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.
You have no clue. The legislature went against the will of the people when they passed all these pro-homosexual laws in the first place, and activist courts force it on people too (the original civil union law, for example, or giving custody of that child to that lesbian instead of the mother). Some people have no idea how corrupt and whacky the Vermont government is.
Most people agree with these laws. Also, the law isn't simply "pro-homosexual." It protects heterosexuals too (and black people, white people, red people, yellow people, married people, single people, men, women, the intersexed, Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Hispanics, Irish-Americans, Italian-Americans, the handicapped etc, etc, etc, etc, etc).
Most people agree with these laws. Also, the law isn't simply "pro-homosexual." It protects heterosexuals too (and black people, white people, red people, yellow people, married people, single people, men, women, the intersexed, Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Hispanics, Irish-Americans, Italian-Americans, the handicapped etc, etc, etc, etc, etc).
Judging from responses to this incident in this state, I think otherwise. The majority are not in agreement with what's happening.
Here's the problem with your argument. Your argument was used prior to 1965 to deny Blacks on a massive scale access to restaurants, hotels, and other places of public accomodation.
Judging from responses to this incident in this state, I think otherwise. The majority are not in agreement with what's happening.
Um, do you have a poll on this incident?
A large majority of people support anti-discrimination laws as applied to places of public accommodation. Every single state, as well as the feds, have such a law and have for 5 or so decades.
Many states have added "sexual orientation" to their state law - the first to do so was Wisconsin in 1982. Vermont added sexual orientation in 1992 with overwhelming public support. I doubt that support has weakened in the last 19 years.
Pennsylvania is the next state poised add sexual orientation to it's law. A bill to do so is currently working its way through the process. Public polls show about 70% of Pennsylvanians favor this. Here are the states that have the same law as Vermont covering sexual orientation in its public accommodation anti-discrimination law:
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Hawaii
Illinois
Iowa
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Minnesota
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
Oregon
Rhode Island
Vermont
Washington
Wisconsin
A large majority of people support anti-discrimination laws as applied to places of public accommodation. Every single state, as well as the feds, have such a law and have for 5 or so decades.
Many states have added "sexual orientation" to their state law - the first to do so was Wisconsin in 1982. Vermont added sexual orientation in 1992 with overwhelming public support. I doubt that support has weakened in the last 19 years.
Pennsylvania is the next state poised add sexual orientation to it's law. A bill to do so is currently working its way through the process. Public polls show about 70% of Pennsylvanians favor this. Here are the states that have the same law as Vermont covering sexual orientation in its public accommodation anti-discrimination law:
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Hawaii
Illinois
Iowa
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Minnesota
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
Oregon
Rhode Island
Vermont
Washington
Wisconsin
Of course not one Southern state on the list. Eventually 37 will have it and 13 won't.
You have no clue. The legislature went against the will of the people when they passed all these pro-homosexual laws in the first place, and activist courts force it on people too (the original civil union law, for example, or giving custody of that child to that lesbian instead of the mother). Some people have no idea how corrupt and whacky the Vermont government is.
If it went against the will of the people, then it was the people's' responsibility to vote those representatives out of office. That's how the system works, and it's entirely fair. Representatives are beholden to the interests of their constituents.
And it sounds like you don't understand how the judicial branch of government works either.
If it went against the will of the people, then it was the people's' responsibility to vote those representatives out of office. That's how the system works, and it's entirely fair. Representatives are beholden to the interests of their constituents.
And it sounds like you don't understand how the judicial branch of government works either.
The democrats have run this state like their private kingdom for years now. A handful of cities/towns run the state. The courts have been packed full of people who tote their line. There were some fishy things happening in the last election as with many others, but nothing ever comes of it. Outside money comes in by the millions to support lawsuits to further radical agendas.
Some of our "leaders" who created these laws are so popular one of their cars was acquired and burned in the capitol in a demonstration years ago.
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.
