Discussion for article #234815
What is there to clarify?
This bill is designed to allow homophobes and bigots to hide their prejudice behind their religion and eventually people will start using it to deny other groups service too.
29 Likes
If there is one good thing to come out of this stupid law, it is the very real and very hot heat the folks in Indiana are feeling right now.
17 Likes
Note to Speaker Bosma: when choosing a fig leaf to cover your bits, don’t grab the one that’s on fire 
8 Likes
"You shouldn’t force me to participate in beliefs I don’t share," say the people who claim we’re a ‘Christian’ nation whether we like it or not.
25 Likes
Clarify? WTF? How would one “clarify” the law without essentially repealing it?
The fact that these two idiotic republican “leaders” couldn’t spell out in their press conference how they would fix the law just proves (again) that they are clueless morons.
17 Likes
Long said this was a reaction to an “obvious misconception” about what the new law does.
Ah, yes.
An obvious misconception.
2 Likes
Fine, let’s see the language in the Amendment first.
And I’d also like to see them give examples of what the current law allows, and what it’s purpose is. Can Christian’s refuse to serve people who commit adultery? Can a Jewish business refuse to serve uncircumcised men?
13 Likes
¨Clarify¨ should be in irony quotes in the headline as well as the body of the text.
2 Likes
If they want to clarify the law, they should pass a bill similar to what was attached to the GA provision. It said that their version of RFRA does not allow business and individual to violate Georgians’ civil rights, including those of LGBT people. Shockingly, the republicans pulled it and claimed that without the ability to discriminate, the bill is meaningless. Either this or what they did in OK that requires business to post up front those people who they refuse to serve based on their religious beliefs.
4 Likes
THis LAw doesN’t discriminATE. It MErely clarifiES the FACt that IT is OK to NOT associAte with PEOPle you HATE basED on yOUR religioN. LIbtards NEEDs CLARIficaTIons on CLARIfications. HOW deNSe is LIBtards???
8 Likes
remembder the Natzis
“tell a big LIE” in propaganda people beieve it easier go figure I think they want ot believe it it fits their thinking the neanderthals in the Republican Party
2 Likes
These so-called leaders were warned of blowback. Then they say they did not “anticipate” any blowback. Then they commit themselves to “clarifying” something they call an “obvious misconception.” They are logically challenged but the law, as written, is not. How they are going to dig themselves out of this, without revealing their hypocrisy, is going to be very, very interesting (READ: impossible, just to “clarify”).
12 Likes
They are discussing an Amendment for clarification. If they clarify that this does not allow people’s Civil Rights to be violated based on their race, gender, religion, sexual orientation and such, that would be a good clarification. Of course one wonders then what the purpose of the Law was in the first place.
A business does have a right to refuse service to people who behave badly or lewdly, etc. If a gay couple are tongue kissing and doing heavy groping in a restaurant, that is no different than a hetero couple doing the same thing, and a biz has a right to ask them to leave if they don’t condone such behavior, and no lawsuit by those asked to leave should be allowed. Now if a known gay couple just comes in to get a bite to eat and is refused service simply for being gay, that is definitely a violation of Civil Rights.
2 Likes
Just look at what happened in Georgia while they were trying to pass a similar bill. A republican brought up an amendment to spell out that the law isn’t to be used to discriminate, and the rest of the GOP went apeshit…literally saying that the was the whole reason for the law (oops, cat out of the bag). The amendment narrowly passed, so the GOP tabled the entire thing.
11 Likes
"Throughout the press conference, both lawmakers said repeatedly the legislation does not directly discriminate against anyone. "
TRANSLATION: This does not do what it says it does! That’s just the fags talking! FAGS!
2 Likes
Like watching a cat try to cover up a turd on a marble floor.
16 Likes
I like how they use the phrase “small tribe”…what a bunch of backwater hayseed hypocritical redneck bigots. Thank you Indiana for outing these bigots…
3 Likes
This law could have some interesting unintended consequences. From Rawstory:
While Governor Mike Pence ® was holding a signing ceremony for the bill allowing businesses and individuals to deny services to gays on religious grounds or values, paperwork for the First Church of Cannabis Inc. was being filed with the Secretary of State’s office, reports RTV6.
Church founder Bill Levin announced on his Facebook page that the church’s registration has been approved, writing, “Status: Approved by Secretary of State of Indiana – “Congratulations your registration has been approved!” Now we begin to accomplish our goals of Love, Understanding, and Good Health.”
“So, with that said, what ‘compelling interest’ would the state of Indiana have to prohibit me from using marijuana as part of my religious practice?” he asked. ” I would argue marijuana is less dangerous than alcohol and wine used in religious ceremonies. Marijuana isn’t any more ‘addictive’ than alcohol and wine is used in some religious ceremonies. Shabazz concluded, “I want a front row seat at the trial that we all know is going to happen when all this goes down.”
4 Likes
True, but the heat has to now be put on Arkansas.
2 Likes