- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 2/25/14 at 2:19 pm to GumboPot
quote:Yes this is what the queens are butthurt over.
substantially motivated by a religious belief
Posted on 2/25/14 at 2:20 pm to asurob1
quote:Neither is a 6y/o running after his ball in the street.
I'm not worried.
Posted on 2/25/14 at 2:21 pm to asurob1
quote:So, are you saying that anarchy doesn't exist? I'm pretty sure that is a political philosophy/system that is COMPLETELY devoid of governmental forces. I could've sworn everyone had heard of that.
There is none.
No, I wasn't referring to anarchy with my previous posts though.
I will quit asking you to answer my original question though since it seems you are unable to.
And I know exactly why you are unable to answer it also.
This post was edited on 2/25/14 at 2:21 pm
Posted on 2/25/14 at 2:21 pm to asurob1
quote:
Social conservatives love to try using secular law to enforce their chosen religious values on others, but what they don't realize is, common sense (and the profit margin concerns of big business) has ways of shutting that whole thing down.
This is funny considering you are the one advocating for the state's rights to punish a citizen. The bill, as written, simply mirrors the strict scrutiny standard that is applied to all 1st amendment rights. It says that if a state imposes sanctions on a citizen for behavior they find discriminatory they must prove that:
1)It is in furtherance of a compelling government interest and
2)The least restrictive means of furthering that interest.
it is the EXACT language used by federal courts in applying the strict scrutiny standard.
You obviously didn't read it, didn't understand it, or you just aren't a fan of the separation of church and state. Those are really the only 3 options.
This post was edited on 2/25/14 at 2:23 pm
Posted on 2/25/14 at 2:27 pm to BBONDS25
And further on in the bill it states what an individual must prove to get injunctive relief if a state punishes a citizen:
hmmm....I feel like I have seen a list like this before... I wonder where.
quote:
E. A PERSON THAT ASSERTS A VIOLATION OF THIS SECTION MUST ESTABLISH
23 ALL OF THE FOLLOWING:
24 1. THAT THE PERSON'S ACTION OR REFUSAL TO ACT IS MOTIVATED BY A
25 RELIGIOUS BELIEF.
26 2. THAT THE PERSON'S RELIGIOUS BELIEF IS SINCERELY HELD.
27 3. THAT THE STATE ACTION SUBSTANTIALLY BURDENS THE EXERCISE OF THE
28 PERSON'S RELIGIOUS BELIEFS.
29 F. THE PERSON ASSERTING
hmmm....I feel like I have seen a list like this before... I wonder where.
This post was edited on 2/25/14 at 2:28 pm
Posted on 2/25/14 at 2:32 pm to asurob1
quote:
Then you are going to need a kindergarten teacher (the big evil government) to make sure everyone plays nice.
Why are you ok with gov't having this role when they have abused and will continue to do so? Just because you agree with the subject matter? I want gov't out of our lives as much as possible.
The mere fact you want to infringe on private property rights using the force of the state for merely disagreeing with you is absolutely despicable and makes you a thug and no better than the bigots you so hate.
If you want to force morality, force it on something that's actually getting your money, and that's the gov't. Leave your fellow private citizens alone, they are not hurting anybody, stealing anything or conducting slander/fraud. They and their property does not belong to you and is not yours to decide with what should be done with it.
Posted on 2/25/14 at 2:34 pm to Sentrius
quote:This!
The mere fact you want to infringe on private property rights using the force of the state for merely disagreeing with you is absolutely despicable and makes you a thug and no better than the bigots you so hate.
Posted on 2/25/14 at 2:38 pm to asurob1
quote:
common sense (and the profit margin concerns of big business) has ways of shutting that whole thing down.
Wait a minute. The Super Bowl committee is condemning discrimination? And the government didn't tell them to? This doesn't make any sense!
Posted on 2/25/14 at 2:38 pm to LSUnKaty
Posted on 2/25/14 at 2:41 pm to asurob1
quote:
you are going to need a kindergarten teacher (the big evil government) to make sure everyone plays nice.
except when the subject is abortion, right Rob?
Then the kindergarten teacher can hit the fricking road.
Posted on 2/25/14 at 2:45 pm to asurob1
Let's say I'm a gay videographer. Westboro Baptist calls me up and wants me to shoot, edit, and do some CGI on their anti-gay rally.
In your world, do I have to do it?
In your world, do I have to do it?
Posted on 2/25/14 at 2:53 pm to McLemore
quote:
Let's say I'm a gay videographer. Westboro Baptist calls me up and wants me to shoot, edit, and do some CGI on their anti-gay rally.
In your world, do I have to do it?
Yes, you must, you shall and you have no choice.
Posted on 2/25/14 at 2:53 pm to McLemore
So much butthurt. Why are people pretending that this is even remotely ok? As a Christian, I disagree with Homosexuality as a lifestyle choice.
But this law is bullshite. Just because I disagree with something, doesn't give me the right to take it away IMO.
The entire point of this from the right was to overreact on gay issues and claim that its an attack on their rights. The only point in saying that, is to force an overreaction from the left.
Thats nothing less than provocation.
But this law is bullshite. Just because I disagree with something, doesn't give me the right to take it away IMO.
The entire point of this from the right was to overreact on gay issues and claim that its an attack on their rights. The only point in saying that, is to force an overreaction from the left.
Thats nothing less than provocation.
Posted on 2/25/14 at 2:54 pm to asurob1
quote:
Social conservatives love to try using secular law to enforce their chosen religious values on others, but what they don't realize is, common sense (and the profit margin concerns of big business) has ways of shutting that whole thing down.
Wow, if you cannot see the irony in your statement...I don't know what to say.
Social and business pressure as the tool to stop discrimination- boo, we need to government to step in!
Social and business pressure as the tool to stop a law you don't like- yeah!
You realize it is just as easy for Congress to pass a law that says national sports leagues cannot look at the policies of a state to make decisions on where to host games? Yes, that is a stupid law, but dumber ones have passed.
After all, if you want to run a "public" business you have to play by the rules.
This post was edited on 2/25/14 at 3:05 pm
Posted on 2/25/14 at 2:57 pm to BigJim
quote:
WEST HOLLYWOOD (CBSLA.com) — Southern California lawmakers who support legislation to discriminate against gays and lesbians now have one less hotspot to visit in West Hollywood. David Cooley, the founder of The Abbey Food & Bar located at 692 North Robertson Blvd., has announced the popular gay bar will add any legislator in any state who votes for “bills to allow for discrimination against LGBT people” to a “Deny Entry List.”
Posted on 2/25/14 at 2:57 pm to CockCommander
quote:What?
But this law is bullshite. Just because I disagree with something, doesn't give me the right to take it away IMO.
quote:Because unlikely so many people out there, I have no issues with people choosing who they want to associate and do business with.
Why are people pretending that this is even remotely ok?
I believe people should have the liberty to choose.
It seems that many people don't agree with me and this discussion has devolved into the same posts over and over again.
Posted on 2/25/14 at 2:58 pm to CockCommander
quote:
Why are people pretending that this is even remotely ok?
Can you tell me what "this" is?
quote:
Just because I disagree with something, doesn't give me the right to take it away IMO.
You're not making any sense.
Posted on 2/25/14 at 2:59 pm to UncleFestersLegs
quote:A perfectly acceptable response. These places would now have the right to discriminate against those they disagree with.
WEST HOLLYWOOD (CBSLA.com) — Southern California lawmakers who support legislation to discriminate against gays and lesbians now have one less hotspot to visit in West Hollywood. David Cooley, the founder of The Abbey Food & Bar located at 692 North Robertson Blvd., has announced the popular gay bar will add any legislator in any state who votes for “bills to allow for discrimination against LGBT people” to a “Deny Entry List.”
This post was edited on 2/25/14 at 3:00 pm
Posted on 2/25/14 at 3:02 pm to Scruffy
quote:
What?
Huh? Not a hard concept. I disagree with Homosexuality, but I do not support any law or concept that takes freedom from anyone, when their acts are non-violent.
quote:
I believe people should have the liberty to choose.
You do not have the right to choose to discriminate.
Not to mention, this bill has nothing to do with rights. Its completely political. They don't give one flying frick about rights. They care about causing a stir, and getting people foaming at the mouth.
Page 20 of 36
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News