Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Georgia > Atlanta
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 03-21-2016, 05:49 PM
 
10,357 posts, read 11,390,362 times
Reputation: 7733

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by chuckshere View Post
Companies like Mercedes-Benz, Porsche and Pinewood Studios are very image oriented and have put an investment into moving to Georgia. I can't believe they (and a whole lot more than I could possibly name here) are going to just sit back and let these rubes dictate this. I look to see much more political turnover in the years ahead. I think a lot of Republicans are business oriented and will lose patience with the fallout from these kinds of theatrics that will make the Republicans look like the party that's anti-business. I know I'm certainly going to pay more attention to who's running for office.
I agree that some political turnover might be possible in the years ahead, particularly if this bill becomes law and the state experiences a massive public relations and economic fallout that is even worse than what we might currently be seeing.

But outside of that scenario, most of the legislators who supported and pushed this legislation will more than likely actually be rewarded for their support for this bill because of how the legislative districts are gerrymandered so that about an average of at least about 60% or more of them are populated by staunchly conservative voters.

The way that the districts are gerrymandered actually strongly encourages them to return to the legislature and push even stronger religious liberty legislation next year.

It is this political calculus that strongly tilts the electorate in favor of the most conservative voters that is one of the reasons why it is not an absolute certainty that Governor Deal will veto this bill....Not with a very strong and very vocal part of the electorate demanding that some type of really strong religious liberty legislation be passed into law, no matter the expense to the state's reputation and economy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-22-2016, 03:58 AM
 
10,357 posts, read 11,390,362 times
Reputation: 7733
Left-of-center website Daily Kos reported Monday that a lobbyist and fundraiser for the Republican Governor's Association who has talked with Governor Deal and his aides said that the governor wants to veto the bill for the sake of the Georgia economy, amongst many other reasons, but that the governor is trying to find some type of middle ground solution that will make everyone on both sides of this increasingly heated religious liberty debate happy.

From the Daily Kos article "Georgia Gov. Deal under ‘immense pressure’ to veto anti-LGBT 'religious freedom' bill":
Georgia Gov. Deal under

Quote:
A GOP lobbyist and fundraiser for the Republican Governor's Association who's spoken to Deal and his aides told me that the governor "wants" to veto the bill for the sake of the Georgia economy, among other reasons, but he's still trying to find some middle ground.

“He is also getting immense pressure from national party leaders not to repeat Governor Pence's mistake from last year in Indiana,” the lobbyist said. “This is Deal's legacy; he knows it; he's taking his time to figure out how to make everyone happy. In the end, he'll realize he can't make everyone happy, but I think he's still trying to find that solution that doesn't exist.”
From the reporting in this article, it appears that the national Republican Party is somewhat quietly lobbying and pressuring Governor Deal to veto the religious liberty bill out of fear that they will see a repeat of the debacle that occurred last year when Governor Pence signed into law (and then disastrously publicly advocated for) Indiana's RFRA (Religious Freedom Restoration Act)....Only national GOP leaders seem to have even more fear about this situation which would be an even bigger and more high-profile public relations fallout that would be occurring during a presidential election year.

If this is true that the national Republican Party is lobbying and pressuring Deal to veto the bill then that means that the national Republican Party may actually be working against the Georgia state Republican Party apparatus which appears to want this bill to become law so badly to the point that Deal is hesitant to veto a bill that he personally knows will most likely have very bad public relations and economic consequences for the state of Georgia.

Governor Deal's apparent hesitancy to veto the bill early-on in the review process out of fear that he may anger and alienate an overwhelming portion of the Georgia Republican Party and conservative movement apparatus may be the reason that Georgia's very well-respected senior U.S. Senator, Republican Johnny Isakson weighed in on the issue on Monday in what appeared to be an attempt by Senator Isakson to give Governor Deal some much needed political cover from his right flank to veto the increasingly highly controversial bill.

Senator Isakson's comments that the religious liberty issue should be handled through the legislative process at the federal level were an indirect but not-so-subtle sign that the national Republican Party apparatus want this growing controversy to go away out of fear that could do much damage to a national Republican Party that is already having some very major "issues" during a heated presidential primary election season.

The comments also seemed to indirectly reflect some very serious personal concern from Isakson himself that the state of Georgia is in an extremely dangerous place both public relations-wise and economically with this controversy that is bringing the state much unwanted attention and negative publicity.

Senator Isakson's comments basically appear to be an attempt to save his home state of Georgia from a (completely unnecessary and totally self-inflicted) public relations and economic catastrophe while also trying to save the Georgia GOP from destroying itself in a state that is key to the national Republican Party's electoral strength.

Airforceguy earlier linked to the story in the Atlanta Journal Constitution's "Political Insider" blog that reported Senator Isakson's comments...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Airforceguy View Post
Quote:
Isakson was then asked specifically whether Deal, who has previously said he would reject any measure that legalizes discrimination, should veto the bill.

“That’s Governor Deal’s responsibility. But I think he ought to look long and hard at the ramifications. He’s a good man that usually does the right thing. And I’m sure he will in this case.”
Here is a link to some video of a WXIA-TV (11Alive) interview with Senator Isakson where he echoed those same comments reported on in the Atlanta Journal Constitution story...

"Sen. Isakson expresses concerns over "Religious Freedom" bill" (11Alive/WXIA-TV Atlanta)
Sen. Isakson expresses concerns over "Religious Freedom" bill

From the story in the link:
Quote:
When asked if he believed Governor Nathan Deal should veto the bill, the senator said he hoped Georgia's best interests go into the final decision.

"(Vetoing the bill is) Governor Deal’s responsibility, but I think he has to look long and hard at the ramifications, and he’s a good man who usually does the right thing, and I’m sure he will in this case. We went through this in 1996 in Cobb County when the Olympics were coming to Cobb … It is an issue that’s gonna cause consternation, so I think you need to evaluate that with what’s in the best interest of the state.”

Last edited by Born 2 Roll; 03-22-2016 at 04:39 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2016, 05:35 AM
 
1,581 posts, read 2,177,398 times
Reputation: 1130
Quote:
Originally Posted by arjay57 View Post
No, just the opposite. No preacher has ever been forced to marry people he didn't want to. This is plain tomfoolery.
And no one has made the claim that preachers have been forced to marry people so enough with the straw man.

But in what alternate universe are you living in where do you think the Supreme Court ruling will not result in lawsuits across the country? Even the mere statement of belief that marriage is between a man and a woman is labeled "hate". This bill is exactly about people of faith not being forced to do something they do not believe in and in no way "ramming religion down everybody else's throat".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2016, 05:48 AM
 
1,581 posts, read 2,177,398 times
Reputation: 1130
Quote:
Originally Posted by fourthwarden View Post
Chill man. It really sounds like he wants the churches and religious peeps to keep their bigotry to themselves instead of trying to make it law.
A) This is a forum where issues are discussed.
B) Bigotry is defined as intolerance of others. The statement of disagreeing with others is not the same as intolerance and your characterization of others as "bigots" demonstrates your own intolerance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2016, 06:23 AM
 
Location: Orange Blossom Trail
6,420 posts, read 6,496,784 times
Reputation: 2673
Quote:
Originally Posted by samiwas1 View Post
If this does pass, and the TV and film industry does indeed back out of Georgia, there is going to be some hell to pay, and I might just be leading the charge. You mess with my career, and take my six-figure income from me and my family just so that you can tell gay people they're icky, I'm coming after you.
lol
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2016, 06:26 AM
 
Location: Seattle, WA
9,830 posts, read 7,211,766 times
Reputation: 7779
Quote:
Originally Posted by J2rescue View Post
This bill is exactly about people of faith not being forced to do something they do not believe in
Exactly, and that's why it's an utterly, completely horrible bill.

What if every place that sells food, cites a sincere religious belief that they feel it's sin to do business with whatever your particular skin color/hair color/sexual orientation. It's ok for you to starve to death, so long as their arbitrary bigotry is protected? That's the priority?

That's the extreme, but it's a slippery slope. Whatever views you have about marriage, belongs in your personal life. If you sell goods or perform services, that needs to be open to business for everyone, period.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2016, 07:19 AM
 
Location: Atlanta, Birmingham, Charlotte, and Raleigh
2,580 posts, read 2,473,760 times
Reputation: 1614
Quote:
Originally Posted by First24 View Post
The circus going on around this "religious liberty" bill is disturbing. I certainly hope none of our dear state legislators think these companies and 'Hollywood' are bluffing about pulling business away from Georgia. Either way, Georgia's more progressive cities like Savannah, Atlanta and Augusta (emerging), will receive a black eye from this.

Off topic, but a situation like this only makes me respect early Civil Rights pioneers even more. The belligerence still displayed towards civil freedoms by certain factions within the state and state government is astonishing.
Unfortunately, this state had avoid the true embarrassment actually deserves for abusing and blatant disrespect of civil rights. Remember there were segregated proms for public schools in numerous counties in south Georgia as late as 2009. This state is basically on the same level of true respect of social equity as Mississippi because of the bold nature of how some elected officials are disrespectful towards non-whites and sexual minorities. However, it is indicative of the type of elected many of them represent because it is not like the majority from the individual districts are not aware of this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2016, 09:41 AM
 
Location: Atlanta, Birmingham, Charlotte, and Raleigh
2,580 posts, read 2,473,760 times
Reputation: 1614
Unfortunately, this state had avoided the true embarrassment it actually deserves for abusing and blatant disrespect of civil rights. Remember there were segregated proms for public schools in numerous counties in south Georgia as late as 2009. This state is basically on the same level of true respect of social equity as Mississippi because of the bold nature of how some elected officials are disrespectful towards non-whites and sexual minorities. However, it is indicative of the type of elected officials, many of whom represent the majority of their individual districts, so it is not like their constituents are not aware of this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2016, 10:50 AM
 
1,581 posts, read 2,177,398 times
Reputation: 1130
Quote:
Originally Posted by primaltech View Post
Exactly, and that's why it's an utterly, completely horrible bill.

What if every place that sells food, cites a sincere religious belief that they feel it's sin to do business with whatever your particular skin color/hair color/sexual orientation. It's ok for you to starve to death, so long as their arbitrary bigotry is protected? That's the priority?

That's the extreme, but it's a slippery slope. Whatever views you have about marriage, belongs in your personal life. If you sell goods or perform services, that needs to be open to business for everyone, period.
It may have been missed in all of ridiculous rhetoric but this bill is limited to religious organizations and has nothing to do with "doing business".

And I will put this in every post if I have to.

Stating a belief that marriage is between man and woman is not bigotry. It is a statement of belief that God defines marriage, not the Supreme court nor the wind driven public opinion. And having a different opinion is not "hate".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2016, 11:29 AM
 
Location: Ono Island, Orange Beach, AL
10,739 posts, read 13,317,898 times
Reputation: 7171
Quote:
Originally Posted by J2rescue View Post
And no one has made the claim that preachers have been forced to marry people so enough with the straw man.

But in what alternate universe are you living in where do you think the Supreme Court ruling will not result in lawsuits across the country? Even the mere statement of belief that marriage is between a man and a woman is labeled "hate". This bill is exactly about people of faith not being forced to do something they do not believe in and in no way "ramming religion down everybody else's throat".
Very interesting how reasonable folks can have such disparate views on this piece of legislation and matters of religion. For instance, I consider myself a Christian and do not feel that my Christian beliefs would be compromised in the least by selling services to a gay couple. On the contrary, I think were I to refuse to provide those services my God would look upon me with disappointment. I'm sure others feel just the opposite.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Georgia > Atlanta

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top