Can somebody please explain the "Religious Freedom Bill" that Pence

[Bloom.]

It really isn't about the patrons. It was about the workers...

A person shouldn't have to decide whether or not to work in an unsafe environment. The law doesn't totally eradicate bars that allow smoking, but it made it easy for new restaurants to never consider it. It created more safe jobs.

The flip side of the that is there are three bars in Carmel which were grandfathered, partly based on the criteria you mentioned, and they too benefitted from the law. There is a definite line, and it benefits everyone. No more guessing.

 

[mustache_rides]

We still can't buy beer on Sunday

Everything else remains the same.

 

[MyTeamIsOnTheFloor]

I Reserve The Right To Refuse To Respond to Anyone's Post

and now Indiana says I'm right.

 

[WER4IU]

Legalized is a tough one to argue.....

I'm from southern Indiana and have traveled the state on business for multiple years.....in the AG industry no less....and have never seen anyone refused service. Ever. Period. It's true our state has a dark history with white supremacy causes, but it also has a dark history with black power extremist causes. We police ourselves. If a company refuses service they will quickly have to close their doors. Do you fear the evil white Christian oppressor keeping ethnic and racial minorities down, or does it work both ways? I have been places in Indiana where I was told to take my "honkeyass" home. Needless to say I probably didn't need to be there......so I left.....happily and quietly......and I didn't call the ACLU as soon as I got home

 

[Ungar16]

I wasn't saying any differently....

my point is that to call "marriage" some sacred thing is BS. If it was sacred people would treat it like it was. Instead we see 1 or 2 day marriages and a divorce rate that is through the roof. To me that is not sacred it means very little for me to have the label "married" (besides the tax benefits etc.). I "married" my wife because she means something to me, I love her dearly but I didn't do it for the label (ok I did for the benefits and to make her happy).

I know people make mistakes and get married to people they don't love or fall out of love or some other reason people get divorced. It happens to straight people just like it happens to gay people. I am just saying don't call it freaking sacred when we as straight people treat it like crap.

 

[tbizzy]

upvote, +1

nt

 

[UTFO]

It's a very legit defense. I think 30+ states have it or will have an RFRA

Since the gay marriage thing went viral, 13 states (including Indiana) have proposed legislation. Indiana's is the first to make the governor's desk of those 13 though.

The law is scary enough but, yes, I hear you on the "slippery slope" thing...

 

[Optimist13]

It ain't discrimination if

a florist won't sell flowers for a funeral to the family of someone who died of AIDS, if is against the florist's religion to conduct business with people the florist hates due to the florist's religion.

 

[Bligedy]

You don't live in Indy do you?

because you seem to be clueless about what is going on here.

 

[FL33]

I think you have some guilt ridden

fantasy of huge swaths of Indiana being ready to jump into discrimination mode, and then the state's judiciary and/or the Fed. government allowing it to take place.

Ain't. Gonna. Happen.

Other than that, I agree with you about the silliness of the law.

 

[FL33]

What....they not serving you at Panera in Carmel?

I always assumed it was us smaller town folk who got a bad name from you bigoted big city boys.

 

[tbizzy]

I don't. I honestly think it will be a minute thing

that only has minor affects, but why ever allow something like that? The folks governing our state apparently think that someone right to believe something supersedes civil liberties. That is what I have an issue with.

 

[GOIU]

Well you said the divorce rate

Would drop 12% so it means you think gays are more likely to stay married.

 

[Ungar16]

I also said it would rise in the previous sentence...

but that was only 2% so I guess I should have put 72%. I started at 60% which might be higher or lower than it actually is I didn't look at 2014 numbers.

 

[GOIU]

Nope

I just responded to his numbers.

 

[WER4IU]

Straight people contract AIDS as well you realize.......

Dear lord, religious freedom and social persecution are not the same thing.......No florist turns down the $$$.......mute point....

 

[GOIU]

As I said before the whole thing is stupid

And I don't care if gays can marry. When I say I don't care I really mean that I've had people tell me I had to have an opinion, I don't care.

 

[NickStromboli]

Easy reason why....it probably costs 1/4 a much to run the business

Cheaper labor, cheaper overhead and yes they will still be able to get talent. You don't need a bunch of mensa members to be good leaders/members and at the end of the day they can overpay for the area and still undercut their costs from California.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

Some industries are more gay-friendly than others.

Let's say, hypothetically, Apple is looking to open some satellite office that will employee 50 highly-qualified white-collar workers. Apple is probably going to say "No" to states with a RFRA. This isn't about the retail outlets. It's about corporate headquarters, R&D, high-paying white collar jobs.

In a more general sense, it also just makes the state look bad, and that discourages investment period.

Yes, it's all about the money. For some corporations, moving offices into a RFRA state will be bad for business. We have essentially told all of those companies to go ahead and look elsewhere.

Maybe the effects are slightly overblown. But if just one company decides not to open an office in the state because of this, then it wasn't worth it. If just one highly-trained, high-earning, productive same-sex couple decides to relocate to, I dunno, Charlotte instead of Indianapolis, then it wasn't worth it. Appeasing bigots isn't worth even one tiny dent in the state's economy, and that's what is happening here.

goat

 

[Zizkov]

As I said, you missed the point......

His numbers were made up and irrelevant to his overall point.

 

[Guy_Fawkes]

Moot ....**

IU

 

[Ungar16]

Why is my questions...

is Apple going to discriminate against gays? The RFRA doesn't effect them at all unless they plan on discriminating which I highly doubt they will do. If that is the case which I highly doubt it is or would be then the law will get repealed. If enough business is lost then it will get repealed.

Your statement on if 1 person or 1 business chooses not to come to Indiana because of this reason then it is wrong. What if 1 business does come because of it or 1 person moves here because of it does it make it a good law? Making decisions off of 1 thing is not a smart move. Decisions need to be made off of sound information not because 1 person doesn't want to come to Indiana because of RFRA.

 

[IU_Cramer]

Discrimination is wrong

Just because you have experienced discrimination for being white in what I surmise from your statement was a mostly black area doesn't make it any different from the discrimination faced by ethnic or racial minorities or anyone else for that matter. Discrimination based on sweeping generalizations such as race, gender, ethnicity, or sexual preference shouldn't have a place in our society. But kudos to you for not seeing anyone refused service. I saw several occasions where Hispanics were refused service at a business growing up. It was cloaked in terms of a language difference (and I'm putting that in nicer terms than were used by the individuals at the business). Now I'd also point out that over time the Hispanic community that was sprouting up in Marshall County solved this by opening up their own businesses.

 

[hoosierdug]

Here's an immediate example and their letter to Pence (link)

*facepalm* What an embarrassment our state government is.

Nice response. More will follow.

 

[WER4IU]

Interesting......

Gentrification & perceived or realized persecution fears led to new businesses.......We seem to agree on most things we probably just stand on different sides of the street......good if not great chat.....I've finally forgotten about basketball.

 

[Guy_Fawkes]

Honkey? What are you 90?

or were you at a black old folks home? Those geriatric gangstas are hard, yo.

 

[NickStromboli]

To some people it is sacred Ungar

My wife and I waited until we were married to consumate it because we felt that is what was right according to what we believe. We don't believe in divorce except for marital infidelity. We view it as a lifetime committment that we made to each other and to God.

We have many friends who believe the same thing.

I know on here and in society that I am considered a weirdo, but to say no one considers it sacred isn't fair.

Also, someone who holds those same beliefs are now labeled a bigot.

I don't believe in discriminating against someone for their sexual orientation. That's not my thing, but to me marriage is sacred.

If gay people want to get married and be miserable let them go ahead, but if a business owner doesn't want to support that (due to their beliefs) they shouldn't be forced. The business owner can face the consequences for that decision.

There are plenty of other places that will take that couples money.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

I really doubt this will be good for business.

It's simply not the direction the wind is blowing. We're positioning ourselves as a backwards state, and that's bad for business.

It's not about Apple discriminating. It's about the guy from Stanford who refuses to relocate to Indianapolis because he doesn't think he and his family will feel welcome in the state. Will Apple be able to find someone else qualified who is willing to move? Probably, yes. But why should they limit their own pool of potential hires? What benefit do they get from it? Tax incentives? Other states and cities will offer tax incentives. States and cities that will more attractive to the new generation of talented individuals.

People who are opposed to same-sex marriage and LGBT rights are dying out in the professional ranks. Companies that want to find the best talent are also attracted to the most tolerant states and localities. This will only be bad for the Hoosier economy. How bad remains to be seen.

goat

 

[Bloom.]

It is discrimination, but that isn't really the issue...

The issue is the state is endorsing it. Further, it seems to read that employees can unilaterally make decisions on their own and can't be penalized without threat of suit. At least as I understood one section of it.

 

[VanPastorMan]

My main concern is that if you take away the definition of marriage then

you will get different groups like the polygamists, group marriage proponents, who will want their rights too. And why can't they if the definition of marriage is whatever you want it to be? The real question is about society. Which family structure works the best? If you have gays who get married and bring children into the relationship then these children will grow up without a mother. If two lesbians do the same then the children grow up without a father. I see this as a tragic result upon society. Now I know with divorce and couples who live together and split up that many kids are raised in one parent households. This is a tragedy too,so I am not just picking on the gays.

 

[WER4IU]

Cool, Guy_Fawkes I wish you would have been there......

I'm sure these specific guys would have loved your cool mask and would have loved to hear about your fight against social injustice from the wifi in the security of your moms basement......all of that would require you leaving the basement and seeing the sunlight.....in between WOW sessions of course....... Long live capitalism!......... R-tard

This post was edited on 3/24 4:17 PM by WER4IU

 

[WER4IU]

C-O-U-L-D******

Iu

 

[Ungar16]

that is fine I am fine with marriage...

Hell my wife views marriage the same as you and your wife. I do to a point as well but for me for it to be sacred then it needs to be treated that way and today it is not. Obviously with the high devorice rate that is very prevalent. If Society is going to treat marriage as a short term thing anyways then why is it so bad if gay people marry? They are doing no more "damage" than the 3 day old marriages, who take a vow and then break that vow.

Maybe we should have a "this is real marriage" and " the other "real" marriage.

By the way the infidelity comment is nice to see. We have a few friends who's husband or wife cheat then they give me some BS how God wouldn't want them to divorce. They stay in an unhappy marriage and bitch and moan about how bad it is.

 

[Guy_Fawkes]

T-Y-P-O! *

IU

 

[Guy_Fawkes]

Go away ..

or I'll get Morgan Freeman to intimidate you.

 

[WER4IU]

Auto correct above......

Harassment sucks.....

 

[I FAN U]

Chuck Schumer mighta been behind it and Clinton signed it into law.

Mighta been struck down by the supremes but not sure.

With all the hubub over our law, I'm curious to see how often denial of services will actually occur. I dunno...

 

[GOIU]

And as I said you missed my point

Who should care if gay get married and why throw out numbers that seem to make it look like the divorce rate would change.

 

[tbizzy]

I think your final point misses the point.



I don't think a business can be forced to serve somebody, but the business can get in trouble for not serving. There are lots of reasons that is a good rule and shouldn't have a religious exception,

- For one, a business does not operate in a vacuum. Tax payers pay to to build and maintain the roads that allow access to the business, pay for the cops and firefighters who protect it, pay for the system that created, monitors and protects our monetary system. The idea is that businesses who benefit from these systems paid for by general public shouldn't be allowed to deny service to a portion of those people based on race, gender, sexuality, etc.. Essentially if you aren't willing ot serve all patrons, than pick another line of work.

-The folks who support these bills often see it from the simple lens of their religion and one topic. The reality is that it opens the door to other forms of discrimination like denying service to Jews, apostates, unwed mothers, etc... You also don't have to try real hard to find religious or biblical beliefs that support (and were used to support) segregation, prohibiting interracial marriage, and lots of other awful things.

-It isn't just a matter of not providing flowers for a gay wedding. Could a doctor not now refuse to see a child of gay parents or one born out of wedlock? I don't really think that is likely but this bill would allow it

I do believe most people think of this as simply protecting people of various religious belief, but the reality is is sets back civil liberties and opens the door to un thought of issues.

 

[Bizzlepizzle]

Re: Can somebody please explain the "Religious Freedom Bill" that Pen

Originally posted by FL33:
large corps in the state have publicly pushed back against the law makes me think that Indiana Republicans, who claim to be pro business, are foolish for doing what they are doing. I'm not backing the bill. I'm just saying it has more symbolic political effect than it ever will actual consequences. Maybe the bill costs Indiana some new business. Hopefully, those behind the bill will be held accountable.

OTOH, last time I was reading about this, it was about Cummins and their corporate diversity programs. It's funny how their "diversity rules" are not implemented overseas in places like China and India, etc... So when it comes to these issues, every corporation's support is symbolic vs. their bottom line.

Actually Cummins does promote diversity in the countries you singled out. Diversity does not just mean race. Trust me, I have a little insight into this and you have no clue.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

This post was edited on 3/24 9:14 PM by Bizzlepizzle