First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
Post Reply Mississip Passes Law Against Gays
637 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M
Offline
Posted 2/20/16

dougeprofile wrote:

"Mississippi passes law against anti-religious bigotry" would have been a better tittle for this thread. What a good, reasonable, and yes ...constitutional law(s)! Liberals and homosexual activists will not be able to victimize people of faith FORCING them to adopt their own sexual beliefs.

"with a preference toward boys" ....um, that is illegal.

Unlike the backward regime in Oregon, religious people won't be destroyed by homosexual activists working (illegally) in conjunction with governmental officials to COMPEL or destroy a family that will sell cakes to homosexuals but not participate in their same sex ceremony.

Religious adoption charities who place children with married couples (which means male/female for the confused) won't be shut down and FORCED by intolerant leftists who can't abide that policy even though private and governmental agencies exist who do place with same sex couples.

An elderly couple opening a B&B in their home won't be FORCED to violate their beliefs by a lesbian couple? Now THAT is real tolerance!

The Second Amendment protects the free exercise of religion; this law does not violate the 14th. OBERGEFELL was a bad decision (that will be overturned) that created a new right outside the legislative process.


It's the first amendment that protects freedom of speech, religion, the right to assemble peaceable, and the the freedom of the press. As for the 14th amendment, it is the one that grants all persons born or naturalized in the US citizenship. If you want to defend or be against it you'll need to use the 15th amendment as evidence, which does not allow discrimination based on race, color, or condition of servitude when it comes to voting. An amendment, however, that has now been expanded over the years by other existential laws that are not part of the constitution or bill of rights but are still upheld by the Supreme Court today.
Posted 2/20/16 , edited 2/20/16

deltree wrote:

I don't understand why it's a radical concept that a business should be allowed to choose who it does business with.

It makes good business sense to accept money from anyone willing to give it to you, if they're stupid enough to refuse business to someone that's their prerogative. Plenty of businesses out there that will do business with you.

Not like a locksmith will show up to help you get into your house and ask if you're gay before opening your lock.

If people don't want to cater or officiate a gay wedding because they're butthurt at the idea of two people of the same sex liking each other, that's their problem, find someone else.


They apparently didn't appreciate it when people advertised that they don't discriminate.

http://onenewsnow.com/business/2014/04/28/miss-businesses-stick-it-to-religious-freedom
2047 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 2/20/16 , edited 2/20/16

Kerst wrote:

Ok I'm bi-sexual with a prefrence towards boys and I sadly live in Mississippi. As everyone knows the southern states are racist and prejuidice.

Well lovely recently Mississippi just passed a law to refuse "service" to anyone who is in a same-sex relationship they can refuse to marry them, serve them, rent them a apartment, or just about anything as long as they state it's against their religious beliefs.

Fucking south man.
Fucking Mississippi this is the same states that banned sex toys because they promote sex. Ugh this state is so stupid.


Good I hope it sends the degenerates a message!
27451 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / USA! USA! USA!
Offline
Posted 2/20/16

deltree wrote:

I don't understand why it's a radical concept that a business should be allowed to choose who it does business with.

It makes good business sense to accept money from anyone willing to give it to you, if they're stupid enough to refuse business to someone that's their prerogative. Plenty of businesses out there that will do business with you.

Not like a locksmith will show up to help you get into your house and ask if you're gay before opening your lock.

If people don't want to cater or officiate a gay wedding because they're butthurt at the idea of two people of the same sex liking each other, that's their problem, find someone else.




It's an extreme concept to people who are told that if someone offends them, that person has no rights (but who never question, what if THEY offend OTHERS.....)




Southern55 wrote:

Love the generalization. All states in the south are racist and prejudice? Yeah, okay... You have fun thinking that.



I know, right?


"Why do this horrible, awful, terrible people not seem to like me?! It has to be a problem with THEM!"




theYchromosome wrote:

Does this law apply to government services or all services? I mean, if I'm running a business, I don't see why it would be a problem if, say, I don't want to take someone's money because I don't like their tie. "I don't like your tie, so I don't want to sell you my product." It's idiotic business practice, and speaks very soundly against the good sense of the establishment. But it's his/her stuff to sell. Why is he required to sell his products to anyone?

If the law in question is a government mandate to government employees, then I'd say it's a terrible one indeed, but to tell private business owners they are not required to sell their property seems like common sense to me.

I mean you are, financially and ethically, a shitty business owner if you don't sell to people that are gay, but it does seem to me that you have the right to be shitty business owner in this case. No?



It's a problem because Congress passed an unconstitutional law (The Civil Rights Act of 1964) and SCOTUS precedent has taken the view that "rights" can be found in the Constitution that were never written in the original document or added through the amendment process.




dougeprofile wrote:

"Mississippi passes law against anti-religious bigotry" would have been a better tittle for this thread. What a good, reasonable, and yes ...constitutional law(s)! Liberals and homosexual activists will not be able to victimize people of faith FORCING them to adopt their own sexual beliefs.

"with a preference toward boys" ....um, that is illegal.

Unlike the backward regime in Oregon, religious people won't be destroyed by homosexual activists working (illegally) in conjunction with governmental officials to COMPEL or destroy a family that will sell cakes to homosexuals but not participate in their same sex ceremony.

Religious adoption charities who place children with married couples (which means male/female for the confused) won't be shut down and FORCED by intolerant leftists who can't abide that policy even though private and governmental agencies exist who do place with same sex couples.

An elderly couple opening a B&B in their home won't be FORCED to violate their beliefs by a lesbian couple? Now THAT is real tolerance!

The Second Amendment protects the free exercise of religion; this law does not violate the 14th. OBERGEFELL was a bad decision (that will be overturned) that created a new right outside the legislative process.




Heh, and now we get to what it's really about, huh?


Now it makes sense why the OP didn't actually include the text of the law in question.....
Posted 2/20/16
Marriage is a silly thing in this day and age anyway, the gays aren't missing out on much.
11702 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M
Offline
Posted 2/20/16
mrs. sippi be sippin on dat hatorade
11768 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / McDonough
Offline
Posted 2/20/16 , edited 2/20/16

Nogara-san wrote:


Southern55 wrote:

Love the generalization. All states in the south are racist and prejudice? Yeah, okay... You have fun thinking that.


I realize that not all, if most folks down South are like this(trust me, PA ain't no picnic either), but even you have to admit that things like this doesn't help the South's image.

I can't understand these laws...how are you supposed to know someone's gay...wear a rainbow star?


Well they are denying them things like marriage as well. As far as services like renting apartment who knows. But judging the south by something like this is tantamount to me judging all of the Midwest as nothing but blacks shooting and killing each other all the time simply because that's how Chicago is. Or that every city in Michigan is a deserted waste of space because Detroit is that way.

I get we have to generalize quite often for any number of reasons. But generalizations usually aren't done using the minority. 1 state passes a law like this so we are going to call at least 11 states racist and prejudice?

People have different ideals, regardless of whether you share them with someone else or not does not make you better than them. Wars have been fought over religion. Something as little as passing a law because for religious reasons isn't anything new. It won't stick around for long anyways.

I want to make it clear though that I in no way agree with the law they passed.
35033 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 2/20/16 , edited 2/20/16

dougeprofile wrote:

"Mississippi passes law against anti-religious bigotry" would have been a better tittle for this thread.


No, it wouldn't have.


What a good, reasonable, and yes ...constitutional law(s)!


Have you even read it?


Liberals and homosexual activists will not be able to victimize people of faith FORCING them to adopt their own sexual beliefs.


Anyone can hold any beliefs they want to with or without this legislation. That is not what this legislation is about.

What is specifically being aimed for here is that all employees throughout the private sector be allowed to refuse goods and/or services (including medical services and housing) on the basis of sexual orientation without regard to a private business's status as a public accommodation, that private businesses be allowed to discriminate in their hiring/firing/promoting practices and compensation on the basis of sexual orientation so long as they claim to be a religious business (you might think you'd have to prove an affiliation with a church or other house of worship in order to count as a religious organisation, and you'd be wrong), that parents not be held liable for disregarding the medical needs of their children so long as they claim to have done so on religious grounds, and that state employees be granted a loophole to refuse to perform their sworn duties without penalty.

Read it. Read the legislation. That's what it actually does. Someone could be denied a vehicle rental, a lease on a flat, or equivalent marital benefits from one's employer on the grounds of sexual orientation. One could be fired for being homosexual based on this legislation, and their employer wouldn't even have to show that their "religious business" is actually affiliated with a church to do it.

http://index.ls.state.ms.us/isysnative/UzpcRG9jdW1lbnRzXDIwMTZccGRmXGhiXDE1MDAtMTU5OVxoYjE1MjNpbi5wZGY=/hb1523in.pdf


"with a preference toward boys" ....um, that is illegal.


The OP was transparently talking about their relative position on the Kinsey Scale.


Unlike the backward regime in Oregon, religious people won't be destroyed by homosexual activists working (illegally) in conjunction with governmental officials to COMPEL or destroy a family that will sell cakes to homosexuals but not participate in their same sex ceremony.


You have a funny definition of "illegal" if you think that people filing suit against public accommodations that have violated state law by discriminating provision of goods/services on the basis of characteristics that have been made protected classes in Oregon constitutes an illegal act.


Religious adoption charities who place children with married couples (which means male/female for the confused) won't be shut down and FORCED by intolerant leftists who can't abide that policy even though private and governmental agencies exist who do place with same sex couples.


You really haven't read Mississippi's legislation. Check out its definition of "religious organisation". It's vague enough to be anything that says it's a religious business.


An elderly couple opening a B&B in their home won't be FORCED to violate their beliefs by a lesbian couple? Now THAT is real tolerance!


It isn't if that bed and breakfast is a business that is open to the public, which is a decision the hypothetical elderly couple made when setting up their business under no duress to set up a business, let alone a particular sort. You are not entitled to do whatever you want simply because you're a business owner. That's why you have to register with the state before being allowed to open your doors: there are rules you must agree to abide by in order to conduct business, and part of the rules concerning a particular sort of business (public accommodations) include adherence to a number of non-discrimination statutes.


The Second Amendment protects the free exercise of religion; this law does not violate the 14th. OBERGEFELL was a bad decision (that will be overturned) that created a new right outside the legislative process.


I'm not even going to get into an argument about that court case, but I will note that it is the first amendment that concerns speech (unless you're saying churches should arm themselves and become religious militias) and that I consider your prediction about the case being overturned to be a tad optimistic even when accounting for the possibility that Scalia is replaced with a comparably conservative originalist.

TL;DR: Justice Ginsburg was right.
218 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 2/20/16
Backlash against lawsuits in the the PNW is all. Falls under the same thing as Curves not allowing men to join.
29840 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 2/20/16

geauxtigers1989 wrote:


Kerst wrote:


geauxtigers1989 wrote:

News that surprises no one. Don't sweat it too much, though. The law won't last.


You underestimate the stupidity of Mississippi.


I live in Louisiana. I'm well accustomed to stupidity.


Just visited New Orleans, good food but at night time with Bourbon Street/Downtown New Orleans, omg..
23413 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
16 / F / Always my room
Offline
Posted 2/20/16
I know that Mississippi has the reputation of having some of the most hospitable people but then you hear homophobic things like this that contradict everything.
4583 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / Decemberunderground
Offline
Posted 2/20/16 , edited 2/20/16




Actually no I saw this on the news and only commented of what the news actually said.
You are also stating what you think I mean when you don't.

Also my prefrence towards I like girls and i like guys. I like guys more.
They mistook what I meant since I used the word boy instead of male so they think little kids and no I wasnl't referring to children I was referring to the male gender. I refer to myself as a boy even though im 23 so I guess it's confusing?
You also seem to be ignorant to the south.
I never said eveyrone in the state is horrible but it'sa wide majority Alabama is the worst here and most south states do have a issue with homosexuality and race.
This is the place that tricked a girl into going to New Orleans for a fakeprom because she wanted to bring a girl.
you're being idiotic because you apparently didn't read it yourself. You can save yourself time and Read BlueOni's
post since she actually took apart your stupidity with actual facts.


fairy_tail175 wrote:

I know that Mississippi has the reputation of having some of the most hospitable people but then you hear homophobic things like this that contradict everything.


I have lived here for like 18 years and have never heard that before.
8632 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / F
Offline
Posted 2/20/16
Good job.
19921 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / A town called "Ci...
Offline
Posted 2/20/16
Maybe we should implement Michi Law, so homophobia would send you to prison for life.

I mean, if Georgia and Mississippi want to play this game, so will CHIMEKO.
4583 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / Decemberunderground
Offline
Posted 2/20/16 , edited 2/20/16

dougeprofile wrote:

"Mississippi passes law against anti-religious bigotry" would have been a better tittle for this thread. What a good, reasonable, and yes ...constitutional law(s)! Liberals and homosexual activists will not be able to victimize people of faith FORCING them to adopt their own sexual beliefs.

"with a preference toward boys" ....um, that is illegal.

Unlike the backward regime in Oregon, religious people won't be destroyed by homosexual activists working (illegally) in conjunction with governmental officials to COMPEL or destroy a family that will sell cakes to homosexuals but not participate in their same sex ceremony.

Religious adoption charities who place children with married couples (which means male/female for the confused) won't be shut down and FORCED by intolerant leftists who can't abide that policy even though private and governmental agencies exist who do place with same sex couples.

An elderly couple opening a B&B in their home won't be FORCED to violate their beliefs by a lesbian couple? Now THAT is real tolerance!

The First Amendment protects the free exercise of religion; this law does not violate the 14th. OBERGEFELL was a bad decision (that will be overturned) that created a new right outside the legislative process.


Yeh you misuderstood what I said, when I said a prefrence towards boys I was not talking about kids I was saying I like both genders but I prefer the male gender. When someone asks me if I'm a girl I say I'm a boy but I'm 23, 24 in1 day.
As Blue Oni said my relative position on the Kinsey Scale.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.