The ramifications of the SCOTUS' Hobby Lobby decision

[write on]

I said this would happen back when I was debating that decision with certain people here on PJ. You know who you are.

It's all coming into fruition--state sanctioned discrimination. They're trying it here in Oklahoma but Indiana is one step ahead of the bigots here.

Welcome back Jim Crow!...this time against gays.

"While the state of Indiana is taking a beating across the country for passing the “Religious Freedom Restoration Act,” allowing businesses and individuals to deny services to gays on religious grounds, Governor Mike Pence has come in for an extra heaping of scorn on social media."

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2015/03/twitter-pounds-indianas-mike-pence-enjoy-your-last-term-as-governor-you-ass-backward-dipsht/

 

[RickWA]

I said this would happen back when I was debating that decision with certain people here on PJ. You know who you are.

It's all coming into fruition--state sanctioned discrimination. They're trying it here in Oklahoma but Indiana is one step ahead of the bigots here.

Welcome back Jim Crow!...this time against gays.

"While the state of Indiana is taking a beating across the country for passing the “Religious Freedom Restoration Act,” allowing businesses and individuals to deny services to gays on religious grounds, Governor Mike Pence has come in for an extra heaping of scorn on social media."

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2015/03/twitter-pounds-indianas-mike-pence-enjoy-your-last-term-as-governor-you-ass-backward-dipsht/

I think folks are going to fundamentally disagree about coercing recognition of unions that violate their core moral code. I can certainly understand why a Christian who happens to be a baker doesn't want to make cakes commemorating what is an immoral event or institution in his/her view. That is coercing violation of moral code and violation of faith.

I'm sure we disagree, but I don't consider one's being (gender, race, ethnicity) the same as one's behaviors and/or associations.

In any case, speaking personally, I really don't care whether homosexuals marry. That's their business. I'm not big on coercion one way or the other...neither "pro" nor "con".

 

[connieb]

I said this would happen back when I was debating that decision with certain people here on PJ. You know who you are.

It's all coming into fruition--state sanctioned discrimination. They're trying it here in Oklahoma but Indiana is one step ahead of the bigots here.

Welcome back Jim Crow!...this time against gays.

"While the state of Indiana is taking a beating across the country for passing the “Religious Freedom Restoration Act,” allowing businesses and individuals to deny services to gays on religious grounds, Governor Mike Pence has come in for an extra heaping of scorn on social media."

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2015/03/twitter-pounds-indianas-mike-pence-enjoy-your-last-term-as-governor-you-ass-backward-dipsht/

People have the right to associate and do business with people they want to. And, yes, that excludes some. While it is not acceptable in certain situations such as "common carriers", it is perfectly acceptable to choose who you will and will not serve. People who disagree are free to not patronize your establishment. Those who do, will support you. Either way, it opens up an opportunity to serve a niche you don't want to server. Good for business and individual liberty.

connie

 

[JuliefromOhio]

I think folks are going to fundamentally disagree about coercing recognition of unions that violate their core moral code. I can certainly understand why a Christian who happens to be a baker doesn't want to make cakes commemorating what is an immoral event or institution in his/her view. That is coercing violation of moral code and violation of faith.

I'm sure we disagree, but I don't consider one's being (gender, race, ethnicity) the same as one's behaviors and/or associations.

In any case, speaking personally, I really don't care whether homosexuals marry. That's their business. I'm not big on coercion one way or the other...neither "pro" nor "con".

most Christians don't believe in discriminating against their fellow man i.e. God's children, so I don't understand the thinking of those who do.

 

[write on]

I think folks are going to fundamentally disagree about coercing recognition of unions that violate their core moral code. I can certainly understand why a Christian who happens to be a baker doesn't want to make cakes commemorating what is an immoral event or institution in his/her view. That is coercing violation of moral code and violation of faith.

I'm sure we disagree, but I don't consider one's being (gender, race, ethnicity) the same as one's behaviors and/or associations.

In any case, speaking personally, I really don't care whether homosexuals marry. That's their business. I'm not big on coercion one way or the other...neither "pro" nor "con".

This has nothing to do with the union of two gay people. It is the select discrimination against an individual for nothing more than being gay that would be known by, as you say, their "behavior".

Ones moral code shouldn't be used as a front for bigotry. What do you think your god would do to a christian that served a patron?

 

[fairsheet]

I said this would happen back when I was debating that decision with certain people here on PJ. You know who you are.

It's all coming into fruition--state sanctioned discrimination. They're trying it here in Oklahoma but Indiana is one step ahead of the bigots here.

Welcome back Jim Crow!...this time against gays.

"While the state of Indiana is taking a beating across the country for passing the “Religious Freedom Restoration Act,” allowing businesses and individuals to deny services to gays on religious grounds, Governor Mike Pence has come in for an extra heaping of scorn on social media."

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2015/03/twitter-pounds-indianas-mike-pence-enjoy-your-last-term-as-governor-you-ass-backward-dipsht/

Indiana is well...Indiana. In the long run, Jesus is better served when the likes of Indiana are left to rot in their own Indiana hell.

 

[write on]

People have the right to associate and do business with people they want to. And, yes, that excludes some. While it is not acceptable in certain situations such as "common carriers", it is perfectly acceptable to choose who you will and will not serve. People who disagree are free to not patronize your establishment. Those who do, will support you. Either way, it opens up an opportunity to serve a niche you don't want to server. Good for business and individual liberty.

connie

But, as the law is written in both Oklahoma and Indiana, ANY "common carrier" can refuse service.

Are you ok with that?

 

[JuliefromOhio]

the NCAA and businesses are expressing concern. maybe they'll boycott Indiana like they did Arizona.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/2015/03/26/ncaa-tournament-final-four-indiana-religious-freedom-law-gay-rights/70492134/

 

[write on]

Indiana is well...Indiana. In the long run, Jesus is better served when the likes of Indiana are left to rot in their own Indiana hell.

The only problem with that is that non bigots have to serve in hell with them.

This country is going to shit. It's ISIS lite. Wait a few decades.

 

[fairsheet]

But, as the law is written in both Oklahoma and Indiana, ANY "common carrier" can refuse service.

Are you ok with that?

Your response is bad since she really didn't mean what you say. There's a good way to hate on others and a bad one. She only supports the good one.

 

[write on]

Your response is bad since she really didn't mean what you say. There's a good way to hate on others and a bad one. She only supports the good one.

What did she mean? What good one?

 

[fairsheet]

the NCAA and businesses are expressing concern. maybe they'll boycott Indiana like they did Arizona.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/2015/03/26/ncaa-tournament-final-four-indiana-religious-freedom-law-gay-rights/70492134/

I don't know how else to say it without coming across as "mean", but without the NCAA and the 500, Indiana ain't got shit. And...to those of you simple that equate the "500" with NASCAR?.....good luck!

 

[fairsheet]

Your response is bad since she really didn't mean what you say. There's a good way to hate on others and a bad one. She only supports the good one.

The good one is the one that serves her hate-meme.

 

[write on]

The good one is the one that serves her hate-meme.

How is that good?

 

[fairsheet]

How is that good?

Give it a rest, if you will.

 

[write on]

Give it a rest, if you will.

I'm just trying to figure out what you're trying to say. Why don't you just say it without the word salad.

 

[RickWA]

most Christians don't believe in discriminating against their fellow man i.e. God's children, so I don't understand the thinking of those who do.

Discrimination against some actions of man is central to Christianity.

You know this and I know this.

That's essentially what I wrote.

 

[RickWA]

This has nothing to do with the union of two gay people. It is the select discrimination against an individual for nothing more than being gay that would be known by, as you say, their "behavior".

Ones moral code shouldn't be used as a front for bigotry. What do you think your god would do to a christian that served a patron?

When man honors and obeys God, everything else takes care of itself.

Whether you or disagree, we should respect that.

 

[write on]

When man honors and obeys God, everything else takes care of itself.

Whether you or disagree, we should respect that.

That's between you and your god.

He says nothing about homosexuality in the ten commandments nor is it mentioned as one of the seven deadly sins.

It's pure bigotry. And what makes it worse, is that xtians know it.

 

[write on]

When man honors and obeys God, everything else takes care of itself.

Whether you or disagree, we should respect that.

"When man honors and obeys God, everything else takes care of itself."

Do you knowingly sin?

Does that include gay xtians?