## Arizona set to enact religious freedom bill

Post by vantran » Sun Feb 23, 2014 10:31 am

http://www.azcentral.com/news/politics/ ... fusal.html
You can be refused service by companies in Arizona if you were gay

### Re: Arizona set to enact religious freedom bill

Post by mikeybound » Sun Feb 23, 2014 10:38 am

And these are the people who freed the slaves. Really?
What this state needs is for the LGBT population, and anyone willing to pretend to be a part of it, to pack all the bigoted business owners establishments. Say what you are loud and proud, and let them waste the day with rejection after rejection and barely a cent made. Let them drive themselves out of business through their bigotry and hypocrisy until there is absolutely nothing left of those assholes.

### Re: Arizona set to enact religious freedom bill

Post by Chris12 » Sun Feb 23, 2014 11:28 am

Isn't this blatantly unconstitutional? Doesn't the first page say with big letters that its self evident that all men are created equal? Guess they missed that part.
So can't the supreme court strike this bill down?

### Re: Arizona set to enact religious freedom bill

Post by mikeybound » Sun Feb 23, 2014 11:38 am

> Chris12 wrote:Isn't this blatantly unconstitutional? Doesn't the first page say with big letters that its self evident that all men are created equal? Guess they missed that part.
> So can't the supreme court strike this bill down?

Sadly, people have a habit of "interpreting" the constitution when it's inconvenient. The good news is, our amendments have been far more fair.

### Re: Arizona set to enact religious freedom bill

Post by skybird137 » Sun Feb 23, 2014 11:39 am

Just wait until the first embarrassments happen as a result of this bill. It will put them on the map.
Wasn't it a nearby state that passed laws that would allow them to jail legitimate visitors to the United States?
Calling Fifty Shades of Grey a Bondage Story is like calling Titanic an Iceberg Movie...
http://skybird137.deviantart.com

### Re: Arizona set to enact religious freedom bill

Post by mikeybound » Sun Feb 23, 2014 12:07 pm

> skybird137 wrote:Wasn't it a nearby state that passed laws that would allow them to jail legitimate visitors to the United States?

Actually, I believe it's the same state. Apparently you can kill and steal to build this country and abduct children to indoctrinate them into the culture, but if you immigrate to it you need documentation to take a shit outside your house.

### Re: Arizona set to enact religious freedom bill

Post by Chris12 » Tue Feb 25, 2014 8:57 am

To be fair there's one thing Arizona has in its favour.
At least its not Uganda.

### Re: Arizona set to enact religious freedom bill

Post by Jason Toddman » Thu Mar 06, 2014 10:37 am

> Chris12 wrote:To be fair there's one thing Arizona has in its favour.
> At least its not Uganda.

A local writer here has in fact compared Arizona to Uganda in a recent article:
http://www.theforecaster.net/news/print ... big/190184
Fortunately, the governor of Arizona vetoed the bill. Wise decision i think, regardless of the flak her own party is giving her for it.
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

### Re: Arizona set to enact religious freedom bill

Post by Jay Feely » Thu Mar 06, 2014 10:38 am

This is ridiculous. Its a good thing it was rejected.
You will have to subdue me to restrain me. I been a bad boy so make sure you torture me too with anything but pain.

### Re: Arizona set to enact religious freedom bill

Post by Jason Toddman » Thu Mar 06, 2014 12:21 pm

> Jay Feely wrote:This is ridiculous. Its a good thing it was rejected.

Really? I think that's the first time you surprised me in one hell of a long time.
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

### Re: Arizona set to enact religious freedom bill

Post by mikeybound » Thu Mar 06, 2014 12:23 pm

The worst part is, these people probably won't see the divine intervention of their governor bitch slapping this bill.

### Re: Arizona set to enact religious freedom bill

Post by Jason Toddman » Thu Mar 06, 2014 12:40 pm

> mikeybound wrote:The worst part is, these people probably won't see the divine intervention of their governor bitch slapping this bill.

Hmmm. Are you saying governor is a bitch, or are you saying she's bitch-slapping?
The lack of a hyphen can make a big difference in meaning sometimes.
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

### Re: Arizona set to enact religious freedom bill

Post by NemesisPrime » Thu Mar 06, 2014 1:41 pm

Too bad where I live the same bill is circulating around and that makes ME pissed cause I am gay!
Now fortinately the guy who co=sponsored the bill even admits the support for it is evoprating and the senate version has been taken off. I think the tide with these kinds of bills are turning unfavorable because politicians don't like supporting something that gets them major backlash and the LGBT community is pretty big.
Everyone speaks in multiple languages...But gag talk is universal and a sock in your mouth is the perfect translator!

### Re: Arizona set to enact religious freedom bill

Post by Jason Toddman » Thu Mar 06, 2014 1:48 pm

In fact the tide is turning so rapidly lately that, unless it loses momentum, gay marriage will likely be legal in all 50 states within 10 years.
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

### Re: Arizona set to enact religious freedom bill

Post by alebcay » Sat Mar 15, 2014 5:41 pm

> Jason Toddman wrote:In fact the tide is turning so rapidly lately that, unless it loses momentum, gay marriage will likely be legal in all 50 states within 10 years.

You bet the tide is turning pretty quickly. Quite personally, I am not in support for same sex marriage, but where I live, I feel quite endangered to speak my mind at all. It is only in a nice obscure place like this, separated by the Internet, that I have the nerve to admit that I'm not for same sex marriage (which for the record, is not the same as being homophobic, although there is a rather fine line in today's society, or so it seems).
Hope that my personal and relatively miniscule and unimportant opinion does not severely offend or insult anyone.

### Re: Arizona set to enact religious freedom bill

Post by Jason Toddman » Sat Mar 15, 2014 9:08 pm

> alebcay wrote:Hope that my personal and relatively miniscule and unimportant opinion does not severely offend or insult anyone.

Not me it doesn't, but i am curious. Why do you oppose gay marriage? On religious grounds, or what?
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

### Re: Arizona set to enact religious freedom bill

Post by alebcay » Sun Mar 16, 2014 6:11 pm

As ridiculous as it may sound to some, it's on religious grounds. Then again, politics is probably not the best place to integrate religion. But then, politics is one of the things that permeates into everybody's lives, so if one's religious beliefs are not integrated the law (and more importantly, they conflict each other), the choices are (there are probably more; these are the tree biggest I can think of right now): 1) let it go ("who needed religion anyway?"); 2) civil disobedience; 3) petition for change.

### Re: Arizona set to enact religious freedom bill

Post by Jason Toddman » Sun Mar 16, 2014 9:54 pm

Sound like the same three strategies that the pro-gay-marriage people have been using.
Anyway, I figured it was probably religious grounds, as I have never yet known anyone to postulate any other reason that made any sense. But I never saw any sense in laws that had only religious reasons, which is why so many others (such as blue laws closing stores on Sundays or the decision to stop telling Catholics not to eat meat on Fridays) have gone by the wayside.
After all, the same book that condemns gay relationships also condemns eating shellfish and pork, but would you support laws to criminalize those? And yes i know about the New Testament rationale for changing those, but that was so that Christians could attract more Gentile converts - St. Peter's 'visions' most likely just being the official explanation. Since gays were in the minority even then, the Christians saw no need to abrogate that restriction.
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

### Re: Arizona set to enact religious freedom bill

Post by Mister Mistoffelees » Mon Mar 17, 2014 12:48 pm

> But then, politics is one of the things that permeates into everybody's lives, so if one's religious beliefs are not integrated the law (and more importantly, they conflict each other), the choices are (there are probably more; these are the tree biggest I can think of right now): 1) let it go ("who needed religion anyway?"); 2) civil disobedience; 3) petition for change.

I was staying out of the discussion until I saw this. Are you arguing that your religious beliefs should be written into law that everyone--regardless of whether they actually believe one single little thing about your religion--has to follow? Why should your religion get to be written into everyone's law code and not someone else's? Why shouldn't Jewish people get to write kosher laws into the US Code? Why shouldn't Hindus get to ban killing cows based on their religious beliefs?
Sorry, your argument has no validity whatsoever in a nation whose laws are clearly and intentionally secular. The followers of Bob Jones "University" believe that interracial marriages aren't sanctified by God, and prevent their students from entering into them; they can believe whatever they want, as long as they don't write laws, based on that belief, which everyone has to follow. You seem to be advocating for a theocracy, the way I see it...
Welcome to Snowden! Enter at your own risk...

### Re: Arizona set to enact religious freedom bill

Post by FelixSH » Mon Mar 17, 2014 1:16 pm

Religion and government have to be strictly separated. If a religious rule should be made into a law, it needs to have a better reason than "god says so". Hence I also think that marriage should be a purely religious thing, that doesn't provide benefits from the state. To get this benefits, there should be something official like a partnership, which is open to hetero- and homosexual couples.
Before I say anything else, would you accept such a solution, alebcay?

### Re: Arizona set to enact religious freedom bill

Post by Jason Toddman » Mon Mar 17, 2014 1:29 pm

For prime examples of theocracies, look at Medieval Europe or modern day Iran. Look at what some lawmakers are trying to do now in insisting on teaching creationism in science classrooms - often replacing evolution and not just alongside it!
Not the kind of government I would want to live under, that's for sure!!!
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

### Re: Arizona set to enact religious freedom bill

Post by alebcay » Mon Mar 17, 2014 6:04 pm

> Mister Mistoffelees wrote:I was staying out of the discussion until I saw this. Are you arguing that your religious beliefs should be written into law that everyone--regardless of whether they actually believe one single little thing about your religion--has to follow? Why should your religion get to be written into everyone's law code and not someone else's? Why shouldn't Jewish people get to write kosher laws into the US Code? Why shouldn't Hindus get to ban killing cows based on their religious beliefs?
> Sorry, your argument has no validity whatsoever in a nation whose laws are clearly and intentionally secular. The followers of Bob Jones "University" believe that interracial marriages aren't sanctified by God, and prevent their students from entering into them; they can believe whatever they want, as long as they don't write laws, based on that belief, which everyone has to follow. You seem to be advocating for a theocracy, the way I see it...

I'm not advocating for a theocracy. Heck, I'm actually considering becoming a hermit someday. Anyways, my point is this: the government doesn't have to back me (and really shouldn't; that's what makes the US unique) and my beliefs. I completely understand that it's laws are intentionally secular (Establishment and Free Exercise clauses): the government's job is to move society to collective action (at least it's supposed to anyway), not to please some particular group of people. However, that does not mean that I cannot voice my disdain in this particular situation. The same way a special interest group may lobby for their agenda to local, state, or national government, am I not allowed to do the same?
The political atmosphere within the US is filled with agendas everywhere. It's a bit of a dog-eat-dog world, and a huge game of "chicken" to see how long a party will filibuster against a bill before consequences occur. At least in this particular case, if the government does not support my viewpoint (which in light of the public opinion, it probably should not), then it is most certainly against my viewpoint, and in the most fundamental way of stating things, it makes me discontent.
Think about it this way: if a law was passed against gay marriage (as being suggested here), it is very evident that a theocracy is being established. How do we recognize the establishment of a theocracy? By the fact that the law is based on belief. However, if the contrary occurred - a law allowing gay marriage - were passed, would that not also state several beliefs, for example, that gay marriage is morally acceptable (if one believes in morality), etc.
My point is that most, if not all social laws express beliefs: they dictate what is deemed right, wrong, acceptable, or not.

### Re: Arizona set to enact religious freedom bill

Post by Jason Toddman » Mon Mar 17, 2014 9:25 pm

> alebcay wrote: The same way a special interest group may lobby for their agenda to local, state, or national government, am I not allowed to do the same?

Certainly.Isn't that what you're doing? i don;t think anyone wants to take that away from you. It was simply unclear what you were advocating, and we have the same right to disagree with you as you have to disagree with the government - as long as we're all civil about it.

> alebcay wrote: (if one believes in morality)

I think virtually everyone believes in morality. Even atheists. Even the hardest of criminals probably do, regardless of their failure to practice it.
Where people disagree is what the ultimate source of morality is (atheists believe it is a natural outgrowth of evolution rather than from God, and even animals have a conscience of sorts), and some tenets (except for the most basic tenets like anti-murder and anti-theft) may vary from culture to culture and generation to generation. After all, why would God condemn an action that hurts no one that is so natural that even numerous species of animals (including apes and dogs) have been observed to practice it? Anyone who thinks homosexuality is exclusively a human trait is deluded.
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

### Re: Arizona set to enact religious freedom bill

Post by Jason Toddman » Tue Jul 01, 2014 4:02 pm

I don't like resurrecting long-dead threads - especially ones started by a member who has since been banned - but this seemed like an appropriate place to bring this up rather than start anew thread about it.
With the Supreme Court's latest incomprehensible ruling about religious rights (no-buffer zones around abortion clinics and the right to refuse to pay for certain items in health care plans for religious reasons), one wonders how much further we have to go before we become a theocracy. I just found this article that some people (except Drawscore, most likely) might find as disturbing as it is interesting:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/3 ... ostpopular
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

### Re: Arizona set to enact religious freedom bill

Post by mikeybound » Tue Jul 01, 2014 4:51 pm

The thing is, the comments are actually more depressing than the article. At least the stuff listed there are hypotheticals.

### Re: Arizona set to enact religious freedom bill

Post by Jason Toddman » Tue Jul 01, 2014 5:09 pm

> mikeybound wrote:The thing is, the comments are actually more depressing than the article. At least the stuff listed there are hypotheticals.

Hypotheticals, yes - but far from impossible and not even all that improbable with some of them.
And actually i only glanced at the comments, as comments in such places are usually more thoughtless than thought-provoking. Having now just looked them a bit more carefully, these seem to be no exception.
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

### Re: Arizona set to enact religious freedom bill

Post by misterg792000 » Tue Jul 01, 2014 6:47 pm

KEEP THE GUBBERMENT OUTTA MY HEALTH CARE, IT'S A PERSONAL DECISION
*cheers a decison that lets boss make health care decisions for me*
*keeps licking plutocrat boots, hoping for scraps to fall from the table*

### Re: Arizona set to enact religious freedom bill

Post by mikeybound » Tue Jul 01, 2014 8:18 pm

> misterg792000 wrote:KEEP THE GUBBERMENT OUTTA MY HEALTH CARE, IT'S A PERSONAL DECISION
> *cheers a decison that lets boss make health care decisions for me*
> *keeps licking plutocrat boots, hoping for scraps to fall from the table*

I'm...I'm not quite sure how to take this. Is it sarcasm, or are you expressing a political stance?

### Re: Arizona set to enact religious freedom bill

Post by misterg792000 » Wed Jul 02, 2014 1:51 pm

> mikeybound wrote:

> > misterg792000 wrote:KEEP THE GUBBERMENT OUTTA MY HEALTH CARE, IT'S A PERSONAL DECISION
> > *cheers a decison that lets boss make health care decisions for me*
> > *keeps licking plutocrat boots, hoping for scraps to fall from the table*

> I'm...I'm not quite sure how to take this. Is it sarcasm, or are you expressing a political stance?

Sarcasm. Very loud, very deep sarcasm.

### Re: Arizona set to enact religious freedom bill

Post by Jason Toddman » Wed Jul 02, 2014 3:35 pm

> mikeybound wrote:

> > misterg792000 wrote:KEEP THE GUBBERMENT OUTTA MY HEALTH CARE, IT'S A PERSONAL DECISION
> > *cheers a decison that lets boss make health care decisions for me*
> > *keeps licking plutocrat boots, hoping for scraps to fall from the table*

> I'm...I'm not quite sure how to take this. Is it sarcasm, or are you expressing a political stance?

Are you taking that personally for some reason, Mikeybound? If so, I fail to see why.
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...