Bobby Jindal Promises Executive Order Allowing Discrimination Against Gay People

There is no valid reason for anyone to be against marriage equality aside from religious reasons.

Give me one good reason why gay people shouldn't be allowed to marry. And that reason can't be based on religious beliefs.

Go.

originally posted by: Seamrog
If you have to split hairs to dance around your own words.....

My words are out there for everyone to see. And so are yours...

I guess a church is no longer a religious institution with it is convenient, and a university is not a university, it is a religious institution when it is convenient.

A church is a church (it's also a religious institution), but a university is not a church. A university CAN be a religious institution, but that doesn't make them synonymous. When I said church, I meant church. When I said university, I meant university. They're two different things, even if they're both religious institution.

I thought that was clear, but I guess not.

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
There is no valid reason for anyone to be against marriage equality aside from religious reasons.

Give me one good reason why gay people shouldn't be allowed to marry. And that reason can't be based on religious beliefs.

Go.

There isn't one.

That's why the anti-gay defense keeps losing in court.

a reply to: dawnstar

oh and I have to say this also:

if you religious beliefs aren't worth a small percentage or your profits then well....
your conviction isn't worth 2 cents!!!

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

I'm not too concerned. Folks could donate to the businesses who choose to serve everyone who seeks business. This politician is speaking a dead language. This is targeted legislature and backlash from the approaching marriage equality laws. I firmly believe this is going to go the way of all other forms of discrimination. Their rights end where another's begin and I don't believe any business open to the public should pick and choose who that public is. Churches are known for their inclusiveness through history, taking care of the poor and infirm and otherwise helping the community.... It's too bad that they'll weigh certain "sinners" instead of the "sin".

a reply to: hearows

Yeah, I don't think it will make any difference, either. I linked to an article that stated as much earlier in the thread.

Here

But the Republican governor, who is courting Christian conservatives for a likely presidential bid, quickly fought back against the defeat, seeking to enact the bill’s provisions without legislative support.
...
Stephen Perry, a vocal critic of the bill who heads up the New Orleans Convention and Visitors Bureau, dismissed Jindal’s order as “largely a political statement” that “will have very little practical impact.”
...
“No Executive Order of a governor may create substantive law, even in an emergency situation,” he said in a statement.

I like your idea of donating to businesses who are serve everyone!

originally posted by: stolencar18

originally posted by: SubTruth
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic
If a gay man opened a bar and only wanted to serve other gay men guess what.......This is real freedom. And let me make myself clear private property is your choice public is just that public and serves everyone equally.

This. Let's cut the crap on discrimination. Nobody complains if a black man chooses not to serve a white man, or if a gay couple wanted to choose not to provide a service for an enthusiastic Christian couple, or even if Hooters restaurant chooses not to hire girls that don't have...er...hooters. Let's not even talk about the strip clubs. Should they hire any girl (heck, why stop at women) that walks in?

The only reason this is an issue is because it's got a Christian background. Everyone flips their # (even though it doesn't affect them) when a Christian wants to do Christian things. If my above examples are all acceptable - and we know they are - then a Christian business choosing not to serve a certain demographic is equally acceptable (or, conversely, they're all equally unacceptable, and I expect some people start some threads about Hooters and black on white discrimination).

This is exactly why we should follow the constitution again. If you are a gay Black man and open a bar and only want to serve other gay Black men.......You already have the right according to the constitution.


This is real freedom and until we remember our roots tyranny will rule the day. Private property is just that private and public property should be open to everyone equally.

originally posted by: SubTruth
This is exactly why we should follow the constitution again. If you are a gay Black man and open a bar and only want to serve other gay Black men.......You already have the right according to the constitution.

Where in the Constitution?

One thing is certain...

If 'obama created an executive order declaring sharia law on all 50 states, No one would be arguing about petty rights at all, every christian, gay, black etc etc would be walking Equally together against it.

All of this crap is created simply to 'divide and conquer' and the heirarchs are laughing it up while they watch the pawns scatter in different directions. They know Exactly what they're doing and why they're doing it. It's everyone else who isn't getting it, the one's who can't see past their rose colored shades.

Speak it, tell it like it is. I've already made it clear in another thread that I would be willing to set aside my differences with anyone to pick up arms against a common enemy. Much like Vasquez and Lt. Gormon in Aliens (2) a little reference for all my sci-fi geeks out there, holla.

Sadly though there are too many that would not be able to see past my fabulous clothing and put in work. They would rather sit idly by and gripe, complain and hate me and mine. Thats ok though thats why we are here, to test them by giving them something to hate. To give them a choice between love and hate so they may be judged on their quality. a reply to: awareness10

New Orleans Mayor Counters Jindal's Order With One of Acceptance for All

New Orleans Mayor Counters Jindal's Order With One of Acceptance for All Mayor Mitch Landrieu says his famously tolerant city will continue to welcome everyone, including LGBT people, despite Gov. Bobby Jindal's antigay 'conscience protection' order. BY TRUDY RINGMAY

New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu wants the world to know that despite Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal’s antigay “conscience protection” order, the good times are still rolling for LGBT people and everyone else in the Big Easy.

Thursday, two days after Jindal issued an executive order that essentially put the state’s Marriage and Conscience Act into effect after legislators failed to pass it, Landrieu issued an executive order of his own, saying that New Orleans will not tolerate discrimination, reports New Orleans newspaper The Times-Picayune.

“The purpose of this Executive Order is to confirm for the residents of the City of New Orleans, its businesses and visitors that religious beliefs are protected from unjustified governmental burden, but that there is no tolerance in the City of New Orleans for discrimination on the basis of race, creed, national origin or ancestry, color, religion, gender or sex, sexual orientation, gender identification, marital or domestic partner status, age, physical condition or disability,” the order reads in part.

www.advocate.com...

a reply to: Annee

hey this might get interesting
does a mayor's executive order override a governor's or does the governors have more power???

a reply to: dawnstar

It's more a declaration than anything concrete, really. Just a mayor standing up for his people.

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
a reply to: dawnstar

It's more a declaration than anything concrete, really. Just a mayor standing up for his people.

Actually he's standing up for the money gay people bring to New Orleans.

Southern Decadence brings as much money to the city as Mardi Gras does.

originally posted by: IslandOfMisfitToys
Actually he's standing up for the money gay people bring to New Orleans.

Which helps the people of the city. There'd be no need to bring in money if not for the people who benefit from it. But Mitch Landrieu is a Democrat, so likely is much more accepting of LGBT folks than Jindal.

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

I didn't mean the money was the only thing but I'm sure it has it's pull.

am completely in favor of marriage equality. What I don't get is forcing those that are not in favor due to religious beliefs, being forced to marry same sex couples. I don't really get why that same sex couple would even want to be united together by a church or priest who doesn't actually support it....baffles me.

I don't think there should be a law that says they can't get married, but I don't think forcing a church to marry them is the right way to go about getting it done

That's just it, show me where law suits are lined up against churches refusing to marry gay people. I for one would not want to get married anywhere that didn't want me and neither would most of my friends.

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: IslandOfMisfitToys
Actually he's standing up for the money gay people bring to New Orleans.

Which helps the people of the city. There'd be no need to bring in money if not for the people who benefit from it. But Mitch Landrieu is a Democrat, so likely is much more accepting of LGBT folks than Jindal.

Right.

Money is what made Indiana revise their discriminatory bill.

Isn't this the same Louisiana that still allows churches to discriminate against interracial couples?

Yet has a rebuplican Indian governor, and apparently a marginally famous SUPER gay festival in its most famous city??? WTF... a reply to: LDragonFire