| Author | Message | ||
     Sifo |
| ||
| Aesquire |
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/415041/injus tice-doj-uncovered-ferguson-wasnt-racism-ian-tuttl e seems to be an accurate take. | ||
| Aesquire |
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/414682/nancy -graces-america-conrad-black | ||
| Aesquire |
http://www.pjtv.com/series/pjtv-special-174/in-pra ise-of-the-federal-government-50-years-of-progress ive-triumphs-10780/ | ||
| Aesquire |
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/03/21/drink-c yanide-bloody-neanderthals-for-liberal-israelis-ne tanyahus-win-is-a-reality-check/ Leftists have the same attitude everywhere, it seems. You don't agree, you are an idiot, and you should die. | ||
| Aesquire |
http://www.pjtv.com/series/afterburner-with-bill-w hittle-56/election-cheating-obama-wants-compulsory -16-yr-olds-voting-10818/ | ||
| Patches |
Indiana, Governor Mike Pence  Finally a Politician for the Word of God! http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-03 -26/mike-pence-signs-religious-freedom-bill-and-th e-indiana-boycott-begins | ||
| Aesquire |
So, what does the law actually say? Will it make Sharia enforceable by The State? Does it actually take away any freedoms, or does it affirm them? Go find a pro-propaganda page and find out. If all you read is one side, all you know is one side. Notice the example I give in the R candidate thread? | ||
| Patches |
The law allows businesses the right to refuse serving gays and lesbians on religious grounds. At a morning news conference, Pence read a statement about his decision to sign the bill. "Today I signed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, because I support the freedom of religion for every Hoosier of every faith," he said in the statement. "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." | ||
| Daddio |
So. Patches, Consider this scenario. A person goes to another person whose business creates what is arguably 'art' and demand that the artist create something which the artist finds offensive. At the initial meeting with the artist, the 'customer' is very demanding, and the artist decides that it would be in neither party's interest to pursue a contract. The 'customer' then decides to sue the artist, but besides civil court also has the power of the Government behind him. Are you OK with this? | ||
| Patches |
I believe the Business Owner should have just as much "Rights" to say "No" and not have to pay for it. No one should have the Right to force there Beliefs onto another Person. If It takes the Government getting involved to make it fair So Be It. | ||
| Airbozo |
Should my business be able to refuse service to someone based on the color of their skin, because my religion forbids it? Or how about the fact that I know you dork your SO in the brown eye and because my religion says that is evil, I can refuse you service? Or a similar situation regarding unwed mothers? Or how about the fact that I feel you disrespect your parents so I refuse to make you a wedding cake? Those are my beliefs, so the government should get involved and tell you to bugger off... Seems fair to me. | ||
| Aesquire |
The real world examples are varied. A cake maker decided he didn't want to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple. ( I won't differ between sexes here ) They sued. I think the baker has a right to refuse anyone for any reason. I also think anyone has a right to publicly protest his decision, and tell others what a jerk they think he is. Both freedoms are important. Another example would be a guy who refuses to sell beer to black people. Again, his right, and everybody else's right to complain & boycott. I have a bit of a problem with the first guy, and would not buy his cakes. I have a big problem with the second and not only would I go elsewhere for my beer, I would loudly suggest to others they go elsewhere. No one has a right to not be offended. No one SHOULD have a right to sue someone for telling the truth. I might get sued for suggesting others boycot the beer guy. I'm a big boy, I'd take it to court. Might lose. It's a messed up world. My question is.... does the law violate my rights? Can others force me to obey their religious laws? Will it interfere with anyone complaining about some bozo who won't do business with a gay, or a Jew, or a black, or a women? So far all I have is Patches assertions based on biased reports. He needs to reset some filters on what he believes. Some of the stuff he complained about is very real. Others are nonsense. The Illuminati don't rule the Earth through the Bush's. A really rich ex Nazi actually does pay for propaganda and lies ( not necessarily the same thing ) to make himself richer and change the world to suit a very evil agenda, cloaked in good intentions. He really has wrecked national economies to make millions. | ||
| Sifo |
A huge part of the problem with our country at the moment is that we are electing people to office who are not qualified to snap two Lego blocks together. As proof of this I offer Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton. I really don't know what to say. | ||
| Hootowl |
OT but wtf. Karma is a bitch. Most will remember this event. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/03/27/ex-cfo-who-cr iticized-chick-fil-reportedly-now-on-food-stamps-a fter-outcry/ | ||
| Patches |
It is Just My Opinion.  "My question is.... does the law violate my rights?" I do not think so. "Can others force me to obey their religious laws?" No, You have the right to freedom of religion. Does the gay couple have a right to protest? Yes, As long as it does not infringe on the business owner right to operate. Does the gay couple have a right to sue and collect damages for Denial of Service? Absolutely not, remember it is Just My Opinion. Are you talking about George Soros? Aesquire? and About a .18 on the breathalyzer Sifo?  | ||
| Aesquire |
Soros, yep. There are times I really agree with you, and others where I'm going WTF??? Contempt for Congress is something Obama and I share. I've decided they all should be put on a desert island and consumed by ravenous wild beasts. With cameras everywhere, and a 24/7 pay per view channel with twitter feeds, the Vegas line, etc. Use that money to cut down the debt. No weapons of course, Wolves are a protected species.  Repeat at random intervals. Obama's even done a few thing I agree with. Not a lot, but a few. Ronnie Raygun made me upset more than a few times. Despair is considered a sin in some faiths, it leads you to make bad decisions, and despite what I just wrote above, thinking that EVERY politician deserves your wrath is, fortunately, wrong. I'm never going to agree with all the policy ideas of any politician. I'm just too small a demographic for them to care about. Maybe you are too. So you just hope for change and try and weed out the worst. To be honest, I seem to almost never like the guy who finally wins the primaries, but the primaries are the only place you can have any statistical say, and where your donations, of time or money, can have any real affect. Don't want to give money, tell other people that you think so and so is the least horrible guy running and suggest they vote for him or her. Don't be too annoying, and they will actually listen. By the time it gets down to the Election, your influence is over. It's so polarized, and so full of bribe money... Over a Billion$ in bribes and suckers. Your remaining choice is to vote for the lesser evil, or don't vote and accept the greater evil. Sometimes you choose wrong, I'm still apologizing for voting for Jimmie Carter. He seemed to be the better choice, and I was Wro.. I was Wro.... I was mistaken. | ||
| Strokizator |
I've got to ask, would any of you eat a cake from a baker you sued? Even if you prevail in court you're going to lose when you take that first bite. Take your business somewhere where they're happy to see you. | ||
| Daddio |
That baker did not refuse to sell them a product; he refused to participate in their "wedding" ceremony. It came out in court that the couple had gone into the bakery with an obvious chip on their shoulders, and likely would never had used this bakery. When he sensed the bait, IIRC, the baker taped the conversation. He also taped all the ensuing 'shakedown' conversations. Defying logic, the judge still found in the couple's favor, but awarded them minimal damages, and the baker kept his business. (Message edited by daddio on March 29, 2015) | ||
| Aesquire |
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/indianas-relig ious-freedom-restoration-act-explained_900641.html Is the Religious Freedom Restoration Act really a license to discriminate against gay people? No. Stanford law professor Michael McConnell, a former appellate court judge, tells THE WEEKLY STANDARD in an email: "In the decades that states have had RFRA statutes, no business has been given the right to discriminate against gay customers, or anyone else." So what is the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, and what does it say? The first RFRA was a 1993 federal law that was signed into law by Democratic president Bill Clinton. It unanimously passed the House of Representatives, where it was sponsored by then-congressman Chuck Schumer, and sailed through the Senate on a 97-3 vote. The law reestablished a balancing test for courts to apply in religious liberty cases (a standard had been used by the Supreme Court for decades). RFRA allows a person's free exercise of religion to be "substantially burdened" by a law only if the law furthers a "compelling governmental interest" in the "least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest." So the law doesn't say that a person making a religious claim will always win. In the years since RFRA has been on the books, sometimes the courts have ruled in favor of religious exemptions, but many other times they haven't. If there's already a federal RFRA in place, why did Indiana pass its own RFRA? Great question. In a 1997 Supreme Court case (City of Boerne v. Flores), the court held that federal RFRA was generally inapplicable against state and local laws. Since then, a number of states have enacted their own RFRA statutes: Indiana became the twentieth to do so. Other states have state court rulings that provide RFRA-like protections. Here's a helpful map......... | ||
| Patches |
LGBT and the Bible | ||
| Sifo |
I have to say that I'm struggling with understanding the various facets of this issue. I'm kind of amused by the arguments that claim there will be discrimination, based on religion, of skin color. What religion(s) are we dealing with here? I don't think there are any. I don't doubt that evil people have used the facade of religion for discriminatory purposes, but that is a false use of religion. It's pretty easy to spot the difference. I'm really not familiar with any religion that makes any issue of skin color, other than perhaps those who would celebrate Kwanzaa. I'm not sure that Kwanzaa is so much a religious thing as a cultural issue, so that leaves religion pretty clean on this. As for forcing a baker to participate in a wedding ceremony where it is against their beliefs, isn't that just another form of bigotry? Is it really more palatable just because you can get the power of the government behind you? Did the power of the government make slavery just? Of course not. It simply institutionalized the bigotry. Institutionalized bigotry is among the most evil you will find. Here's the problem with trying to legislate bigotry away. If you have two people with incompatible view points on an issue, how do you choose which person the state will support? Can you really legislate someones belief? Isn't that bigotry in itself? I think the best you can hope for, or legislate is that you try for the least harm done. Was the baker who refused a gay couple actively trying to hurt anyone? No, they simply didn't wan to participate in someone else's incompatible beliefs. They didn't actively go out to draw attention and scorn to the gay couple. It's the gay couple that has escalated this to the point that our courts and legislative bodies are now taking action. Does anyone really believe that the government has the power to force this baker to change his religious beliefs? Does anyone really want to grant the government the power to even attempt to change someone's religious beliefs? Is this not exactly what the first amendment is there to protect? To me, it comes down to which is the greater harm? A baker who refuses to bake for a gay wedding, or a government forcing a baker to bake for a gay wedding. I know which one seems far more tyrannical to me. You? The new law in Indiana? From what I've heard, it's pretty much the same as what Bill Clinton signed into federal law. It's much the same as what BO voted for in Illinois law. It's much the same as what has been passed in 19 other states. Why is this such a big issue all of a sudden? Someone is trying to get you to stop paying attention to what's going on right in front of you. A magician calls this misdirection. A politician calls this a crisis. I don't trust either of them to represent reality. | ||
| Hootowl |
"A magician calls this misdirection. A politician calls this a crisis. I don't trust either of them to represent reality." Well said. | ||
| Aesquire |
I'm not sure that Kwanzaa is so much a religious thing as a cultural issue Correct, it's a modern holiday, created out of nothing by a communist with intent to provide a propaganda teaching holiday for black Americans. Other than it's original purpose, to teach a new kind of slavery as good, I have no issues with Kwanzaa, but that one point is pretty big. The reason these laws have been passed on a State level, is the fear that the Federal law, ( yep, signed by Slick Willie ) may not apply on the State level, and someone could be unfairly treated for/in aspects of his faith, like forcing an Amish to take out a loan. Or Firing a Muslim for praying multiple times a day. I will repeat, as long as the law does not restrict my right of free speech, so that I may not complain some fellow won't do business with me because I'm Irish, or you're catholic, I'm probably good. Businesses that discriminate will go out of business, if the market, and the discriminated against, still have free speech. A barber shop that won't cut a white-hispanic's hair, because he's White-hispanic, will get boycotted by White-hispanics. Ditto bakery/gay, garage/black, champagne room/Hittite. Pick your combo. Now, if you live in a place where there are only 2 gays, one bakery, and the rest of the community couldn't give a rats's butt, the bakery may stay in business a long time, and the gays may have to go elsewhere for a wedding cake... and the town will be far more colorful during the wedding.  In any event it looks like the hoo-rah on this subject is mostly lies by evil men, and willful blindness on the part of a corrupt media. You tel me who started this, and I'll point to someone worth remembering as a bad guy. | ||
| Reindog |
You mean like this?  | ||
| Aesquire |
http://pjmedia.com/blog/pence-wants-religious-free dom-bill-fixed-by-end-of-the-week/ | ||
| Aesquire |
Patches, I disagree with much that the guy says in the video you posted above. And a few bits make perfect sense, better than some on the other side of the argument. In any case, If you don't believe in the Bible, or don't follow every single rule for behavior put down by a millenia of prophets, you can still be a good person. For example, I wear wool/cotton blends, and on occasion eat shellfish, although tonight I'm having burgers. Does it count as shellfish if I eat Krab salad? There's no crabs in it. I also don't give a darn what consenting adults do in the bedroom, or kitchen, or anywhere they don't scare the horses. ( or children & old ladies ) We've had quite a bit of discussion here and the 2 complaints about Gays & Gay marriage seem to be either religious prohibition, or tax policy. Since the current Regime is importing welfare cases by the thousands for political reasons, the tax reasons seem tiny to me, but I do grasp the principle. In any event this Protest seems contrived, and if they correct any loopholes I suppose George Takei can relax, and go make money at a Con, as he should. | ||
| Sifo |
Repeal sanctions on Iran... Check! Start sanctions on Indiana... Check! Our leaders are incredibly lost. Too many are following blindly. Maybe we need a new law to force the two sides to spend more time together. Perhaps once a month LGBT+ folks be required to dine once a month at their local Chic-fil-a. I'm guessing they would suddenly have an objection to the government stepping in, telling them what they must do even if it goes against their desires. This wouldn't even be against their religious beliefs, unless they are worshiping the Holy Mother Chicken. Frankly, I've pretty much had it with progressives. Here it is from their leadership... Harry Reid is proud he lied about Mitt Romney's taxes This line sums it up quite well...
Truth has become meaningless in our country. There's a stunning silence from his fellow Democrats on this. All that matters is the end game. It's painfully clear that the end game is an end of our Constitution. Yes, I am convinced our once great country is on the downward slide. Funny thing happened to me yesterday. I answered the doorbell to find Brian standing there. I haven't seen Brian for about 10 years now. I invite him in and we sit and start talking. He did a bunch of rambling, some crying, but the crux seemed to be that he didn't understand how he had let such good friends (my wife and I) slip from his life. What he doesn't realize is that the way he slipped from our lives is because we made a conscious decision to let that happen with a number of friends. Why? We were just tired of the progressive BS we were continually bombarded with from some of our Progressive friends. I feel kind of bad for Brian. He actually described himself as having an emptiness inside. I tried to bring up God and Christ, but he was having none of that. OK. I've got nothing to help then. Honestly, through the entire conversation I was kind of expecting him to say that he and Bonnie were splitting up and he needed a place to stay for a while. It just had that sort of feel to it. I'm really not sure I want to let him back into our lives. Oddly, about a month ago we got a phone message from another of our ex-friends that we haven't seen for about 10 years. Mary just listened to the message and said "mmm, Barry and Sue" then deleted the message. Yep, all of this is connected to me. We don't live in a vacuum. | ||
| Aesquire |
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2015/03/apple-bash es-indiana-but-gladly-does-business-with-countries -that-execute-gays/ Apple Bashes Indiana – But Promotes Business in Countries That Execute Gays This is typical of progressive & leftists, and not at all unknown among the more centrist types. Bill Clinton was accused of rape, and was absolutely guilty of multiple counts of "sexual harassment" due to him being in a position of power over women he had sex with. ( out of wedlock is, of course Ignored ) Yet Women's rights groups were perfectly willing to give Slick Willie a pass on charges of Rape, and joined in to destroy his accusers. Perhaps this was a realpolitic move to ensure that their current core agenda was maintained. Once it was women's rights, now it's abortion rights. Which I, lacking a Womb, consider a side issue, but the Progressive Eugenics folk MUST have abortion legal to maintain their slow genocide of American blacks in accordance with Planned Parenthood's Founder's wishes. But I digress. The willful ignoring of the hundreds of gays murdered proudly in public in the Islamic countries and by ISIS infuriates me. When Obama supports a Muslim Brotherhood ruler of Egypt, while his minions use rape to intimidate his opposition, and the free press, no one in NOW puts pressure on Obama to make sexual equality part of the deal. I don't hear any of the LGBT movement calling on Obama to push Iran on the issue of gays being executed there. Proudly, publicly. Now, I DO understand the cowardice of the Typical Lefty Protester in confronting the horrific abuses by the Islamists and Communists, preferring instead to pick on Christians, Chik-fil-a, and other groups that won't murder them and their children in their sleep, or torture them to death on Youtube. This reasonable and prudent cowardice, is still cowardice. ( other than the KKK, a Democrat Party operation, and some others considered nuts, there is no Right Wing in America, believe it or not. There may be a few politicians right of center, but you'll have to point them out to me ) | ||
| Aesquire |
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/416176/want-e vidence-hysterical-anti-christian-bigotry-look-no- further-boycottindiana-david |
