Indiana’s Debate Over LGBT Rights Continues
The renewed debate kicked off Tuesday.
The question still looming for lawmakers, should sexual orientation and gender identity be added protections to the state’s civil rights code?
Tuesday saw new, mounting pressure from prominent Indiana-based companies like Cummins, Eli Lilly, Cloud One and the state chamber.
Opponents quickly focused on the Obama administration’s directive on transgender bathrooms and the impact any civil rights legislation in Indiana would have.
Democratic gubernatorial candidate John Gregg says he would sign into law new legislation that added sexual orientation and gender identity to the state`s civil rights code.
His Republican counterpart Eric Holcomb says he would consider legislation, as he would any other measure that would come to his desk, alongside balancing religious liberty and nondiscrimination.
Indiana Next License Plate Vote Deadline Approaching
Three plate designs were unveiled on opening day at the Indiana State Fair, and the deadline to share your thoughts is next Monday, September 5th.
The artwork was designed by a Fort Wayne, Indiana based company called Intellectual Technology Inc.
You can vote for your favorite of the three plates at mybmv.com.
Voting ends at midnight on September 5th.
Hoosiers will begin to see the winning plate design on vehicles in January of next year as older plates are replaced at the end of the normal seven-year life cycle.
Wood Memorial’s Varsity Football Season May Be Over For 2016
44News contacted several schools remaining on The Trojans’ schedule this season. All of the coaches we contacted said Wood Memorial has called them to say they would forfeit the games.
East Gibson officials confirmed earlier the school would cancel its game this week against Vincennes Lincoln, but it has not commented on the rest of the schedule.
Wood Memorial forfeited its first two games of the season following an investigation of hazing within the football program. That investigation continues.
No one should be discriminated against including LGBTs, but neither should one’s sexual preference or how one feels about what one’s gender give one the right to force another to violate his/her convictions.
To me the solution is simple. Exempt contractual services where the consumer is dictating the terms of service and where another entity would likely perform the the service. Then you are not pitting religion against sexuality.
Further more, I am a little tired of these corporations threatening economic terrorism and acting as if LGBT employees are more valued than those living by the convictions of their faith.
The bigot Mike Pence now has a national stage to strut his discredited bigotry on. He signed on to the sick candidacy of a mutant tailor-made for bigots and racists. Pence will be coming back to Indiana soon, a whipped puppy. He is an unpopular governor, more so since his overt and unrepentant bigotry towards gay folks. His warped, unGodly stance certainly has its adherents in Indiana, they are a loud unhappy minority. Let them practice their bigotry and racism behind the doors of their churches where the damage they can do to Indiana will be minimal. Their God will be mighty proud of them.
Full rights for gay people is the law. Those who choose to break it under the guise of religion must pay a penalty.
And religious freedom is the constitution. When our government can force one to violate one’s religious convictions on the weight of an ordinance, then the constitution suffers. It’s not fare.
*is Constitutional. I am no good at multitasking, thinking and typing at the same time.
Ho ho ho, the prospect of using ‘fare’ in that sense distracted you. You got ahead of yourself and the constitution suffered.
Pence is having his own well-deserved “issues” these days. http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/pence-recaptured-after-fleeing-trump-campaign-bus
Did anyone see the story about the woman in Indy arrested for beating her 7 year year old to the point of hospitalization? She’s claiming exemption for her actions under the RFRA. Quoted some Bible verse about beating your kid with a rod. My questions are: 1) When and who radicalized this woman into this religion of terror? and 2) how much bs do we have to put up with from these people?
Did you see IE used the term Economic Terrorism to describe the consequences of action? Everyone agrees that football player had the right to protest but all of racist America wants him to face the consequences of his actions. He knew he would not be free from that and experienced blowback for sure.
What IE wants is freedom from consequences of action for religious discriminators. He does not have as much courage and conviction and that football player.
Then she must have ignored the scripture which tells parents not exasperate their children. Colossians 3:21 But then scripture was written before liberalism became stylish and the art of common common sense was lost so that some, you, can not understand the difference between discipline and abuse. That confusion shows in liberal temper-tantrums.
So can you show me in scripture where God changed his mind on marriage being one man and one woman as Jesus said in Matthew 19:4?
And if it is about equality then why do we den more than two or close relatives marriage equality?
It’s OK, you can man/woman up and talk to me in the first person. If the corporations were taking the same stand on BLM as they are RFRA would you not call it economic terrorism?
If corporations were threatening economic repercussions because an ordinance protecting gay rights was creating a climate where they are having difficulty hiring the best and brightest workers because their religious freedom was threatened, would you call it economic terrorism?
What action is a professional singer who does not want to sing at a gay wedding that he/she committing that the person should suffer blowback? Are you saying that sexual liberty, which is not in the constitution, is greater than religious liberty, which is in the constitution, because some community wrote an ordinance?
Are you saying that a christian baker who declined creating a special cake saying “Congratulations Ann and Eve” has caused so much harm that the government should fine them $135,000, strip them of home and business a week before Christmas, place a gag order on them, and block them from seeking financial donations to offset the cost is justice?
Would you call it just if the government wrote an ordinance saying that all must stand for the national anthem and strip Kaepernick if home and livelihood because he declined to stand?
But the real question is >>>>>What do you have against my idea that contractual services where the consumer is dictating the terms of service should be exempt?<<<<< You can address it in first person, but I doubt you will address that comment when it's much more fun to just flap your wings and peck at insularity issues.
So in the case of the child abuser, are you saying we should place limits on people using RFRA for exemption? Most of the rest of your post is incoherent word salad, but maybe we agree that limits are in order.
Religious extremists are boycotting Target for their bathroom policy. Is that Economic Terrorism? Or simply protesting, giving Target some consequences for that policy?
Got to work, don’t have time for your bullshit.
Common sense tells one that Child abuse is not a religious right and to be honest, it is not even the same argument.
There is no city ordinance driving Target’s bathroom policy. They made that decision. Choosing not to spend your money at Target because their policy make you uncomfortable is a personal choice not economic terrorism.
Thanks you for not answering my question, but wouldn’t not making this a religious issue be a better resolution? I gave you the oppertunity to avoid m “word salad” and go straight to my point, but I suspect you are only interested in your views not finding workable resolutions.
You’re not the boss of me little man/woman, but with your attitude you need to go take a nap.
The BS is that you seem incapable of actually participating in a sensible debate. (Reference my comment that some liberals raise brats who throw temper-tantrums when they lose. )
BTW, it’s not just religious extremist boycotting Target. It’s mostly people who feel uncomfortable and unsafe with their policy.
Popped in to see if you became unhinged and you didn’t disappoint.
I know you think she shouldn’t use RFRA for her defense but she is, and it’s no one’s choice but her own to make. You want to force her to change her plea to something else but what part of the Constitution gives you that right? This case will end up testing RFRA in a way that will put limits, or get rid of the thing once and for all. It is NOT ok to commit secular atrocities in the name of religion. Hopefully using that common sense, they will see there is no way to write a discrimination bill without opening up abuses.
The ordinance driving the Target boycott is the Bathroom Bill (from the fine folks at ALEC) which is an odious piece of legislation in many states and will be here next legislative session unless we can stop it in its tracks. You say others participate in the boycott, maybe that’s true. I see no evidence of it. I only see extreme Christians touting it on FB and I know plenty of moderate Christians who still shop there.
As for your other questions, I have no wish to repeat old arguments with you. Marriage is settled law. It’s done. Meaning I DGAF about your concern for 3-way relationships etc.
Now, go a little nuts some more so I am entertained next break….
Since you DGAF, might I suggest then that you exercise your constitutional right to shut up? You can’t stay on topic or answer reasonable questions anyway. Your pompous arrogance is beginning to remind me of this liberal brat.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhtqv9Y_KTk
What is your main point/question? Be brief.
I>>>>>What do you have against my idea that contractual services where the consumer is dictating the terms of service should be exempt?<<<<<
That is what’s called a loaded question. First I would have to assume something is true that is not true in reality. Customers do not dictate terms of service.
A bakery’s terms of service are: We have a variety of cakes at different price points. We also include a message written in icing. We have a variety of cake toppings so you can choose the ones that look most like you and your intended. We deliver. Pay up or we will not deliver. Those are the terms of service set by the bakery.
Now is you say the customer demands to pay less for his gay cake, you might have a point. But if they abide by the terms of service, pay the price on time, how does that make them the dictator of terms?
BTW very nice of you telling me to shut up. No way. The ONLY reason I voted for Obama was so I could have this “voice”. You’re the one that’s supposed to be “voice”less until Trump saves you from that predicament.
A loaded question is “do you still beat your wife?” There is nothing loaded in my question.
When the customer can dictate what is written on the cake or the nature of the service then the business person should have the option to decline the service. It may not work perfect but its much better than seeing someone being sued for $135,000 for declining to provide a wedding cake.
However, that would not pertain to over the counter service/
Ok I asked the bakery at the grocer if they had a policy about what they would write on a cake. She said she wouldn’t want cuss words or hate speech but that there really was no “policy”.
I took that to mean Congrats Bill and Steve does not violate the terms of service. As for the service itself? That has nothing to do with the bakery. They just need to deliver to the reception venue, weather it’s a mixed race wedding, a woman marrying her 19th husband, no matter.
Showing kindness to “sinners” (like JC Himself often did) does not spoil your chances at “heaven”. I’m gonna stop here because you and I will never agree. And law has prevailed. Gay marriage is legal in ALL states and you won’t get your way. So now that I can, I’m thinking about getting gay married myself. I have an idea for special gazebo but can’t find one retail. I’ll be calling around to machine shops with lathes to see if I can get one custom made. Any recommendations?
We show kindness to sinners because we all are sinners, but Christ calls us to repentance of sin not condoning or enabling it. When Jesus saved the woman caught in adultery he told her to go and sin no more not that it was alright to continue in adultery. (John 8:11)
In your example the customer is still dictating “contracting” for the service and the provider should be able to decline. What if the baker was gay and the customer wanted a cake with a bible verse like 1 Corinthians 6:9 which calls homosexuality unrighteous on it? Should the gay person be made to provide that cake? Would it be just to fine the gay $135,000 for declining the service and take his some and business a week before Christmas?
This problem has not arisen because of Christian bakers but because laws have been written and court rulings decreed which have unduly burdened the convictions of others. Therefore RFRA laws have become necessary.
There’s a picture of some of that child’s injuries in this article. It was bigger and on the ‘front page’ of the CP earlier this morning. It is gruesome and there is no justification for it. That is child abuse. Trying to hide behind the RFRA while also claiming cultural differences and personal religious justifications are defenses that would seem to be at odds with each other. It hurts religion and exposes Indiana as a state where beating a kid is perfectly fine. (Just can’t take it to the level Kin Park Thaing did).
http://www.courierpress.com/story/news/crime/2016/08/31/son-had-36-bruises-mom-quoted-bible-defense/88998568/
Do you think they will actually prevail in that defense? What would Billy Graham say?
That kid is fortunate they only beat him to the point of hospitalization, it could have been worse. That lady, who should be locked up and denied parental rights (and her church taxed), could have unilaterally sentenced him to one of the church run Tough Love Camps. They would have tried to break the child mentally while subjecting him to frequent beatings, until somebody rescued him from their clutches. Forced indoctrination into their sect would have been a requirement to survive.
I think you hit on the very reason a lot of the nutsos are so for the RFRA, in addition to letting them parade their bigotry, it would give them legal cover for some of the horrible things they do.
You absolutely summed this entire “debate” up in one sentence. Religion has been used as a cover for atrocities since its inception, and I mean virtually all religions, not just Christianity. There should be NO debate about the rights of law-abiding citizens.
Then why have more atrocities occurred under secular atheistic nations? Writing bad laws and making bad ruling s that has pitted sexual liberty against religious liberty is the problem.
Why do you try to have an intellectual discussion on this blog? Come to think about it, I don’t know why I look at this “forum”. Must be the same reason one gawks at a traffic accident or gay pride parade: morbid curiosity.
Comments are closed.