SportsAndLady;1717843 wrote:This isn't a "God durn O-Burma!" Anti-left wing thread that most of this site has. This is a thread to discuss the law, not discuss why the law is another attack on Christians and conservatives.

We really need to be discussing why the law ISN'T really another pro-right wing attack on gays and liberals.

I'm already pretty damn tired of reading/hearing about it 24/7.

heard a Clinton soundbite today on the radio,,,, jesus the left was doing and saying the same thing 20 years ago. Its unreal how everyone has to play politics with everything

fish82;1718087 wrote:I'm already pretty damn tired of reading/hearing about it 24/7.

amen

Spock;1718089 wrote:heard a Clinton soundbite today on the radio,,,, jesus the left was doing and saying the same thing 20 years ago. Its unreal how everyone has to play politics with everything

preach it brutha

believer;1718063 wrote:We really need to be discussing why the law ISN'T really another pro-right wing attack on gays and liberals.

https://iga.in.gov/legislative/2015/bills/senate/568#digest-heading

There is absolutely nothing in here that is discriminatory. That it is being touted as that without challenge from the media and by politicians is pure political fabrication.

Doesnt the government already deny a certain percentage of the population the right to follow their beliefs in polygamy? Will gay rights for marriage give polygamist a chance to plead their case?

redstreak one;1718190 wrote:Doesnt the government already deny a certain percentage of the population the right to follow their beliefs in polygamy? Will gay rights for marriage give polygamist a chance to plead their case?

AND THEN PEOPLE WILL MARRY SHEEP!!!!! OH THE HUMANITY!!!!!!!!!

Heretic;1718204 wrote:AND THEN PEOPLE WILL MARRY SHEEP!!!!! OH THE HUMANITY!!!!!!!!!

THIS MOTHERFUCKER AIN'T ONE OF US!!! HE SAID HE'D FUCK A SHEEP!!!

Sheep are beautiful creatures.

HitsRus;1718172 wrote:https://iga.in.gov/legislative/2015/bills/senate/568#digest-heading

There is absolutely nothing in here that is discriminatory. That it is being touted as that without challenge from the media and by politicians is pure political fabrication.

BINGO.

Most of today's 'journalists' are little more than ignorant, lazy, liberal lapdogs; 180 degrees from their intended role as watchdog of government. To understand the law they would have to have some semblance of comprehension, but it is easier to just march in lockstep with the politically correct crowd.

Liberal media deflection agenda from the issue of importants:
Hillary, IRS, Iran, Keystone, Terroist

redstreak one;1718190 wrote:Doesnt the government already deny a certain percentage of the population the right to follow their beliefs in polygamy? Will gay rights for marriage give polygamist a chance to plead their case?

Ideally it would allow all adults in consenting relationships to plead their case.

Apple has more stores in Tehran than in Indiana; yet the head of Apple rants about Indiana's law (same law as obama signed on to in Illinois which he did not rant against), but does he say anything about the real abuse of gays and women in Iran, as in executions, stoning etc... Hell no! It is just easier to sign on to the politically correct agenda being rammed down our throats, especially if a financial incentive exists. The hypocrisy of the Left is simply immeasurable.

justincredible;1718276 wrote:Ideally it would allow all adults in consenting relationships to plead their case.

That is what RFRA is about...giving legal standing in the courts to arguements related to religious freedom. In the case of the polygamist, he could argue from relief from prosecution from antipolygamy laws. That does not mean he will win, only that his arguement has legal standing. The court would decide if his arguement had merit, or if the greater public good is served compared to the burden imposed.

If somebody hates somebody irrationally or not, the government isn't going to change that. Why do people think it's the governments job? It's society's job, as a society we take the shittiest route (government) to put an end to hate. No matter how many laws the government will pass, it still want not end hate. If anything it rubs people the wrong way and the hate grows stronger.

This guy hits a homerun. Where is the outrage?

[video=youtube;RgWIhYAtan4][/video]

If I were in charge, I'd get the US Congress to pass, and then the states to ratify, a Commerce Conscientious Objection Amendment giving businesses the right to deny the sale of products and/or services on moral/religious grounds.

Just as the military cannot force a conscientious objector to participate in killing, (though the person can still perform other duties in the military), so too, businesses will not be forced to provided products and/or services that go against their moral and religious beliefs.

Problem solved.

like_that;1718444 wrote:If somebody hates somebody irrationally or not, the government isn't going to change that. Why do people think it's the governments job? It's society's job, as a society we take the shittiest route (government) to put an end to hate. No matter how many laws the government will pass, it still want not end hate. If anything it rubs people the wrong way and the hate grows stronger.

Word.

QuakerOats;1718294 wrote:Apple has more stores in Tehran than in Indiana; yet the head of Apple rants about Indiana's law (same law as obama signed on to in Illinois which he did not rant against), but does he say anything about the real abuse of gays and women in Iran, as in executions, stoning etc... Hell no! It is just easier to sign on to the politically correct agenda being rammed down our throats, especially if a financial incentive exists. The hypocrisy of the Left is simply immeasurable.

pretty much

TedSheckler;1718445 wrote:This guy hits a homerun. Where is the outrage?

[video=youtube;RgWIhYAtan4][/video]

At the 5:07 mark --------- BINGO !!!!!

Definitely a "religious" law, because I don't think the scriptures of Jesus align with these types of actions. I think a lot of "religious" folk of today would be peeved with his "liberal" tendencies. The republican party probably would call him a socialist-pacifist. Blessed is the peacemaker. Luke 6:35 But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be children of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked.

I think Jesus would probably say "hey, being crucified over here....a fucking cake is not the end of your world"

Definitely a "religious" law, because I don't think the scriptures of Jesus align with these types of actions

I don't think a lot of actions on both sides of the aisle align with Jesus's teachings....
Hence...

hey, being crucified over here

in redemption for our screw ups.

This might be one of the site's all-time greatest logical fallacies. "If someone holds beliefs you find offensive and you don't financially support them (and, by proxy, their viewpoint), YOU'RE AS BAD AS THEM!!!!!"

Oh it definitely would be if you just read it as-is without context. The point I was driving at (and I really could have invested more time into my response, that's my bad), in context with the topic, was that people are going nuts over stuff like not wanting to cater to a gay wedding - and then boycotting it as a reaction.

The whole idea of poor little victims is has just oversaturated the media market. Through cheap headliners, sensationalized wording, kneejerk reactionaries and downplaying others' responses, this is where we're at in the US. And it is because of this that people like me are just desensitized to all of it. All of it. I just cannot get myself to find any favorable response for either side, really. And then I find myself saying things like "I don't care" and "This is getting ridiculous".

Gay rallies there are no shooting, looting and burning on the other hand....

The same freedoms, rights and liberties that gays want and individual choice they rally against....

I open a business, invest my time, money and take the risk of ownership...... My faith, believes are mine, how I opperate within the guidelines of the law is my business, my failure, my success are mine, It's my business not yours... not the media, not someone else, not others faith or believes ....