Jump to content

Indiana's New Law


Recommended Posts

After actually READING the new law I think this is more of a "tempest in a tea cup" than anything else. How many businesses are going to turn away business? Perhaps I am making light of this because these laws are in many other states and I don't see the business community throwing business away for religious reasons. The other thing is that if you don't like the law, vote people in that will change it. Crying about something like this doesn't do much save add drama that may or not be warranted. People should NEVER be forced by the US government to do something under the threat of that oppressive hammer to do things they don't want to do save those things that are life threatening (which is covered I believe in law). I have fired MANY a customer for other reasons than sexual orientation etc..(not paying on time etc). Should I be forced to keep them? Certainly not. Time will tell how this all shakes out. Personally, I think it will be a big nothing at the end of the day with certain factions pointing out the remotest examples of being wronged to make a case. But that's just my opinion.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...If the rest of humanity could share, discuss, differ, agree, and argue over its' myriad problems, concerns, petty differences and meaningful differentiations with even half the degree of respect, equanimity, and tolerance I've seen over 27 pages of opinion from individuals -- some (or many) of whom, I'd bet, haven't even met face-to-face once in their lives -- such as this group...well...I'd feel a ###### lot more secure about the world I currently live in.

No, this isn't any kind of Pollyanna "Kum-Bah-Ya" moment. But by ######, people...everyone needs a pat on the back once in a while -- especially when it's earned and deserved. i do know that my coffee is tasting just a little bit better than usual right now. Thanks.

...

I've read this thread from the beginning and more than recognize that it could easily be heated, resulting in posters "screaming" at one another. The fact that it hasn't turned out that way kind of makes me wonder if we've entered the Apocalypse and just don't know it yet. :)

In all seriousness, keep it up, folks. This shows hope for more than just drum corps.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Response to MelloDude, there have been a few businesses here and there that have turned down gay business and turned up in the news. Biggest issue that I remember is some that had a contract and then found out it was a gay event and tried to back out. Then it got messy with what takes precedence, the contract or the beliefs of the owner. My thought is if a business doesn't want gay business then they should be honest/brave enough to post at the door they don't want it. That way there will be no surprises. Just dust off the old "No Blacks/Irish/Chinese/Jews Allowed" signs.

IOW the opposite of the blue circle stickers (pay attention DCI) some IN businesses are putting up saying they allow all in their stores.

PS In PA you can fire for sexual orientation, local business did it and firing was upheld because "LGBT" is not in the list of groups that are protected. Sometimes it's what is NOT written down that bites you.

Edited by JimF-LowBari
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meh, the businesses that do this will soon be gone. The percentage on food etc (for an example) is so little that every penny counts. While this whole thing stinks (and I agree) there should be NO WAY someone should be able to be sued into poverty for being anti whatever for refusing to do a non-critical or life threatening service IMHO.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've read this thread from the beginning and more than recognize that it could easily be heated, resulting in posters "screaming" at one another. The fact that it hasn't turned out that way kind of makes me wonder if we've entered the Apocalypse and just don't know it yet. :)

In all seriousness, keep it up, folks. This shows hope for more than just drum corps.

Not sure about the Apocalypse, Michael...but if it's (specifically) the "Rapture," then I guess we'll know through our postings who got left behind (shivers). :peek:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree up to a point MelloDude. Family had some businesses that thank goodness I no longer have to worry about. Heard and heard about enough lawsuit threats when people were refused business to be glad I'm not doing that. Note: refused business/thrown out for being disruptive and being jerks 90% of the time.

What would bother me is if I was gay is being in a business and wondering if they want my money or kick me out if they knew. And is the refusal really based on religious belief or "just don't like gay people". Knew one business owner who loathed mixed race couples and their kids. If he could he would kick them out but didn't because they were protected by the state. Doubt if any of them heard the crap that came out of his mouth after they left. So without realizing it they supported someone who "couldn't stay THAT".

Edited by JimF-LowBari
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sometimes, the truest test of a law and/or resutling personal viewpoints is to observe the resulting possible situations in reverse...

If a business which is operated under the ownership of Gay individuals was to expel customers based solely on the customer's heterosexual standing, would there be a public outcry or governmental action?

If a business which is operated under the ownership of Atheistic individuals was to expel customers based solely on the customer's Christian (or Hindu, Buddhist, Muslim, etc.) standing, would there be a public outcry or governmental action?

I suspect that, like Cinderella's Prince, we'd all find out that one size doesn't always fit all.

I think what we simply need is to sit Steve Rondinaro down and teach him, a la Darryl Waltrip, "Boogity, boogity, boogity boys (and girls)....Let's Just Go Marching!!!

Edited by HornTeacher
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sometimes, the truest test of a law and/or resutling personal viewpoints is to observe the resulting possible situations in reverse...

If a business which is operated under the ownership of Gay individuals was to expel customers based solely on the customer's heterosexual standing, would there be a public outcry or governmental action?

Same thing when talking about political parties and how the news outlets cover a story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sometimes, the truest test of a law and/or resutling personal viewpoints is to observe the resulting possible situations in reverse...

If a business which is operated under the ownership of Gay individuals was to expel customers based solely on the customer's heterosexual standing, would there be a public outcry or governmental action?

If a business which is operated under the ownership of Atheistic individuals was to expel customers based solely on the customer's Christian (or Hindu, Buddhist, Muslim, etc.) standing, would there be a public outcry or governmental action?

I suspect that, like Cinderella's Prince, we'd all find out that one size doesn't always fit all.

I think what we simply need is to sit Steve Rondinaro down and teach him, a la Darryl Waltrip, "Boogity, boogity, boogity boys (and girls)....Let's Just Go Marching!!!

Yup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

putting on my non-opinion lawyer hat, I think it's important to deflate the '19 other states' element that keeps being repeated.

While it's true that 19 other states and the federal government have passed nearly identical RFRA laws, this does not make the situation the same. the 'teeth' of a state's RFRA law are determined by other supporting or preventative laws.

example: illinois passed their RFRA in 1998, but then in 2005 passed a non-discrimination law that specifically prevents the kind fo Title2 infringements that people are concerned about in this particular thread.

there are a variety of perceived harms and benefits to the RFRA, and states have different levels of protection/authority. so it is not strictly true to speak of '19 states' as being equal in regard to implementation of an RFA.

This is simply not true. The Indiana RFRA is no more onerous or discriminatory than the plethora of similar laws that have been on the books for years (which merely restore first amendment protections that were eviscerated by the Supreme Court in the early 1990s).

Look ... I am gay. The last thing I would ever do is support and celebrate a law that was passed for the purpose of discriminating against gay people. That isn't what this law does, regardless of the rhetoric that some with political agendas want to spread. The law simply guarantees the freedom of religion that is provided for in the constitution.

For anyone that wants the truth, rather than the rhetoric, read this well written letter from several constitutional experts in support of the law:

http://www.faithlafayette.org/uploads/Church/LetterSupportingReligiousFreedomRestoration.pdf

One of the signers is a former law professor of mine, and I can assure you that he is about as liberal and pro-gay rights as they come. Frankly, I find the way this has been twisted by some to be rather appalling.

To bring this back to the topic at hand, I think DCI's statement was perfect.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...