Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-17-2014, 12:35 PM
 
Location: texas
9,127 posts, read 7,941,165 times
Reputation: 2385

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Versatile View Post
Critically received Memphis chef Kelly English this week offered to host a political fundraiser to unseat Sen. Brian Kelsey after reading that the Republican party member had sponsored Senate Bill 2566, which would allow individuals or religious organizations with "strong religious beliefs" to refuse goods and services that further same-sex unions in Tennessee. It is commonly being referred to as the "Turn Away the Gays" bill.



Tennessee 'Turn Away the Gays' Bill Feels Heat from Memphis Chef - ABC News
So if you go to church on Easter, Christmas and cinco de Mayo, is that "strong religious beliefs" enough to turn back gays?

How would one's religious beliefs be measured? Who gets to determin...the state?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-17-2014, 12:37 PM
 
Location: Middle of nowhere
24,260 posts, read 14,202,347 times
Reputation: 9895
Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok View Post
But here's the thing. It's not about sexual orientation in general, it's about same-sex unions specifically and only in the case of religious objections. That's a bit different.

I see both sides on this. (I should mention I'm 100% for gay marriage.)

Not to mention...this is just affirming rights that already do exist as whogo pointed out.
Why only same sex unions? Why not ANY union that a persons religious beliefs object to? Why only religious beliefs? What if a non religious person has an objection to mixed race or mixed religion unions? Should they be allowed to discriminate against those people?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2014, 12:37 PM
 
Location: Sango, TN
24,868 posts, read 24,381,847 times
Reputation: 8672
Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok View Post
It's a proposed state law so why would you email your congressman?
Because I live in Tennessee, and I expect my State Senator to oppose the bill
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2014, 12:39 PM
 
Location: Sango, TN
24,868 posts, read 24,381,847 times
Reputation: 8672
Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok View Post
But here's the thing. It's not about sexual orientation in general, it's about same-sex unions specifically and only in the case of religious objections. That's a bit different.

I see both sides on this. (I should mention I'm 100% for gay marriage.)

Not to mention...this is just affirming rights that already do exist as whogo pointed out.
If we are going to have civil rights for some, then its civil rights for all.

If you don't want civil rights for all, then we should have civil rights for none.

Thats why.

Religious arguments are to be kept separate from state and federal law.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2014, 12:43 PM
 
Location: Houston
26,979 posts, read 15,883,903 times
Reputation: 11259
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
Why only same sex unions? Why not ANY union that a persons religious beliefs object to? Why only religious beliefs? What if a non religious person has an objection to mixed race or mixed religion unions? Should they be allowed to discriminate against those people?

Yes. The problem is that issue was decided wrongly long ago. Let me throw in the fact I married outside my race. This has nothing to do with approval of such actions. It is just my belief such actions should not be illegal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2014, 12:47 PM
 
Location: Houston
26,979 posts, read 15,883,903 times
Reputation: 11259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979 View Post
If we are going to have civil rights for some, then its civil rights for all.
Do you believe the ugly should also be a protected class and the NYC clubs that use looks as a criteria to who they let in should change their practices?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2014, 12:47 PM
 
Location: texas
9,127 posts, read 7,941,165 times
Reputation: 2385
I married outside my race too. I married a human.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2014, 12:48 PM
 
Location: Texas
14,975 posts, read 16,456,814 times
Reputation: 4586
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
Why only same sex unions? Why not ANY union that a persons religious beliefs object to? Why only religious beliefs? What if a non religious person has an objection to mixed race or mixed religion unions? Should they be allowed to discriminate against those people?
If it's an actual religion that specifies that a certain type of union is wrong and they are attending religious services, etc., then I guess yes. Again, like I said, I can't make up my mind on this.

Someone who works for a governmental entity - hell no (not to mention that would be unconstitutional IMO). I'd also say hell no when talking about a private business that receives any kind of public funds.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2014, 12:49 PM
 
Location: Montreal, Quebec
15,080 posts, read 14,320,820 times
Reputation: 9789
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
Why only same sex unions? Why not ANY union that a persons religious beliefs object to? Why only religious beliefs? What if a non religious person has an objection to mixed race or mixed religion unions? Should they be allowed to discriminate against those people?
How about couples living in sin or knowing each other in the biblical sense? How about liars or adulterers?
They can refuse services to them, as well? Soon, nobody will be allowed service anywhere.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2014, 12:49 PM
 
Location: Texas
14,975 posts, read 16,456,814 times
Reputation: 4586
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979 View Post
If we are going to have civil rights for some, then its civil rights for all.

If you don't want civil rights for all, then we should have civil rights for none.

Thats why.

Religious arguments are to be kept separate from state and federal law.
Except this is about the state defending the right of people to support their religious beliefs.
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:


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 > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

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