[blakesq]

oh yeah, the theory of the ever changing meaning of the plain language of the constitution and bill of rights. In other words, the constitution means whatever we "feel" like it should mean. That has worked so well.

Originally Posted by smackfu

Yes, there is more to the Constitution than just the text. That's why the Supreme Court exists.

[nep321]

Annnnnd the Arkansas House just passed the same religious freedom bill that passed in Indiana:

BREAKING: Arkansas House Passes Religious Freedom Restoration Act

[dazzleman]

Malloy must be planning on running for president at some point. He's trying to lift his profile. Maybe he should focus on fixing things at home, rather than casting aspersions on other people.

[hartford_renter]

Originally Posted by mlassoff

In response to Indiana's new pro-discrimination law, Governor Malloy announced that he's banning tax payer funded travel to Indiana. I'm sure that there was likely ZERO tax-funded paying travel to being with, but I do like the symbolism here.

https://twitter.com/GovMalloyOffice

I'm not a big fan of the governor, but I do like that he has taken a stand here.

Its despicable this coward of a governor goes ahead and does something like this

The real bigots are the Gays and religious groups are being victimized.

Hobby Lobby decision would never passed if not for this legislation.

Another low point for CT

[kidyankee764]

Originally Posted by hartford_renter

The real bigots are the Gays and religious groups are being victimized.

The only thing dispicable is this comment.

[FutureTown]

Wow, I can't believe people like that think this way in Connecticut. Man, where is the education this state boasts? lol

People need to read the source of news instead of having propaganda channels feed them views. This goes triple for Fox News and 1x for MSNBC and CNN. I can't believe how much trash comes out of Fox News especially in regards to my religion. There is no basis for it and all it does is damage the image to the public viewers. The worst is that the sheeple actually buy it cause somewhere in their lives, they forgot to think critically and analytically. I'm surprised people don't believe me when I say I'm a millionaire as easily. :/

[markfromct]

Malloy was all over the morning shows today, including CNN and Morning Joe.

It was pretty funny when Joe Scarborough was challenging him on why he doesn't boycott the 19 other states with a similar law.

19 states that have ‘religious freedom’ laws like Indiana’s that no one is boycotting - The Washington Post

[dazzleman]

“When I am weaker than you, I ask you for freedom because that is according to your principles; when I am stronger than you, I take away your freedom because that is according to my principles.”

[Lalalally]

One of the first lessons I learned as a young adult was to never discuss religion or politics in public, because it's lose/lose no matter what your position is That said, and being that this thread joins the two so inextricably, here goes ...

I'm not really sure how I feel about this. At first blush, like most others here, I definitely think discrimination is wrong, and I could certainly understand how some unscrupulous bigots out there could potentially hide behind a law like this for no reason other than they can.

But for the truly religious out there -- of all faiths -- I kind of agree that their duty to their God and to themselves will sometimes trump their duty to me. For instance - never in a million years would I ever consider walking into a kosher restaurant and expect the owner to serve me a roast beef and cheese sandwich -- even though I know he has both for sale -- the roast beef and the cheese -- I personally would not demand that he put the two together for me on the same sandwich. I know that I'd have to go to a different type of restaurant for that particular sandwich -- a restaurant whose owner's religious beliefs would not conflict with my desire for roast beef and cheese. But I would recognize and respect his religion, and would not make such demands upon him which would obviously conflict with his beliefs, because that's just not my style. And just like I know that if I really were to force him to make me that sandwich -- I mean really force him -- a bolt of lightening will not fall from the sky and strike him dead no sooner than a bolt of lightening would strike dead a devout Christian, or Muslim, or Jewish baker if I were to force them to put two grooms or two brides on top of a wedding cake. I honestly really would just shop somewhere else for that cake.

I think they're going to need to amend, or at least clarify this law if it's as broad and ambiguous as some are saying. My hope is to find enough time this week to actually read it for myself.

[kidyankee764]

Originally Posted by Lalalally

One of the first lessons I learned as a young adult was to never discuss religion or politics in public, because it's lose/lose no matter what your position is That said, and being that this thread joins the two so inextricably, here goes ...

I'm not really sure how I feel about this. At first blush, like most others here, I definitely think discrimination is wrong, and I could certainly understand how some unscrupulous bigots out there could potentially hide behind a law like this for no reason other than they can.

But for the truly religious out there -- of all faiths -- I kind of agree that their duty to their God and to themselves will sometimes trump their duty to me. For instance - never in a million years would I ever consider walking into a kosher restaurant and expect the owner to serve me a roast beef and cheese sandwich -- even though I know he has both for sale -- the roast beef and the cheese -- I personally would not demand that he put the two together for me on the same sandwich. I know that I'd have to go to a different type of restaurant for that particular sandwich -- a restaurant whose owner's religious beliefs would not conflict with my desire for roast beef and cheese. But I would recognize and respect his religion, and would not make such demands upon him which would obviously conflict with his beliefs, because that's just not my style. And just like I know that if I really were to force him to make me that sandwich -- I mean really force him -- a bolt of lightening will not fall from the sky and strike him dead no sooner than a bolt of lightening would strike dead a devout Christian, or Muslim, or Jewish baker if I were to force them to put two grooms or two brides on top of a wedding cake. I honestly really would just shop somewhere else for that cake.

I think they're going to need to amend, or at least clarify this law if it's as broad and ambiguous as some are saying. My hope is to find enough time this week to actually read it for myself.

The difference between the two scenarios is the kosher restaurant wouldn't serve anyone that sandwich, not just a select few people. It's even across the board, thus not discriminatory.

I'm not a fan of the liberal PC movement and I don't identify with liberals on most issues, however here, I can completely understand the outcry across the country.