The SB 101 (Religious Freedom Restoration) Thread

[DFM914]

In my opinion, a business owner has the right to refuse service to anyone, for any reason. Even if that reason is none.

What he said...^^^^

 

[miguel]

What ever happened to the signs saying

we reserve the right to refuse service for any reason

I think this movie scene made everyone take them down.

[video=youtube;e4ptm6F2KHQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e4ptm6F2KHQ[/video]

When I attended GenCon in 1980, the few girls in attendance did not bear much resemblance to the girl in your picture or photos of many of the other girls who attend contemporary conventions.

I hereby call FOUL!!! Either use Mr. Peabody's Wayback Machine to improve my experience in 1980, or make all the nerds of today suffer as I did back then!

OMG, I am just old enough to remember Mr. Peabody!

 

[indykid]

Hillary's joined the fray! Looks like irony is another concept Ms. Clinton doesn't grasp.

George Takei, others call for boycott of Indiana over religious - 13 WTHR Indianapolis

ETA: Don't know what's up with the link...

This is the person that the democrats seem to want as their next president, when she is so stupid that she doesn't know that it was her husband that signed the federal law that the Indiana law is modeled after! That lady is so out of touch with reality it is sickening.

 

[lovemachine]

So since our awesome Governor signed this bill, does this mean I can no longer be discriminated and judged for being a Ginger? Or will this continue 10 fold?

 

[BigBoxaJunk]

I think this movie scene made everyone take them down.

You get the irony trophy for today posting that clip with Rock Hudson on this thread. That diner owner didn't realize, at the time, that he was killing two birds with that one stone.

Please tell me that wasn't a coincidence. No wait, it doesn't matter.

You have my respect.

 

[BigMatt]

I think this movie scene made everyone take them down.

[video=youtube;e4ptm6F2KHQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e4ptm6F2KHQ[/video]

While I agree that the diner owner shouldn't discriminate against the people in that clip, I respect his right to do so. The government shouldn't force people to do business with other people, the people should vote with their dollars and I would bet that guy would go out of business sooner rather than later.

I wouldn't eat there if I knew he discriminated against Hispanics like that.

 

[Denny347]

Thank You for posting, read it 2x, reinforcing that it in no way, shape or form allows for discrimination, YMMV.

The politicians knew this was a controversial bill. I wished they would have gotten in front of the press, minimizing all the bad press Indiana and Indianapolis is getting. Right or wrong, they needed to "sell" this to the public to prevent the talking heads from steering the conversation, as it currently is. It is significantly more difficult to be reactive and control the damage than it is to be proactive. Sure, eventually this will die down, but the negative press is hard for the hospitality industry here to overcome until that time comes.

 

[bmbutch]

The politicians knew this was a controversial bill. I wished they would have gotten in front of the press, minimizing all the bad press Indiana and Indianapolis is getting. Right or wrong, they needed to "sell" this to the public to prevent the talking heads from steering the conversation, as it currently is. It is significantly more difficult to be reactive and control the damage than it is to be proactive. Sure, eventually this will die down, but the negative press is hard for the hospitality industry here to overcome until that time comes.

I agree 100%, it's getting slaughtered on social media & lamestream media. Could have done much better job explaining it's function.

 

[rw02kr43]

So my sister says that any business (cause it's not a person) should provide a service for any person even if it is against their personal beliefs. She's a freelance web designer. Just one person. So a hate group can contact her and demand a website or they will sue her. How can she not understand this?

 

[hoosierdoc]

I agree 100%, it's getting slaughtered on social media & lamestream media. Could have done much better job explaining it's function.

No, would not have mattered. The uninformed are choosing to be uninformed and reacting the way they are told. We are witnessing emotional responses; there is no intellectual pursuit at all.

 

[Denny347]

No, would not have mattered. The uninformed are choosing to be uninformed and reacting the way they are told. We are witnessing emotional responses; there is no intellectual pursuit at all.

Uh, that's most of the world.... Gotta play the game. Tell them what to think before someone else does. It is the world we live in.

 

[BigBoxaJunk]

No, would not have mattered. The uninformed are choosing to be uninformed and reacting the way they are told. We are witnessing emotional responses; there is no intellectual pursuit at all.

I may be way off base, but I believe that it's possible that legislators intended for there to be controversy and emotional response. That does generate criticism, but it also generates support. It's just a gamble sometimes which one outweighs the other. I'd be very surprised if there wasn't some study done beforehand that attempted to quantify both.

 

[Denny347]

I may be way off base, but I believe that it's possible that legislators intended for there to be controversy and emotional response. That does generate criticism, but it also generates support. It's just a gamble sometimes which one outweighs the other. I'd be very surprised if there wasn't some study done beforehand that attempted to quantify both.

I like what you are saying, sadly, I have little confidence that those yahoos are slick enough for that. The negative is MUCH louder than the positive.

 

[miguel]

While I agree that the diner owner shouldn't discriminate against the people in that clip, I respect his right to do so. The government shouldn't force people to do business with other people, the people should vote with their dollars and I would bet that guy would go out of business sooner rather than later.

I wouldn't eat there if I knew he discriminated against Hispanics like that.

I'm with you on that one, amigo! Even though there are many people coming here illegally from the south, I think Latino men are our logical allies against the weak ass "beta males" most natural-born American men have turned into.

When watching this clip, Mini Miguel asked, "Who's the good guy?"

<awkward silence>

"Well, it's his restaurant, but he was kinda rude to those people who just wanted to have lunch. That said, the other guy initiated the physical altercation and if you start it, you better be ready to finish it..."

So my sister says that any business (cause it's not a person) should provide a service for any person even if it is against their personal beliefs. She's a freelance web designer. Just one person. So a hate group can contact her and demand a website or they will sue her. How can she not understand this?

Respectfully, many people on "that side" don't get it. They think because they are on the "right side of history" nothing bad will ever happen to them because they haven't "done anything wrong".

 

[bmbutch]

No, would not have mattered. The uninformed are choosing to be uninformed and reacting the way they are told. We are witnessing emotional responses; there is no intellectual pursuit at all.

Sadly so, or there are a ton of liars or ignorant peep, maybe both on social media, saying they've read the bill & it's all about hating gays. Really????? I don't see anything in there about hating gays.

 

[Regionnus Rattis]

What is the difference?Federal law signed by Clinton 1993: "Government may substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion only if it demonstrates that application of the burden to the person— (1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and (2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest." https://www.law.cornell.edu/us... Indiana Law signed yesterday: "A governmental entity may substantially burden a person's exercise of religion only if the governmental entity demonstrates that application of the burden to the person: (1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and (2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest." https://iga.in.gov/legislative...Only in the upside down, inside out, Bizarro World of the left, and especially the radical homosex demo, can an anti-discrimination law be characterized as discriminatory. Radical pro-regressives never miss an opportunity to distort reality, as their ability to effectively process and resolve cognitive dissonance is defective. Therefore, they are quite comfortable in simultaneously holding diametrically opposed views on the same issue with no sense of conflict. This is simply a bill that clarifies, and re-states (as others have indicated below) First Amendment principle and precedent. And provides a clear means of recourse for those who feel their religious freedom is being restricted, and imposes the burden of proof on the governmental entity. As the First Amendment has always required, BTW. But those who reside in Bizarro World have their own version of the Constitution. their own Bill of Rights and their own relativistic view of "reality" (this of course changes on a regular basis dependent on their perceived needs...utilitarianism as a world view).

 

[miguel]

Since it's Friday, here's another movie clip of an establishment exercising its option not to serve certain customers.

Note the contrast between the Latino family in Giant and these, errrr, gentlemen, from A Bronx Tale. While I'd most likely have paid my bill and left Sarge's with the old Mexican guy and his family, never to return, I would unquestionably have sat back and ordered another glass of red wine after Sonny and his boys went to work collecting the tab from the mouthy, presumptive, disrespectful clients in his establishment.

Life in America is about compromise. Compromise doesn't mean I do what you or youse tell me I have to do.

[video=youtube;H_lijLYuw-o]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_lijLYuw-o[/video]

 

[Bunnykid68]

Does anyone have any theories as to why Indiana is taking such heat over this bill and the other 18 states that have passed identical or similar bills without so much of a whisper about them?

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

No, would not have mattered. The uninformed are choosing to be uninformed and reacting the way they are told. We are witnessing emotional responses; there is no intellectual pursuit at all.

Uh, that's most of the world.... Gotta play the game. Tell them what to think before someone else does. It is the world we live in.

If they were smart, they would have waited until right about now, 5-6pm on Friday afternoon to sign that. By Monday, it would have been forgotten.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Does anyone have any theories as to why Indiana is taking such heat over this bill and the other 18 states that have passed identical or similar bills without so much of a whisper about them?

There's nothing good on TV?