Page 1 of 11 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 107

Thread: A Stupid Law

  1. #1

    Default A Stupid Law

    Earlier this week, Indiana Governor signed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. He states the law "ensures that Indiana law will respect religious freedom and apply the highest level of scrutiny to any state or local governmental action that infringes on people's religious liberties."

    Sounds great, huh? It sounds like everyone will have the right to go to church without interference from the state. Or something like that.

    In truth, this law is anything but harmless. In essence, it states that business owners can choose not to serve customers who offend their religious beliefs. The most common example of what is wrong with this legislation is that a Christian owned business can refuse to serve members of the LGBT population because it would 'infringe on their religious liberty.' How do you differentiate when a business is discriminating for religious reasons, or they are homophobes using religion as an excuse , or what if the two are intertwined? It is never acceptable to discriminate, and religious rights should not trump any human rights.

    If you were to combine this legislation with the fact that Indiana doesn't have any anti-discrimination legislation around sexual orientation, it would mean that, theoretically, businesses would legally be able post signs in their windows saying "No Gays Allowed." (I'd be inclined to misinterpret such a sign as saying "Please throw rocks through our windows" but that's just me).


    On a positive note, it was great to see the backlash against this legislation. Connecticut announced a boycott of Indiana and large business deals involved with the state were put on hold. Here in Ontario, Canada, our openly gay Premier, Kathleen Wynne, condemned the Indiana legislation, calling it 'unacceptable that in the 21st century such a law would be used to divide people and create hostility." Ontario does a fair bit of trade with Indiana, and although our Premier fell short of curtailing that business, she urged companies looking for more open, non discriminatory jurisdiction to consider Ontario.

    In an interview with George Stephanopoulos, Pence called this backlash against his legislation "intolerant." What a great concept. People who are intolerant of his intolerance are intolerant. Wow!

    Pence said on Tuesday, he stands by the bill but acknowledged Indiana has a 'perception problem' and urged lawmakers and business leaders to address concerns that the bill would allow discrimination. Good luck with that! It's sad that a bill like this even exists where such concerns must be addressed.

  2. #2

    Default

    Have you actually read the law?

    All of the protests and media hype are overreaction to something that has nothing to to with homosexuality.

    Dry cleaners are not going to refuse to clean your feather boas.

    Starbucks isn't going to refuse to make your cappucinos

    A pizza joint isn't going to refuse to make your goat cheese, anchovie and pineapple white pizza because you're gay. He may refuse because he doesn't have any goat cheese.

    On the other hand, you don't have the right to make a Catholic doctor perform an abortion. Of course, if you're gay, that's a moot point.

    You can't (theoretically) make a religious organization pay for abortions or contraceptives, if that's against their beliefs. Note however, that they left in enough weasel words to let the state do things like that if they decide its the 'least intrusive' way to get done what they want to get done.

    You can't force a Jewish deli owner to make pork ribs.

    Might a wedding photographer or florist or event facility attempt to use this as an excuse to deny your gay wedding? Perhaps. Ask yourself... do you really want to engage the services of someone whose heart isn't in it, or worse is thoroughly disgusted by the concept?

    Bottom line: The law doesn't really do anything. Its grandstanding. A public pushback against the liberal attempt to make atheism the state religion. Gays should see that they're being made the dupes in this effort. If anything, its going to generate more anti-gay sentiment, in the same way that Ferguson backfired on blacks.

  3. #3

    Default

    Unfortunately to many folks choose not to actually read laws instead they jump on whichever band wagon from the media (which is all about ratings not truth, they only need to try and avoid 100% lies verbatim) they like most. Which is why things keep going downhill. I think the average american would be shocked by the things they find stayed i laws they supported (or apposed).

  4. #4

    Default

    Here is the text of the Indiana law. Read it and decide for yourself.

    It does not limit how and where any individual or business can discriminate simply because of "religious beliefs". It is not just about homosexuality, though it is being portrayed as such.

    All I have to claim is that my religion feels that people of darker skin color are inferior and I can refuse to let them come into my restaurant, or maybe just have a special section for them.

    Then I could find a clause in my religion about women being lesser creatures...

    Yes, there are many archaic laws on the books. Most of our society has moved beyond that. Those laws are either not enforced or are being repealed. The thing is, we don't need to reinforce those archaic laws.

  5. #5

    Default

    I don't get why a gay couple would want to give their money to someone who is going to discriminate against them anyway.

  6. #6

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by FauxPas View Post
    I don't get why a gay couple would want to give their money to someone who is going to discriminate against them anyway.
    In the 60's, why would a black person want to go into a restaurant in the South when they knew they would be discriminated against?

  7. #7

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by AnalogRTO View Post
    In the 60's, why would a black person want to go into a restaurant in the South when they knew they would be discriminated against?
    To make a statement? I don't know what your going for here? I really hope you are not comparing what African American's went through to what the LGBT community is going through....

  8. #8

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by FauxPas View Post
    To make a statement? I don't know what your going for here? I really hope you are not comparing what African American's went through to what the LGBT community is going through....
    Why not compare the two? Indiana has just legalized discrimination against anyone by claiming it goes against your religion. The way the law is written, it isn't just about LGBT.

  9. #9

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by AnalogRTO View Post
    Why not compare the two? Indiana has just legalized discrimination against anyone by claiming it goes against your religion. The way the law is written, it isn't just about LGBT.
    Oh yes, I forgot about the years of slavery the LGBT community was forced into, the public lynchings, the riots they went through, arrested for not sitting in the back of the bus.....yeah the two are really comparable.

    It isn't just about LGBT, you are right, so again I ask why would you want to give your money to a company that is going to discriminate against you anyway? They way I see it, this law shows the businesses that you would want to avoid by the way they treat others.

  10. #10

    Default

    They did it because they were treated as second class or lower across the board. Many happily refused to not use business that did not welcome them. They fought to have the right not to force another to accept them.

    Discrimination does and always will NEED to exist. Because, their will always be points where individuals right come into conflict with each other. The key is to find the balance no single party should give away all their rights in favor of another's rights.

    The law clearly states "substantially violates" it doesn't say if you don't like it, or if it would be inconvenient. It further goes to require proof to substantiate that it is a substantial violation. I have many good friends from many different minorities but i shudder to see how often they get turned into fools trying to trample others rights perhaps because their own toes were once stepped upon. Reverse discrimination is just as wrong as discrimination. Learn that your rights are not absolute they must be flexible when they push against another's just as the others must also be flexible.

Similar Threads

  1. Stupid UPS
    By jcrowley1985 in forum Diaper Talk
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 10-Jul-2013, 14:44
  2. Stupid jobs with stupid people (Mini-rant...)
    By Ronbeast in forum Mature Topics
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 20-Aug-2012, 06:44
  3. Stupid stupid stupid. Busted!
    By Fingon in forum Adult Babies & Littles
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 03-Jun-2012, 12:26
  4. stupid stupid question...
    By TraumaChick in forum Diaper Talk
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-Feb-2012, 02:36

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
ADISC.org - the Adult Baby / Diaper Lover / Incontinence Support Community.
ADISC.org is designed to be viewed in Firefox, with a resolution of at least 1280 x 1024.