Maybe those ten should have had those copper implants installed. You know the ones? They allow the recipient to talk directly and immediately to allah when installed in the center of their forehead. Hardly any pain or bleeding due to the installation. They won't corrode and they come in sizes from .223 to 50 cal. Very effective, too...... ??
What I can't figure out is why they wanted to save him. He is and was the enemy. Why not a long range sniper? obozo might love him and his parents might love him but the military who knew had a completely different opinion of him.
Religious freedom bills/laws. What exactly are they? In Indiana things are heating up. Why now? 19 other states have passed these types of laws so what's the big deal in Indiana? I'm looking for real answers, not rhetoric. All I've heard so far is the left saying this is sanctioned discrimination. OK, I get it. Enough said. So, my next question is what exactly does this bill/law do? What does it accomplish? Does it keep a mom and pop catering operation from being sued for denying catering services to same sex couples because the mom and pop business bases their denial of service on religious grounds? Is that the basic idea? I don't know. I'm asking.
Can anyone provide a specific example of how the law might be applied? And why is there so much more opposition here than in all the other states with Religious Freedom laws? What's different?
Can anyone provide a specific example of how the law might be applied? And why is there so much more opposition here than in all the other states with Religious Freedom laws? What's different?
I'm no expert, but it's my understanding that the issue with Indiana is that it doesn't have any laws preventing discrimination towards LGBT. I'm guessing many/most of the other states have laws preventing the discrimination in addition to the religious freedom law. So in Indiana, you can't discriminate based on age, gender, race, etc, but not including sexual orientation. This law comes right out and says you can discriminate on religious grounds and about the only people not protected would be LGBT.
Sadly, here in MI we don't have the protections for LGBT either, but I did just see a proposed law to eliminate discrimination of dog breeds. Seriously.
It's tough because I feel like it can go both ways. This is all IMO, of course.
Example. I don't feel like anyone should be able to force a Christian who genuinely believes that God hates homosexuals to provide their business services to them. Saying that they;re choosing which religious ideals to follow is true, but that's like saying we've all broken the law at some point (we have) so we should all turn ourselves in to the police and go to jail. I bet there are more people out there that support LGBT rights then not, so really the business owner is probably hurting their business.Flip side is, what if it extended to other rights like voting, holding office etc. Not sure there is a right answer.I've been thinking about this stuff more with all the attention police have been getting. If I get pulled over, I'm genuinely not afraid that an officer is going to shoot me. Granted, I'm not going to act like an @$$hat and escalate the situation...but there genuinely are people out there that are afraid and believe a cop is going to assault them. Well, that or they say they are to rile people up. Guess it's hard for me to relate when I have not experienced it. Same with discrimination...I'm a Caucasian Army vet EMT...I don't really get discriminated against. I have gay friends, I don't agree with their lifestyle/choice/genetics or whatever you think it is, but I don't let it define them. My team leader in 2008 was gay while DADT was a policy...everyone knew but he never got in trouble. People are so much more than their sexuality or religion. Well, most people.I don't hate gays, and I don't hate people that hate gays. If I owned a business, I'd provide services to both of em. Like I said, not sure what the right answer is...don't want to force people to violate their religious beliefs, but don't want people discriminated against either.
It's legal discrimination. I doubt there are any fourm members that would support Jim Crow laws, but It's hard to find something similar to compare it to. These are people. It's when it becomes the law of the land that I have an issue with. If you were turned away because of the color of your skin, age, sexual preference, or who you choose to form relationships with; it might be an experience you're not likely to forget. It's easy for the people not being discriminated against to say suck it up and go shop where they accept you.
To be President you must...
Be a natural-born citizen of the United States
Be at least thirty-five years old
Have been a permanent resident in the United States for at least fourteen years.
That's discriminating against immigrants, people younger than 35 and citizens that live abroad. Aren't we all about immigrants? Fix it!
It's legal discrimination. I doubt there are any fourm members that would support Jim Crow laws, but It's hard to find something similar to compare it to. These are people. It's when it becomes the law of the land that I have an issue with. If you were turned away because of the color of your skin, age, sexual preference, or who you choose to form relationships with; it might be an experience you're not likely to forget. It's easy for the people not being discriminated against to say suck it up and go shop where they accept you.
I'm sure I'll get blasted for this, but in this day and age I really doubt our collective social conscientiousness would allow a business engaged in active discrimination to thrive. We've come a long way since the Jim Crow era. These laws do not explicitly permit or endorse discrimination against any race, religion, sexual preference or gender. I personally think they fall into the category of unnecessary legislation. If they were used for that purpose, any business engaging in such practices would not only be limiting the market for their own goods or services, but they would likely be the subject of such harsh public criticism and outrage that they'd be forced to change their policy or go out of business. I can't imagine any business enduring the demonstrations we saw in Ferguson without suffering detrimental hardship. If a business wants to refuse service to anyone, let them do so at their own risk. If they can eek out a living serving only like-minded rejects, so be it. I'm not saying it would be right, but those that wish to engage in such discrimination can always find a way to do so regardless of the law.
Can anyone provide a specific example of how the law might be applied? And why is there so much more opposition here than in all the other states with Religious Freedom laws? What's different?
I'm no expert, but it's my understanding that the issue with Indiana is that it doesn't have any laws preventing discrimination towards LGBT. I'm guessing many/most of the other states have laws preventing the discrimination in addition to the religious freedom law. So in Indiana, you can't discriminate based on age, gender, race, etc, but not including sexual orientation. This law comes right out and says you can discriminate on religious grounds and about the only people not protected would be LGBT.
Sadly, here in MI we don't have the protections for LGBT either, but I did just see a proposed law to eliminate discrimination of dog breeds. Seriously.
Other states that have religious freedom acts also have protections for members of the LBGT community. This would be the first state that didn't offer protections for their human rights.
Comments