Arkansas state senator Bart Hester gets owned trying to defend 'religious freedom' bill

[UncleBuck]

Why is it OK for the government to suppress the religious beliefs of citizens? Oh yeah, it's not.

the government can't suppress your bible thumping beliefs, bigot.

but they can tell ya that you can't call yourself 'open to the public' if you refuse to serve members of the public just because they like to rub each other's clitorises to beautiful orgasm when they get home.

if you're gonna be a bigot and try to hide behind the facade of religion, you have to call yourself a private club.

 

[desert dude]

Here's the thing though, you don't have the right to discriminate against people based on their sexual orientation. You think you do, that's why you're wrong. Denying the sale of goods/services to someone based on their sexual orientation is discrimination, nothing in the Constitution grants you the right to discriminate against people

People that support the bill in Indiana believe it protects religious freedoms

People who oppose it believe it allows religious people to discriminate against someone based on their sexual orientation

and most people in all agree with the opposition, which is why when it reaches the SC, a clause will be added to the civil rights act to include LGBT people

Some people are willing to put their money forward to support religious freedom. $842,000. So far.

This war on religion won't end well.

"
Now it appears the O'Connor family will have more money than it knows what to do with, thanks to a crowdfunding campaign created and promoted by conservative media outlets.

 

[Red1966]

Here's the thing though, you don't have the right to discriminate against people based on their sexual orientation. You think you do, that's why you're wrong. Denying the sale of goods/services to someone based on their sexual orientation is discrimination, nothing in the Constitution grants you the right to discriminate against people

People that support the bill in Indiana believe it protects religious freedoms

People who oppose it believe it allows religious people to discriminate against someone based on their sexual orientation

and most people in all agree with the opposition, which is why when it reaches the SC, a clause will be added to the civil rights act to include LGBT people

Actually, you do. You can thank President Clinton for that.
Nothing in the Constitution forbids it either. The SC can't add a clause to the Constitution, either. Once again, you're trying to pretend forcing others to participate in a gay wedding is a "right". Would that be because no one came to yours, not even your "significant other"? Not surprising I wouldn't attend a wedding where they served pizza, either.

 

[desert dude]

You don't have the right to direct the religious beliefs of anybody but yourself. I predict this is going to get bloody.

 

[UncleBuck]

This war on religion won't end well.

how is gay people offering money to stores in exchange for goods and services a war on religion?

your white supremacist rhetoric belongs at your local klan chapter, not a cannabis website.

you fucking snitch rat.

 

[desert dude]

Who would have thought gay people could be such fucking bullies and assholes? Scratch a progressive, expose a fascist. Every time.

 

[UncleBuck]

You don't have the right to direct the religious beliefs of anybody but yourself. I predict this is going to get bloody.

bla bla bla. yeah, your "white revolution" is coming alright. keep dreaming, rat.

the supreme court has already decided that you indeed can "direct the religious beliefs" of others, whatever the fuck that is supposed to mean.

https://www.rollitup.org/t/a-history-lesson-on-religious-liberty.865954/#post-11468251

Bob Jones University excluded African Americans completely until the early 1970s, when it began permitting black students to attend so long as they were married. In 1975, it amended this policy to permit unmarried African American students, but it continued toprohibit interracial dating, interracial marriage, or even being “affiliated with any group or organization which holds as one of its goals or advocates interracial marriage.” As a result, the Internal Revenue Service revoked Bob Jones’ tax-exempt status.

This decision, that the IRS would no longer give tax subsidies to racist schools even if they claimed that their racism was rooted in religious beliefs, quickly became a rallying point for the Christian Right. Indeed, according to Paul Weyrich, the seminal conservative activist who coined the term “moral majority,” the IRS’ move against schools like Bob Jones was the single most important issue driving the birth of modern day religious conservatism. According to Weyrich, “t was not the school-prayer issue, and it was not the abortion issue,” that caused this “movement to surface.” Rather it was what Weyrich labeled the “federal government’s move against the Christian schools.”

When Bob Jones’ case reached the Supreme Court, the school argued that IRS’ regulations denying tax exemptions to racist institutions “cannot constitutionally be applied to schools that engage in racial discrimination on the basis of sincerely held religious beliefs.” But the justices did not bite. In an 8-1 decision by conservative Chief Justice Warren Burger, the Court explained that “[o]n occasion this Court has found certain governmental interests so compelling as to allow even regulations prohibiting religiously based conduct.” Prohibiting race discrimination is one of these interests.

learn from history, you skinhead rat.

 

[UncleBuck]

Who would have thought gay people could be such fucking bullies and assholes?

so offering money to businesses in exchange for goods and services is an act of bullying to you?

again, save the white supremacist rhetoric for your klan chapter you skinhead rat snitch.

 

[Wavels]

Those dastardly mean and nasty Christians.

Double standard...nahhhh, this is just a fake video.

Video on Muslim bakers points to double standard on gay weddings
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/apr/3/video-muslim-bakers-points-double-standard-gay-wed/

 

[UncleBuck]

so have you abandoned your position that this is not bigotry, but simple "religious liberty", and are now going with the "but muslims are being bigots too!!!!!" defense?

 

[NoDrama]

Show me the law that gives you the right to discriminate against people based on sexual orientation or identity

I think someone (you) is very confused by what laws are for. Also confused as to what rights are.

Where is the law that gives you the right to breathe air? Where is the law that gives you the right to take a bath? Where is the law that gives you the right to comb your hair, or cook fish on Tuesdays?

Where is the law that says you can kiss your wife on the cheek in public, or hold your child's hand in the grocery store?

Laws are rules that are intended to govern behavior, laws do not grant rights to engage in behavior.

The US Constitution says "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

What do you think that means?

 

[Grandpapy]

Home of the Free, land of the Brave.
Some folks are too fearful to grow up.....

 

[Padawanbater2]

I think someone (you) is very confused by what laws are for. Also confused as to what rights are.

Where is the law that gives you the right to breathe air? Where is the law that gives you the right to take a bath? Where is the law that gives you the right to comb your hair, or cook fish on Tuesdays?

Where is the law that says you can kiss your wife on the cheek in public, or hold your child's hand in the grocery store?

Laws are rules that are intended to govern behavior, laws do not grant rights to engage in behavior.

The US Constitution says "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

What do you think that means?

You can use this argument all you want until LGBT are a respected class of people recognized under the law just like minorities. You know it and I know it. So have at it until that happens. You think you can skate by based on a technicality, that's fine, but it just shows everybody else where your mind's really at on this. The supreme court is going to rule on gay marriage this month, the US favors it by a 2:1 margin, LGBT rights are inevitable

 

[NoDrama]

You can use this argument all you want until LGBT are a respected class of people recognized under the law just like minorities. You know it and I know it. So have at it until that happens. You think you can skate by based on a technicality, that's fine, but it just shows everybody else where your mind's really at on this. The supreme court is going to rule on gay marriage this month, the US favors it by a 2:1 margin, LGBT rights are inevitable

Awesome! I hope it happens. Do not construe my correcting you on laws and rights as opposition to LGBT's enjoying all the privileges the rest of us enjoy. I see many people making that assumption all the time, that someone correcting them on this or that small matter is equal to opposition to their cause.

If you gave a speech in front of a bunch of people espousing your idea that the earth's climate is warming and someone told you that your fly was down, would you assume the person who told you about your wardrobe malfunction was a climate change denier?