people that they don't already do with other patrons. This applies to everything beezzer is saying, too.

If Muslims don't serve pork, they don't serve it to anyone. Of COURSE, no one can expect them to serve pork.

What we are asking of religious business owners is to treat everyone equally, regardless if they are straight or gay. They want a cake? You make cakes? Make them a cake. No one is asking them to make a virgin sacrifice.

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: ownbestenemy
a reply to: beezzer

Agreed -- why I said the State shouldn't even have to be stepping in -- an individual should have the right to determine who they engage in contract with; regardless if they are a "public accommodation" -- just as much as an individual has the right to determine they don't wish to engage in a contract with such people.

I always saw these as interesting -- a market niche to serve exclusively to the LGBT crowd. Seems like a good business right now no?

If I were an entrepeneur, I'd being "catering" to the LGBT community exclusively.

I have recently invested in a shop that does so. They are doing good business and this hullaballo is great for them because people in the city in question see these news stories and want to go out of their way to patronize a GLBT friendly store. In some places, a rainbow flag outside is a much better draw than one of those "Jesus fish." If things continue the way they are now, I will soon recoup my investment and my friends will have a nice shop. Win-win.

originally posted by: ownbestenemy

originally posted by: Annee
You don't like it - - - don't have a public business.

Define "public business"....

Since to engage in business, I must make myself public, in order to obtain clientel, wouldn't that make all business "public"?

Or is it just cake, photography and wedding services....possibly "mating" services too...

Just trying to understand where you are coming from Annee.

To the statist/leftist, ALL businesses are public and all commerce must be regulated by the state and people should not be permitted (the horror) to make their own decisions.

a reply to: NavyDoc

if you are the only provider of gasoline in the area then yes anyone in the area has the right to buy gas from you!! it's for the communities good and part of your obligation as a business owner! otherwise at least in that one little community I am talking about well you'd possibly be part of a manslaughter investigation by causing someone to be stranded in a hostile environment! there are still small little communities that have maybe one or two places to buy needed goods and to deny the people in those communities (or outsiders who are just passing through) services based on whatever reason you can come up with would cause them undue hardships that no true christian would want to impose on another (weather sinful or otherwise)

originally posted by: flammadraco
I cannot believe that some folk on here are still saying this new Bill in Indiana is acceptable. If you believe this then you are on the wrong side of history. The same folk (religious Fundies) that believe you need this law would probably have been the same folk against interracial marriage back in the 50's.

Indiana is now the laughing stock which is a shame for the more sane people of Indiana. Governors and Mayors in other states are now banning all travel with state funds to Indiana. Big Business is now leaving Indiana and will not invest in Indiana.

Has anyone seen who was at the signing of this bill? Mike Pence stated the RFRA was not intended to discriminate based on sexual orientation and yet look who he invited to the bill signing!

Micah Clark - Executive Director of the American Family Association of Indiana
Quote - Homosexuality has no social benefit... and its individually destructive and dangerous.

Curt Smith - President of the Indiana Family Institute
Quote - I believe homosexuality is harmful to all, including society

Eric Miller - Founder and Executive Director of Advance America
Quote - Homosexuality is wrong! Homosexual Marriages are wrong!

These are the same religious fanatics (Christian Jihads) that go to Africa and give money to the governments who introduce the death penalty for homosexuality. The only difference between these Christian Jihadist and ISIS is money, these Christian groups keep under the radar and use money to get what they want with third world governments

IMOH they should all be prosecuted for "Genocide". This is by far the worst thing that could happen in the states. I can now see within the next decade, churches being fire bombed and religious folks having to keep their faith private for fear of attack, and you know what, they can blame the Nazis they voted into power!

Can you point out in Indiana where a gay person was refused a cheeseburger? Stores do not allow weapons in them all of the time. I think the poster pictured is making spurious claims.