Indiana...Religious Freedom eh? *sigh*

I got a 10% discount at a place I bought lunch for the guys in the shop for having a concealed weapon. Was in the news last year so I assume they still do. Did it for 4 years when I bought the shop lunch.

Louisiana restaurant gives 10 percent discount if you bring a gun - The Washington Post

Apparently I got the LEO discount for years, but whatever 10% savings on 100 lucnhes made it worthwhile to carry which I did anyway.

Nothing in the bible against shitting on the hood of an auto shop owner's car. I think I'll go do that.

Hey maybe a positive out of this, with at least some of those discriminatory anti-homelessness laws getting challenged.

A Texas Woman Might Use The 'Religious Freedom' Law In The Most Amazing Way Possible

Then you say "fuck you give me 100% off! And what's in the register!"

Sentagur_sl said:

So what happened? You walk up to the cash register, Lift your shirt to show you are packing heat and the teller shrugs and asks" How about 10% off?

Click to expand...

Place was right down the street from our shop. We had talked several times and he pretty much knew any business owner in the area carried since the industry we serve isn't in the best part of town. It came up and we talked about what I was carrying and he gave me 10% off that day and I had it ever since. I thought he did it to everyone, didn't know it was LEO only till I read the article again. First saw the headline when it came out but I just assumed that was common knowledgte for a while and just made it into the news, but apparently it's new and he has a sign up now (I'm not there any longer).

I did notice more goofy stuff from the "media". The article says Port Allen is 80 miles northwest of New Orleans, which it is. Just seems odd to say it that way considering it's on one end of the I-10 bridge that crosses the MS river at Baton Rouge with BR on the other end of the bridge a mile away.

BrutulTM_sl said:

You wouldn't have clicked it if it said ordinary.

Click to expand...

I've developed a habit where unless the purpose of the article is articulated in the title, I just don't read it. All that "and what happens next will amaze you!" shit gets bypassed 100% of the time. I'm probably occasionally missing something kind of interesting/important, but I'm definitely missing a ton of bullshit.

Borzak_sl said:

I did notice more goofy stuff from the "media". The article says Port Allen is 80 miles northwest of New Orleans, which it is. Just seems odd to say it that way considering it's on one end of the I-10 bridge that crosses the MS river at Baton Rouge with BR on the other end of the bridge a mile away.

Click to expand...

I am guessing that is because most of America knows generally where New Orleans is, but they couldn't tell you anything about Baton Rouge; I would guess most don't even know that's the capital. Gotta love it. Hell, the person who wrote the article may not have known, you can tell just by his picture he is a fricking douche. Journalistic standards are not all that high these days and the esteemed author is listed as 'blogger', so that could mean anything at all but one thing it certainly does not mean is 'real news'. Something tells me we won't be mentioning Hunter Schwartz in the same breath as Ben Bradlee or Tom Brokaw.

Sorry for the derail from the current discussion, but i've been thinking about the whole idea of religious people refusing to provide services for homosexuals because of things like this RFA. Originally I was for them having the option for a number of reasons, not all faith based. However I've come to really think that the problem with them doing so or even being able to do so is a matter of moral consistency. Or rather their lack of it. Are they refusing to make goods or provide services for those who are divorced? Are they refusing to fix a car for someone they may know who is cheating on their spouse? Are they going to refuse to take wedding pictures if they find out that one of the newlyweds is addicted to porn or steals from their place of business? Most likely not, and that hypocrisy kills me. So how is it any different from the tacit approval you would be giving to a gay couple of you performed the service for them?

The acts I used as examples might not always be major when viewed through a secular lense. But for a Christian all of those things are serious problems. So act with consistency if you want to use your faith as an excuse. Otherwise your just using it to be bigoted against something you personally dislike. Which is disgusting no matter what way you look at it. It's even more disgusting that you are tarnishing something supposedly as important as your faith just to act out your prejudice.

At this point I thing things like the original Indiana RFA which spawned this thread are more a hindrance then a help to anyone who is trying to act in a moral fashion whether from a secular or a faith based viewpoint. Still not sure how much government of any level should be able to dictate who a non essential service provider deals with, but that's a topic for another day.

Haven't been following the thread since like page ten. Sorry if my take on it was repetitive.

Openly religious likely to only selectively follow tenets, more news at 11.

Yeah, I dunno where baton rouge is without looking at a map. I mean I think it's up north and sort of to the east, but honestly I'd have to look. I could point fairly close to the Noo Owleens area. It's easier to find.

Nope, it's right northwest of New Orleans.

WELL, HUH.