Political Wrinkles  

Go Back   Political Wrinkles > Political Forums > Civil Rights & Abortion
Register FAQDonate PW Store PW Trivia Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Civil Rights & Abortion Discuss Indiana's religious freedom law at the Political Forums; Originally Posted by cnredd Just some commentary , I thought, was important... that is not correct thinking when it comes ...

Reply
 
Share LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 03-29-2015, 05:23 AM
saltwn's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Esto perpetua
Posts: 82,516
Thanks: 55,868
Thanked 26,418 Times in 18,920 Posts
Send a message via AIM to saltwn Send a message via MSN to saltwn Send a message via Yahoo to saltwn
Default Re: Indiana's religious freedom law

Quote:
Originally Posted by cnredd View Post
Just some commentary, I thought, was important...
that is not correct thinking when it comes to civil rights. there may be places in the country where there are two or three bakers or shoe stores in every town but that is certainly not true everywhere.
__________________
Happy 100th Birthday, Lois Dickenson Malone!
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 03-29-2015, 10:30 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: PNW
Gender: Male
Posts: 70,513
Thanks: 22,404
Thanked 18,921 Times in 13,936 Posts
Default Re: Indiana's religious freedom law

As corporations decide to leave Indiana it looks as though the crazies will lose.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Shoe View Post
Indiana's Religious Freedom Law: Five Questions - CNN.com

Religious freedom continues to be ensured, as it should be, being a bedrock this country was founded upon.
This is a good thing, IMO.
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old 03-29-2015, 07:01 PM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,619
Thanks: 10,112
Thanked 15,310 Times in 9,281 Posts
Post Re: Indiana's religious freedom law

Quote:
Originally Posted by cnredd View Post
And it was addressed....You non-reader...
I hear you.
I also hear the anti-gay crowd who are crowing over what they say this legislation will give them...

I also know how the right reacts to some of the phrases (or rather the application of some of those phrases) that were in the legislation you quoted...
furthers a compelling governmental interest
least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.

So time will tell...
It would actually please me if you are right in all this and I am wrong.
Pragmatically simple.

But I asked you a question earlier.
What do you think changed with the enactment of Indiana's religious "freedom" law?
What scenario plays out different between before and after the law enactment, for you?


Another point of concern...
Quote:
Pence (Gov Indiana) refused to answer Stephanopoulos' question if a "florist in Indiana can now refuse to serve a gay couple without fear of punishment," but insisted "there's been shameless rhetoric" about the law.

Pence also falsely stated the Indiana law does not apply to private parties unless the government is involved.

Time and time, over and over again Pence cited the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act rather than the Indiana Religious Freedom Restoration Act when making his points – a clear and calculated attempt to mislead and misinform.

And he repeatedly refused to answer if gays and lesbian should be discriminated against.

Gov. Pence also adamantly insisted adding protections for LGBT people is not on his "agenda."
http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement...hange_this_law
Also:
__________________
“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”
~Abraham Lincoln

Last edited by foundit66; 03-29-2015 at 07:22 PM..
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to foundit66 For This Useful Post:
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 03-29-2015, 08:17 PM
Joe Shoe's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 5,218
Thanks: 822
Thanked 1,589 Times in 1,079 Posts
Default Re: Indiana's religious freedom law

Quote:
Originally Posted by Surly View Post
Ever heard of a Christian bakery owner refusing to sell their cake to a (obese) glutton? Even once? Ever? Then I posit it is not about the Christian not wanting to contribute to sin, cause, you know the gluttony thing.
Obese people aren't trying to redefine marriage.
__________________
What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand???
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Joe Shoe For This Useful Post:
  #25 (permalink)  
Old 03-29-2015, 08:47 PM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,619
Thanks: 10,112
Thanked 15,310 Times in 9,281 Posts
Post Re: Indiana's religious freedom law

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Shoe View Post
Obese people aren't trying to redefine marriage.
Forest for the trees, once again. It's like somebody points out that the apple is green and you want to fixate on whether the apple has a skin.

The point is that it's interesting to note how people who claim "religion" will pick one specific prejudice to exercise.
A little while back when the whole "gay marriage cake / baker" kerfuffle was occurring, somebody called up a couple of the bakers involved and asked them about whether or not they would do a cake for:
* a divorce,
* a 3rd wedding,
* a bar mitzvah,
* marrying a cat and a dog,
* etc...

The bakers involved had no problems with any of the above.
It's interesting how it's ONLY gay marriages that they want to discriminate against...

They don't care how they contribute to a sin like gluttony ...
THAT is the point.
__________________
“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”
~Abraham Lincoln
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old 03-29-2015, 08:51 PM
Joe Shoe's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 5,218
Thanks: 822
Thanked 1,589 Times in 1,079 Posts
Default Re: Indiana's religious freedom law

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
The point is that it's interesting to note how people who claim "religion" will pick one specific prejudice to exercise.
Do you actually think anyone here didn't already know that was the "point" being made? It's amazing how many times you assume people don't get a point when in reality the point just isn't that important. It's just that some points are so overwhelmingly incidental compared to the overall picture that it becomes pointless by comparison. The REASON that "one specific prejudice" (as you call it) is in use is because if what I pointed out. Obese people aren't doing that.
Incidentally, I could point out that you guys in your movement pick one specific prejudice when it comes to ex-gays too, when there are plenty of other things you should be far more concerned about.
__________________
What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand???
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old 03-29-2015, 08:58 PM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,619
Thanks: 10,112
Thanked 15,310 Times in 9,281 Posts
Default Re: Indiana's religious freedom law

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Shoe View Post
Do you actually think anyone here didn't already know that was the "point" being made?
So you essentially admit you were trying to move the goal-posts and avoid the point being made?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Shoe View Post
It's amazing how many times you assume people don't get a point when in reality the point just isn't that important. It's just that some points are so overwhelmingly incidental compared to the overall picture that it becomes pointless by comparison.
So instead of addressing the issue head-on, you just toss out some meaningless obfuscatory comment and you think that's superior?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Shoe View Post
The REASON that "one specific prejudice" (as you call it) is in use is because if what I pointed out. Obese people aren't doing that.
Joe, I swear you are hilarious some time in how I don't think you recognize how much you reveal about yourself in your focus.
YOU want to fixate on gays so much that you ignore every other sin out there. (or at least you don't comment on them until dragged kicking and screaming to comment on it)

Redefining marriage is not the only sin out there.
But it's the only sin YOU AND OTHERS want to fixate on.
You can pretend that doesn't mean something all you want.
Others recognize the truth...


Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Shoe View Post
Incidentally, I could point out that you guys in your movement pick one specific prejudice when it comes to ex-gays too, when there are plenty of other things you should be far more concerned about.
I welcome you to try...
__________________
“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”
~Abraham Lincoln
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old 03-29-2015, 09:02 PM
Joe Shoe's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 5,218
Thanks: 822
Thanked 1,589 Times in 1,079 Posts
Default Re: Indiana's religious freedom law

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
So you essentially admit you were trying to move the goal-posts and avoid the point being made?
Avoiding YOUR goalposts is more the situation. When everyone else is playing football, and you're trying to swing a bat in the middle of the game, yeah, you may have to deal with that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
Joe, I swear you are hilarious some time in how I don't think you recognize how much you reveal about yourself in your focus.
Right back atcha'.
It's amazing how much you inadvertently describe yourself when you make these very statements like what you just said.

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
Redefining marriage is not the only sin out there.
But it's the only sin YOU AND OTHERS want to fixate on.
You can pretend that doesn't mean something all you want.
Others recognize the truth...
Do you really not understand the difference between redefining marriage and obesity, and why one is more likely to be opposed than the other???
(Hint: one affects insitutions of society and attempts to normalize perversion, the other is a PERSONAL thing.)
__________________
What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand???
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old 03-29-2015, 09:06 PM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,619
Thanks: 10,112
Thanked 15,310 Times in 9,281 Posts
Default Re: Indiana's religious freedom law

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Shoe View Post
Avoiding YOUR goalposts is more the situation. When everyone else is playing football, and you're trying to swing a bat in the middle of the game, yeah, you may have to deal with that.
Here's the problem Joe.
if you do not want to talk about somebody's goal posts, then you are welcome to ignore those posts.

The problem is you respond to somebody else's post talking about THEIR point and you try to derail it.

If you want to talk about YOUR goal-posts, then YOU can do so.
But your attempt to derail somebody else's goal-posts are the problem.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Shoe View Post
Right back atcha'.
It's amazing how much you inadvertently describe yourself when you make these very statements like what you just said.
Care to elaborate?
Or was this a lame "I know you are but what am I" response?
__________________
“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”
~Abraham Lincoln
Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old 03-29-2015, 09:17 PM
Joe Shoe's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 5,218
Thanks: 822
Thanked 1,589 Times in 1,079 Posts
Default Re: Indiana's religious freedom law

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
If you want to talk about YOUR goal-posts, then YOU can do so. But your attempt to derail somebody else's goal-posts are the problem.
See, what you fail to comprehend is that the attempt to point out some hypocrisy on the right with the gluttony sideshow was an attempt of derailment to begin with. But of course you don't see that, because trying to find fault in the right is one of your favorite things to do and you won't be consistent by condemning that.

Regardless, even with your point here--so in other words, since you don't seem to employ reading comprehension, anytime someone needs to deal with the fact a point is not important to the REAL issue, they should preface it by saying "but that's not the real issue, rather the real issue is ....
Nah, I think most of us can follow a thread to where that's not necessary, and frankly, it seems the only one that complains about that is you. What does that tell you? (food for thought. Take it or leave it.)
__________________
What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand???
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
freedom, indiana, law, religious

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0