Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
OverSword

Indiana's Religious Freedom Bill

408 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Grandpa Greenman

Yes, I believe that a business owner should be able to decide who his business serves and who it doesn't. Just as you decide who is allowed in your house and who isn't. Same principle.

I wouldn't frequent an establishment that refused service to people because of age, gender, sexual orientation, race, left handed red haired green eyed vixens, etc. but it should be the owner's decision. Hopefully enough people boycott and he closes his doors.

Say you and a friend who is of the same sex are on a trip, You're tired and it is late and you need to stop for the night, you just have enough money to rent one room. There is only one hotel in town. You go in to get a room and the sign sign says no gays. How do you prove to the owner you're not gay. This is no difference than refusing to rent a room to a Jewish couple because according to the Bible they killed Jesus. When you run a business like a store, restaurant or hotel it becomes what is called public domain you can't discriminate. Just like Woolworth refusing to serve black people at the lunch counter.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bama13

Say you and a friend who is of the same sex are on a trip, You're tired and it is late and you need to stop for the night, you just have enough money to rent one room. There is only one hotel in town. You go in to get a room and the sign sign says no gays. How do you prove to the owner you're not gay. This is no difference than refusing to rent a room to a Jewish couple because according to the Bible they killed Jesus. When you run a business like a store, restaurant or hotel it becomes what is called public domain you can't discriminate. Just like Woolworth refusing to serve black people at the lunch counter.

I know you can't discriminate, I just believe that you should be able to. It is your business. If you want to turn away paying customers it should be your right.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
shadowhive

If they are going to allow discrimination based on sin then that should include all sinners. If you get to pick and choose which sinners then it's called discrimination and is against the law.

Since everyone is a sinner in their eyes the I guess that'd mean they'd have to refuse services to everyone then.

This law is absurd and it going to lose the state a lot of money (they've already lost at least one $40 million contract and it's been days).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

I know you can't discriminate, I just believe that you should be able to. It is your business. If you want to turn away paying customers it should be your right.

I see nightclubs legally do that all the time. So you should be and are able to, it all depends on the reason. If you're ugly, smell bad, or your clothes are cheap you're not fit for upscale entertainment. That's how easy it is to discriminate. Do you think that an employer doesn't have the right to make someone leave for more important reasons? If someone won't leave and the employer calls the cops, the cop is going to do what? Ask the customer to leave (verifying a right), and perhaps taking a statement from the customer to see if it's a case of discrimination.

On matters of race and religion, it's true you can't discriminate according to the Civil Rights Act, but why should you? If someone comes into your restaurant waving their arms around, shouting ghetto and rattling customers, does it matter if they have black or white skin?

Gays aren't on the protected list and so like the short fat guy trying to get into the nightclub, we get discrimination.

So just add one more word to the Civil Rights Act in-between the commas: Sexuality. Problem solved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Wearer of Hats

As a business owner I should be able to refuse service to anyone I want. No explanation needed. As a property owner I can choose who I let on my property and who I ban. No difference. People can boycott to get the business owner to change his ways, or simply put him out of business by not buying anything from him.

Freedom is saying "I'm not going to serve you", discrimination is saying "I'm not going to serve you because you're a Star Trek fan".

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Michelle

Freedom is saying "I'm not going to serve you", discrimination is saying "I'm not going to serve you because you're a Star Trek fan".

Yeah, but if someone is a jerk and also happen to be a minority they can still slap you with a discrimination lawsuit. Try proving you didn't serve them simply because they were an ass.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Solipsi Rai

I don't support this law, because it won't work and nobody wants to enforce it. Business owners shouldn't refuse service based on their religious beliefs in the first place. Last year, AZ voted for a similar law, then Gov. Jan Brewer vetoed it from ever becoming the law as she knows the law won't be popular to all. I believe a southern state (forgot which one) passed a law allowing business owners to refuse service to customers over religion. Discrimination based on sexuality or anything because an owner doesn't like them based on religious beliefs is poor business ethics, you'll lose money, be boycotted and drive away customers. This can be a reason why we have "Gay villages" or LGBT communities across the nation: Palm Springs, West Hollywood, Hillcrest, Laguna Beach and of course, San Francisco's the Castro in CA as examples, wherever a socially liberal or tolerant environment is around and LGBT people decided to form neighborhoods or business strips to serve their majority clientele. I will be warmly welcomed as a straight male in any business in a Gay village, because the owners don't really care what sexuality I am.

I remember a news story on a baker in Ore. refused to bake wedding cakes to same-sex couples because of his religious beliefs about Gays, but what about they were interracial, interfaith or polyamorous couples if they offend the baker religiously? :-/ Just don't pry into personal lives and make the cakes, make some money and make customers happy, no matter what sexuality, religion or culture they are. If I was a baker, I wouldn't care if the baby shower cake is for two men adopting a baby, two women (at least one is pregnant) live together, if the baby's father is black or Mexican or the mother is Jewish or Chinese (honestly I don't care!), and even I don't mind if a polyamorous woman had her BF's child while her husband still loves her and that child. People have the right to live the way they wish if nobody gets hurt or within the confines of laws and religious books aren't exactly state penal codes, and business owners can't enforce laws or religious beliefs onto other people. Bakeries can explore new ideas for different holidays and events, and learn more about their communities or customer bases.

Edited by Mike D boy
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thorvir

Respect the rights of all, or of none. Alternate lifestyles of any type do not and should not outrank religion in this nation. Nor is the minority rule the proper way to do things.

Business owners should not be forced to serve if it is against their beliefs. They should be free from a legal punishment that could potentially bankrupt them. This law protects them from that.

If someone doesn't like that fact, they can simply go elsewhere. If a business discriminates then they won't stay in business long due to lack of customers--that's how it's supposed to happen, not from frivolous lawsuits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agent0range

Respect the rights of all, or of none. Alternate lifestyles of any type do not and should not outrank religion in this nation. Nor is the minority rule the proper way to do things.

Business owners should not be forced to serve if it is against their beliefs. They should be free from a legal punishment that could potentially bankrupt them. This law protects them from that.

If someone doesn't like that fact, they can simply go elsewhere. If a business discriminates then they won't stay in business long due to lack of customers--that's how it's supposed to happen, not from frivolous lawsuits.

Really?? Businesses in the south were doing just fine until some silly law banning segregation came along. History definitely repeats itself. Just like I sit here today, and think about how stupid segregation was 50 years ago, my grandchildren will be doing the same thing when it comes to gay rights.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stubbly_Dooright

It is primarily for Christians, they don't think other religions count. They are just to be tolerated as long as the law makes them.

You would think by having to sell a gay flowers or something they are being forced to be gay.

Well, then, (and I maybe a little not understanding here but) isn't that wrong and not what prioritizing one religion over another is about? I think this is just preferencing one religion over another and goes against what freedom of religion is about, from what I think. I think it's going back to allowing bigotry again. This just might be me, ..................

Since everyone is a sinner in their eyes the I guess that'd mean they'd have to refuse services to everyone then.

This law is absurd and it going to lose the state a lot of money (they've already lost at least one $40 million contract and it's been days).

Which makes me wonder if they will then refuse business to Atheists and others that doesn't fit their religious ideals.
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
shadowhive

Respect the rights of all, or of none. Alternate lifestyles of any type do not and should not outrank religion in this nation. Nor is the minority rule the proper way to do things.

Business owners should not be forced to serve if it is against their beliefs. They should be free from a legal punishment that could potentially bankrupt them. This law styprotects them from that

Why is religion ranked so highly? After all isn't religion just another type of alternate lifestyle? (Amd, unlike some things that are classed as a 'lifestyle' religion is most certainly a choice).

If your religion makes you incapable of doing your job than you should find a job more compartible with your faith. To me a person that can't do their job because of their religion just comes off as being unprofessional.

Which makes me wonder if they will then refuse business to Atheists and others that doesn't fit their religious ideals.

Yup. Everything is pretty much faithgame, which is whyit's such a bad law. It can be used to screw everyone over.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wickian

The whole uproar over this law is blown out of proportion. It's nothing new and several other states(and the federal government) have an equivalent law on the books already. All it says is unless you have a good reason, you can't force a group or business to do something against their beliefs. Discrimination(if you can prove it) is probably a good enough reason.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paranormalcy

"beliefs" and "religion" are two entirely different things, in spite of what religious people want to think. I have plenty of "beliefs" but I'm not religious. I just have personal values and standards. Maybe I don't want people with tattoos, or blond hair or freckles. Obviously that will alienate a lot of people, but it's in no way wrong, so it's no biggie of course. IF that is how your state has it, then that IS the law of the land.

I do not believe that should be the case for important services such as banks, hospitals, etc. You can't have doctors refusing to treat gay people or nurses refusing to take atheist's blood.

If Lowe's won't sell me a bucket because I'm queer, I dunno, if that is really how the state has it then it's fine, but they're relying on the good sense of RATIONAL people to not refuse service to people wearing dress shoes or hipster glasses. This can easily be insane and probably should just to prove the point.

Edited by Paranormalcy
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OverSword

The whole uproar over this law is blown out of proportion. It's nothing new and several other states(and the federal government) have an equivalent law on the books already. All it says is unless you have a good reason, you can't force a group or business to do something against their beliefs. Discrimination(if you can prove it) is probably a good enough reason.

Such as sell flowers and wedding cakes to gay couples?
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
owf

As a business owner I should be able to refuse service to anyone I want. No explanation needed. As a property owner I can choose who I let on my property and who I ban. No difference. People can boycott to get the business owner to change his ways, or simply put him out of business by not buying anything from him.

That's not good business sense. Why would you refuse anyone's money for such a trivial thing?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Raptor Witness

I can understand ministers who don't want to perform marriage ceremonies for reasons of conscience.

I would never expect them to disobey their personal belief system to perform a religious duty.

However, serving the public is a whole other ball game.

What are these people in the Statehouse thinking?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OverSword

I can understand ministers who don't want to perform marriage ceremonies for reasons of conscience.

I would never expect them to disobey their personal belief system to perform a religious duty.

However, serving the public is a whole other ball game.

What are these people in the Statehouse thinking?

They are thinking "Fags are second class citizens with too much political pull,let's teach them a lesson"
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Careful_perspective

It is primarily for Christians, they don't think other religions count. They are just to be tolerated as long as the law makes them.

You would think by having to sell a gay flowers or something they are being forced to be gay.

Did you really mean to make a sweeping generalization about all Christians? Or are you just referring to the prejudiced Christians this law would serve?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Careful_perspective

Anytime controversy precipitated by the fact that so many Christians seem to have an unhealthy obsession with opposing homosexuality I can't help but wonder if the bible I read is completely different than the one they read. Are they that narrow minded? Empty Headed? Illiterate? I can't find a explanation for it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thorvir

The whole uproar over this law is blown out of proportion. It's nothing new and several other states(and the federal government) have an equivalent law on the books already. All it says is unless you have a good reason, you can't force a group or business to do something against their beliefs. Discrimination(if you can prove it) is probably a good enough reason.

Exactly. It's only being used as a platform to spread bigotry against religion in general.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Solipsi Rai

Woods, some people misinterpret the Bible any way they want to be. The Bible also teaches us to "love thy neighbor, do unto others as they do unto you", and "to turn the other cheek" when in tense situations. You may follow one paragraph of Leviticus (18:22) regarding Gays, but remember Jesus Christ in red said the Old Testament doesn't really apply, the New Testament is what Christians tend to follow more. You can see why you can eat shellfish, put tattoos on your skin and wear mixed-fabrics despite the Book of Leviticus remind readers "God" doesn't approve of them. Christianity itself follows their own set of rules in most cases differing from Judaism which has its own various branches...and different churches among Christians themselves in their own interpretation of biblical scripture and church doctrine.

My wife did something many but not all Christians find it "sinful": she had a child from her ex outside of marriage, which was something considered "taboo" a long time ago. What if a business owner with deep religious and social conservative opinions found out about my wife's personal life? He's gotta have to accept it and don't bother her over what or her ex-BF did 9 years ago. There are still a good percentage of Christians against divorce and remarriage, because of biblical scripture and their own denomination of Christianity might preach against the idea of divorce and remarriage. My parents divorced 30 years ago: my Mom once and my Dad twice by now. Would a business owner belonged to that church against divorce or remarriage take issue of my parents' marital or divorce record? Same answer applies.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agent0range

It's not always misinterpreting the bible. Often times it is grasping at straws in an attempt to justify your actions.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agent0range

Exactly. It's only being used as a platform to spread bigotry against religion in general.

Nope, not at all. It is about keeping your religion to yourself. ANYONE can create a religion. White supremacists and black panthers can create a "religion" barring themselves from interacting with the other race. Next thing you know, businesses will be refusing to serve someone of the opposite race. Do you even realize when a slippery slope is near?

Exactly. It's only being used as a platform to spread bigotry against religion in general.

Nope, not at all. It is about keeping your religion to yourself. ANYONE can create a religion. White supremacists and black panthers can create a "religion" barring themselves from interacting with the other race. Next thing you know, businesses will be refusing to serve someone of the opposite race. Do you even realize when a slippery slope is near?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agent0range

Aaaaand the backtracking begins.

"What we had hoped for with the bill was a message of inclusion, inclusion of all religious beliefs," Republican House Speaker Brian Bosma said. "What instead has come out is a message of exclusion, and that was not the intent."

You can attempt to sugarcoat a turd...but it's still ****.

http://news.yahoo.com/indiana-state-lawmakers-address-religious-objections-law-130900910.html

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wickian

Such as sell flowers and wedding cakes to gay couples?

I don't believe a company should be forced to, but the decision will vary by court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.