hodj
Vox Populi Jihadi
- 31,672
- 18,378
Indiana...Religious Freedom eh? *sigh*
- Thread starter Malinatar
- Start date
-
Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!
Go here and give us your nominations!Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
- 17,781
- 25,897
Tuco
I got Tuco'd!
- 47,959
- 82,722
1. Because in this country, we want people to be free to engage in commerce and not have to deal with people's bullshit bigotry to do so.
2. Because people have the freedom to be who they want and as long as it doesn't impact other's rights they should be free to do so without getting discriminated against.
The cake store was shut down, but it doesn't matter if you can find a microcosm of USA society that all agree 'fuck this group in particular' and you can run a successful bakery that doesn't serve that group. We come together as a country and say that no group may be fucked in this country.
iannis
Musty Nester
- 31,351
- 17,657
Oh bullshit, we do that constantly. That seems like a very, very, white thing to say.
It's why the impetus is so important to me. Take away the high minded principle of the thing. What actually happened? How are people behaving? What is the tangible issue?
The cake store guy was flat wrong, objectively in breach of contract (maybe not legally, fuck if I know), and some lawyers saw an opportunity to grandstand on his mistake for the principle of the thing. If American history teaches us anything at all it teaches us that we need to fuck the types of people who try to do that sort of principled grandstanding, in particular. In particular, fuck them. We have enough real problems without having to make shit up.
khalid
Unelected Mod
- 14,071
- 6,775
What exactly are you arguing for? Sure, we as a society often fuck over certain groups. That doesn't mean we should do it more often or allow the ability to do so be entrenched in law.
As for "take away the high minded principle of the thing", no actually, let's not. What is behind the pushback against this law is people fed the fuck up with religious bigots and their attempts to enforce their religious bigotry with laws to let them shun people.
Palum
what Suineg set it to
- 27,558
- 43,923
I think the high level principle to take away from this is that religion exists primarily to create a schism between followers and non followers, some are more congenial and others hateful murderers. It all comes down to a desire to exclude so as to feel included. In the past we've used conservative morals to ban certain things justified by religion such as stoning, polygamy, etc. It's becoming increasingly clear that at the end of the day the only way dogmatic faith can set itself apart from AAA, AARP, your Costco membership, etc. is to cause disruption amongst nonbelievers. Even believers by and large don't care as much anymore, outside the fundamentalist members of any religion.
Royal
Connoisseur of Exotic Pictures
- 15,077
- 10,643
So you believe that government isn't in the business of making people play nice.
But in fact that is one of the foundational theories behind government, going all the way back to Plato and the Republic; there are those for whom it is naturally good to inflict injustice on others with impunity, and it is naturally bad to suffer injustice without redress, so the point of government is we submit to an authority that supposedly will check the ability of others to do injustice to us, at the cost of our ability to inflict injustice on others.
But let's say that government isn't in the business of making people play nice. It is still in the business of ensuring that all of the citizens who dwell under its auspices are able to fully enjoy in and participate in the society which they create and support. All people who are Americans should be fully free to participate in the social, political, and economic life of the country, and it is the duty of the country to make that so. If the government is shirking that duty, what redress is there?
At the end of the day, there is a price for citizenship and all of the benefits and privileges it affords.
Big Phoenix
Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
- 46,823
- 100,034
Constitution doesnt say you have the right to not have your feelings hurt. Its a cake for a wedding. We arent talking about someone being denied entrance to an ER or from shopping at the only place to buy food in a 50 mile radius.
Its just fucking idiotic you can bankrupt someone because they dont want to deal with you over something so trivial and pointless. Just wait til the wutrans crew comes in and starts going full wu on you when you dont fully accommodate them
Its just fucking idiotic you can bankrupt someone because they dont want to deal with you over something so trivial and pointless. Just wait til the wutrans crew comes in and starts going full wu on you when you dont fully accommodate them
Tuco
I got Tuco'd!
- 47,959
- 82,722
In what situations do we deny service to people because of who they are? I was loose with my language so when I said, 'no group may be fucked in this country' (which is totally false of course, all groups are fucked in different ways) I meant 'no group may be denied service to'.
hodj
Vox Populi Jihadi
- 31,672
- 18,378
The thing is bro, that these laws protect people like psychiatrists and social workers and yes, pharmacists who don't want to hand out drugs like contraception, etc. because it supposedly violates their religious freedom.
This really isn't about the cake bullshit at all, funny enough.
chaos
Buzzfeed Editor
- 17,324
- 4,839
I hate it when people talk about "privilege" but this is pretty much exactly what they are talking about, they are just too dumb to put it into words that don't sound like a middle school cheer squad wrote them. As a straight white male, you aren't exactly going out on a limb saying that groups should be able to discriminate against whoever they want and fuck who doesn't like it. You are excluded from the affected group, and you know this.
Royal
Connoisseur of Exotic Pictures
- 15,077
- 10,643
People should stop reducing this down to wedding cakes and floral arrangements. It goes beyond that. This law extends RFRA protections to corporations, which goes beyond the scope of even the Hobby Lobby decision (as I recall that was limited to "closely held businesses"). It wouldn't be hard to produce a list of very realistic or even likely scenarios as long as your arm. Here's one that isn't hypothetical; a pediatrician declining to take a baby into her practice because of her same sex parents. That happened, it just didn't get all of the attention of the damn wedding cake because the parents didn't sue.
My feelings towards it is, you now have places that gays can walk past certain businesses and say "were not allowed there" which goes against everything this country stands for. Nobody should be barred from any place without committing a crime.
That is the way people need to look at this, it's not about freedom of religion, it's about not treating certain people like criminals.
That is the way people need to look at this, it's not about freedom of religion, it's about not treating certain people like criminals.
Merrith
Golden Baronet of the Realm
- 18,596
- 7,224
The problem for those people that scream "freedom of religion" is they're so used to being able to oppress as the status quo, that when people tell them they can't oppress certain groups anymore they'll complain they're the ones actually suffering from oppression.
Big Phoenix
Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
- 46,823
- 100,034
I wonder how many business owners have kicked people out of their businesses because their didnt meet their standards of clientele?
Big Phoenix
Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
- 46,823
- 100,034
Hoss
Make America's Team Great Again
- 27,660
- 16,106
Nice strawman.
So tell me this, in the 20 years since the federal version of this law has been in effect, how many times has it been used to prevent the government from protecting people from discrimination? Or how about in the other states that have the same law?