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.
I think rejecting customers for their beliefs is bad business and a sign a poor character, however, I believe that every person has a right to associate with whoever they choose (which is protected in our constitution) and to not associate with whoever they choose (which unfortunately the framers were silent in regards to). I hold a person's right of disassociation, no matter how reprehensible I find the reason for doing so, in higher regards than a person's so-called right to visit private establishments where they are unwelcome.
Every business owner in Indiana (and every other state) has done business with, and performed services for, gay people. They just didn't know they were gay. There's a difference between "being" and "flaunting". I'm not asking anyone to go back into the closet. Come out to anybody you want. But don't go crying to Nanny govt if some people dislike having your sexuality crammed down their throats.
I don't go around wearing T-shirts and such proclaming my heterosexuality. It's nobody else's business. I treat business owners with the respect they deserve, and give them my money for a product or service that I need, and they are happy to provide. That's what they are in business to do. They want to do business with the community at large. They just don't want their noses rubbed in somebody else's personal and sexual lives. It's not business-like.
It's just more hoopla at the state level, which will be decided once and for all this summer by SCOTUS. Once it is, this law will either not be needed or will be unconstitutional.
But it's a good campaign strategy to appear that you are actually doing something.
Not true. Even if the Supreme Court legalizes gay marriage, there is no inherent legal principle that forbids discrimination by private businesses against anyone really. Thus, for instance, if the Civil Rights Act was repealed, private businesses would be permitted to discriminate against blacks and women. The Constitution on its face generally prohibits the government from acting in a certain way. While the government can ban certain actions through the proper legislative process, there are no mandatory protections against private discrimination. Case in point: the law in question could be struck down by the courts tomorrow, but there would be nothing in its place forcing private businesses from serving gays, etc., as there are no constitutional provisions (either in the Federal or Indiana constitutions) prohibiting such and there is no legislative act covering those jurisdictions forcing the same.
Anyone heard of segregation? No doubt those supporting refusal to gay customers would like to return to those days. What happens when a straight person is wrongly thought to be gay. Maybe we could start making gays wear something on their clothes. What do you think of a pink triangle? Any takers? And all this controversy mostly because the bigoted believe they support a religion of brotherly love and compassion. Puh-leeze. Grow up already you haters.
Hooray for bigotry, I guess. How this will be enforced, I don't know. How are business owners to know who is and isn't gay? Contrary to many beliefs, it often isn't that obvious.
If a religious business owner finds out after the fact that they serviced a gay patron, will they sue?
What if they try to discriminate against someone who isn't gay, can that person sue (e.g., "Kelly" and "Taylor" want a wedding cake and the baker wrongly assumes that they are both men or women)?
Will they discriminate against the children or relatives of LGBT people (say, someone goes to a bakery to buy their gay auntie a cake)?
What about businesses that also serve the LGBT community, can they discriminate against those (e.g., a shelter that takes in LGBT youth/people trying to get a plumber/electrician/etc)?
And people are so focused about the LGBT factor (as right they should be) but remember, this is a "religion freedom" bill. Does this mean that radical Muslim business owners can refuse to provide services to non-Muslims?
Can Scientologists refuse service to psychiatrists?
Can any religion go through whatever religious book they have on hand and find a passage that allows them to discriminate against women, POC, or people that aren't a part of their religion?
I don't know the answers to these questions, I'm legitimately asking b/c the bill is hazy as ****.
A better measure, one that I would have supported, would be to limit this bill to religious institutions only (IIRC, IL has such a bill). Instead, they've made it so that any business in IN can discriminate (and let's not split hairs here, that is EXACTLY what this bill is designed to do).
IN is going to feel the economic repercussions, that's for sure. Myself and several other people I know have sworn off Gen Con if this bill passed and even Gen Con itself has said that it will move if this bill passed (for those who don't know, Gen Con is a massive gaming convention and gets visitors worldwide). Other conventions may and will likely follow suit. People will no longer want to shop at IN businesses in fear of being wrongly discriminated against.
Personally, I would LOVE to see these people get trolled, i.e., have them unwittingly service a LGBT person who then advertises this (e.g., a 5 star YELP review for a baker for their gay wedding cake). I think it would serve these people right and show the difficulty in adhering to such a silly law.
But hey, if that's the gamble they want to take, go for it. It's their pockets that will be hurting- well, their pockets and their reputations as it becomes obvious that they are on the wrong side of history. Sucks for Indianapolis though, since, according to reports, the Republican mayor of that city was against this bill but it will be his city that gets the brunt of the boycotts since it's the main city in IN.
Oh, and I forgot to ask this: what about people with service dogs? Since many Muslims are against dogs, does this mean they can discriminate against people w/ service dogs? This is already an issues in places w/ large Muslim populations (e.g., Muslim cab drivers not wanting to pick up people w/ dogs). So would this law trump ADA laws?
Religious freedom restoration act. Provides that a state or local government action may not substantially burden a person's right to the exercise of religion unless it is demonstrated that applying the burden to the person's exercise of religion is: (1) essential to further a compelling governmental interest; and (2) the least restrictive means of furthering the compelling governmental interest. Provides that a person whose exercise of religion has been substantially burdened, or is likely to be substantially burdened, by a state or local government action may assert the burden as a claim or defense in a judicial proceeding, regardless of whether the state or a political subdivision of the state is a party to the judicial proceeding. Allows a person who asserts a burden as a claim or defense to obtain appropriate relief, including: (1) injunctive relief; (2) declaratory relief; (3) compensatory damages; and (4) recovery of court costs and reasonable attorney's fees.
It essentially says someone may assert their right of religious freedom as an affirmative defense against a government action.
The cases where this has come up is where a florist, a baker and photographer have been sued because they didn't want to be involved in a gay wedding.
I find it wholly appropriate that a person not be compelled to participate in something their religious view disapproves of.
Why do you think it is okay to make a florist prepare arrangements for something they object to?
Why would a gay couple want someone who disapproves of them involved in their wedding?
The only ones full of hate are those who seek to remove our religious freedoms. This issue isn't about gay people. It's about us....all of us...and the push by a fringe group of wackos to trample on our rights. Once they have the Christians under their control, they will come after you.
Does it force the business owner to put a conspicuous sign on the front door of their business stating ...
THIS BUSINESS WILL NOT SERVE __________ ?
That should be MANDATORY.
That should take care of any 'government action' against a business. If people know in advance, they will not have to go through the humiliation of finding out their business is not wanted.
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.
