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.
To be fair, Mtn States, people have been active on this issue for decades, and especially so the past 5 years. Certainly anything a person can do to facilitate discussion is helpful, but I'm not seeing a lot of discussion taking place. I'm seeing people getting ignored and they are tired of it.
People have tried getting "Add the Words" heard for 8 years. They refuse to allow it to be heard. Butch Otter speaks out of both sides of his mouth. When the opportunity for the public to be heard in the "religious freedom" hearing, the legislature purposefully scheduled the hearing in the smallest room in the Statehouse, and put nearly 300 people into overflow rooms with only audio, but no video, feed. People testified for 4 hours before they went to vote. Of the nearly 150 people that got a chance to speak, 1 person was in favor of the bill. ONE.
And what do you think happened? They waxed poetic about democracy at work and how they appreciated the comments, then went right ahead and voted to move the bill into general order.
They don't listen. And yet, they get voted into office simply because they have an R next to their name. You know as well as I do that is par for the course here in Idaho.
It is symbolic that protesters are standing silent with their hands over their mouths and allowing themselves to get arrested. They are speaking through their actions, while showing how not only are they being silenced, but the legislators are saying nothing. Not when former politicians speak. Not when the business community and organizations speak. Not when the media is calling them out.
If you've followed this issue through social media, by reading the comments in the Statesman, or on Facebook... the support seems significant. And yet, they still don't listen.
Utah, Texas, and a handful of other states have recently overturned gay marriage bans, and are now awaiting appeals to the Circuit courts, before it will eventually end up before SCOTUS. Read the Texas decision. It is the best explanation of why the time has come and why the opposition to gay marriage is illogical, harmful, and hateful. And yet, our state continues to "defend" Idaho's ban on gay marriage and recently allocated $1 million to do so. Talk about wasting money.
I would love for dialogues to happen and for people to vote these ignorant legislators out of office. But, frankly, most people don't care enough about gay marriage to even consider voting for another party, especially when that other party is characterized as a gun-hating, free-spending, health-care-forcing, business-killing party. This is arguably the most conservative this state has ever been, especially with some of the recent newer members. They make Bedke look like a liberal they are so far right. It is amazing some of the things they prioritize in session. Representative Andrus from Lava Hot Springs actually suggested earlier this week that he thought we should build a fence around Yellowstone Nat'l Park.. and he was serious about it.
This nation is as divided as it has ever been, and it is only getting worse. Both parties are broken.
As a caution...this thread is only open to Idaho residents for posting as this should not turn into a broader political debate. If your public profile does not include Idaho, or you don't self-identify as an Idaho resident, your post will be deleted.
He succinctly covers all of the typical rationale against it, including "tradition," procreation reasons, Constitutional arguments against government involvement in marriage, the 14th Amendment and how it applies, federalism/state's right to define marriage, mob rule, and legal precedent.
Utah, Texas, and a handful of other states have recently overturned gay marriage bans, and are now awaiting appeals to the Circuit courts, before it will eventually end up before SCOTUS. Read the Texas decision. It is the best explanation of why the time has come and why the opposition to gay marriage is illogical, harmful, and hateful. And yet, our state continues to "defend" Idaho's ban on gay marriage and recently allocated $1 million to do so. Talk about wasting money.
Great post boisefan88. To clarify, Utah didn't overturn the gay marriage ban, a federal judge (Robert Shelby who actually lives in SLC) basically told the state what to do and it was not what the leaders of that state wanted. Since the appeal, Utah is fighting tooth and nail to keep their ban in place.
I know this is controversial but I will say it again---- a certain religious institution that has more power in Utah and Idaho then in other states is one of our biggest roadblocks. Senator Brent Hill from Rexburg is one of them.
I'm waiting for the day, hopefully soon, when a federal judge overturns Idaho's ban to send a message to our state government.
I think you have some very valid points, Mike. What would you suggest or recommend to get a more civil dialogue happening statewide?
MSR
I'm not sure our current dialog is all that uncivil. Compared to the fiasco of the same law in Arizona, I think Idahoans have been pretty civil already.
Really a lot of creating discussion on anything that pertains to LBGT issues in Idaho lies outside our government. As long as we have some predominant religions here that are anti-gay, I believe it will take some time, and some changes in some of the church policies, to resolve the issue completely. That may require some time with some of the faiths, and less time in others.
But as long as every person in Idaho has the same civil rights, I think that's a good start. I firmly stand for anyone being allowed to worship how they see fit just as much as I stand for every citizen's full equality under our state laws.
As a purely economic issue, I think including the 4 words into the law has no down side. Our reputation for being a conservative state has just as many economic advantages as disadvantages in attracting new and more big business to our state is we can shed the negatives of the past. All we have to do is show we're fair and have a strong desire to improve our education here.
This is exactly how Utah managed to become a real economic powerhouse in the intermountain west, and was able to avoid much of the damage we suffered in the Great Recession. About 20 years ago, Idaho and Utah were about equal in attracting new hi-tech industry, but Idaho's effort faltered while Utah's kept growing. While I think social issues didn't make all the difference, I'm sure they played a part in it. Education surely played a large part as well.
Last edited by banjomike; 02-28-2014 at 11:37 AM..
Banjomike, I used to live in Utah and would say Idaho is better regarding social issues then Utah. Their educational system isn't that much better then Idaho's in rankings but their state government is good at being more accomodating to new companies then Idaho's state government. I think that is the major difference. I feel Utah suffers more then Idaho when it comes to reputation and perceptions from the rest of the country.
Everybody in the United States already has the same rights under the US Constitution,
and unfair discrimination was outlawed in the the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The Constitution trumps perverted sexual deviancy, or at least it should.
If I don't want to do business with homosexuals, I shouldn't be forced to.
And why would they want to anyway? They wouldn't. That's the red herring.
The goal is to punish and destroy any individual or organization that opposes their sick
lifestyle, and they're doing it under the fallacious and false pretense of "equality".
Granting "LGBT rights" to homosexuals at the expense of religious freedom creates inequality.
What part of that don't people get?
Everybody in the United States already has the same rights under the US Constitution,
and unfair discrimination was outlawed in the the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The Constitution trumps perverted sexual deviancy, or at least it should.
If I don't want to do business with homosexuals, I shouldn't be forced to.
And why would they want to anyway? They wouldn't. That's the red herring.
The goal is to punish and destroy any individual or organization that opposes their sick
lifestyle, and they're doing it under the fallacious and false pretense of "equality".
Granting "LGBT rights" to homosexuals at the expense of religious freedom creates inequality.
What part of that don't people get?
Be careful what you say because if you have children, one or more of them might come out gay or if you happen to have grandchildren this could also be the case.
Everybody in the United States already has the same rights under the US Constitution,
and unfair discrimination was outlawed in the the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The Constitution trumps perverted sexual deviancy, or at least it should.
If I don't want to do business with homosexuals, I shouldn't be forced to.
And why would they want to anyway? They wouldn't. That's the red herring.
The goal is to punish and destroy any individual or organization that opposes their sick
lifestyle, and they're doing it under the fallacious and false pretense of "equality".
Granting "LGBT rights" to homosexuals at the expense of religious freedom creates inequality.
What part of that don't people get?
You're right, everyone DOES have the same rights under the US Constitution, including the 14th Amendment. I'm glad you agree and therefore support gay marriage.
I also see you take sexual deviancy to mean sexual relations that aren't consented to, such as rape, incest, bestiality, and sexual relations involving minors, who cannot legally consent... and you DON'T mean sexual relations between consenting adults. I'm glad you like freedom too!
If you don't want to do business with homosexuals, or any other class, you aren't forced to. Nor are you forced to contract with them. However, if you do business in the public sphere in most (not all) sectors, you are not allowed to discriminate, as per the US Constitution, which I know you respect.
Their is no punishment or destruction, only the desire for respect and tolerance. No one has ever suggested you cannot have your religious beliefs nor have an opinion, no matter how ridiculous it might be. Further, adding the words or allowing gay marriage in no way harms your religious beliefs nor your relationship with your particular savior. It's amazing how Jesus is invoked in expressing hateful, intolerant, spiteful views of your fellow man, when that is expressly opposite of what he very plainly said.
I'm glad we had this rational, open minded conversation.
Everybody in the United States already has the same rights under the US Constitution,
and unfair discrimination was outlawed in the the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The Constitution trumps perverted sexual deviancy, or at least it should.
If I don't want to do business with homosexuals, I shouldn't be forced to.
And why would they want to anyway? They wouldn't. That's the red herring.
The goal is to punish and destroy any individual or organization that opposes their sick
lifestyle, and they're doing it under the fallacious and false pretense of "equality".
Granting "LGBT rights" to homosexuals at the expense of religious freedom creates inequality.
What part of that don't people get?
The Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. It doesn't say anything about sexual orientation.
I haven't weighed in on this issue because I honestly don't keep up with the issue, but reading this thread raises some interesting questions.
1. The perception that large businesses may or may not have about the state of Idaho, and how that impacts their decisions re: whether or not to open here. Do we even KNOW (for certain) whether that has come into play in the past re: large companies? If it has, whose responsibility is it to set the record straight re: the NID nazis (chambers, legislators, small business associations - who do we have in the state to aggressively lobby for consideration of our state to large business start-ups/expansions?)
2. Should private businesses (that do not receive government funding) be forced to provide services or sell products to those they do not want to do business with?
3. Where is the line between core personal beliefs and values, and discrimination? I know that's moving away from a specifically Idaho issue but citizens of this state are going to have to ask that question eventually.
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.
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.
