Arizona lawmakers pass bill to allow faith-based discrimination
- Thread starter SLM
- Start date
Actually the Arizona Law was a response to the entire legitimization of homosexuality, to safeguard religious sentiments from being coerced and threatened by narrow minded political correctness bullies and the rabid bigots of the homosexual lobby. By far the larger threat to freedom on conscience these days.
Him too. Stalin was no more a friend to us Polish Catholics (descendents) than Hitler was. I gave you a thumbs up on this by accident.. but i'll leave it as such for your industriousness in finding German and Russian cyrillic texts.
Last edited:
Sen. Allen would make church mandatory
Allen, as You know, is a Republican from Snowflake, a Tea Party favorite who wants to pretend Arizona is an independent country rather than a state, and who believes government should stay completely out of people lives -- unless she can use her position to help out a son-in-law who got into some hot water over behavior with some of the inmates he was guarding at a women's prison.
But that's another story.
They were debating a gun bill at a legislative committee meeting at the State Capitol this week so, naturally, Allen brought up religion.
This was one of those crazy bills in which lawmakers want people to be able to bring concealed weapons into public buildings. Allen got upset because a few people expressed common sense opposition to the idea. Lawmakers here cannot abide common sense.
Allen said, "Probably we should be debating a bill requiring every American to attend a church of their choice on Sunday to see if we can get back to having a moral rebirth,"
She hinted that guns in public buildings might be necessary until there is a moral rebirth.
"I believe what's happening to our country is that there's a moral erosion of the soul of America," she said.
Allen later told the Arizona Capitol Times that she wished things were more like they were in the 1950s.
( I know what you're thinking: Civil rights problems. Women's rights problems. Voting rights problems. Segregated schools.)
Allen told the Times, "People prayed, people went to church. I remember on Sundays the stores were closed. The biggest thing is religion was kicked out of our public places, out of our schools."
Sen. Allen would make church mandatory. God help us.
Allen, as You know, is a Republican from Snowflake, a Tea Party favorite who wants to pretend Arizona is an independent country rather than a state, and who believes government should stay completely out of people lives -- unless she can use her position to help out a son-in-law who got into some hot water over behavior with some of the inmates he was guarding at a women's prison.
But that's another story.
They were debating a gun bill at a legislative committee meeting at the State Capitol this week so, naturally, Allen brought up religion.
This was one of those crazy bills in which lawmakers want people to be able to bring concealed weapons into public buildings. Allen got upset because a few people expressed common sense opposition to the idea. Lawmakers here cannot abide common sense.
Allen said, "Probably we should be debating a bill requiring every American to attend a church of their choice on Sunday to see if we can get back to having a moral rebirth,"
She hinted that guns in public buildings might be necessary until there is a moral rebirth.
"I believe what's happening to our country is that there's a moral erosion of the soul of America," she said.
Allen later told the Arizona Capitol Times that she wished things were more like they were in the 1950s.
( I know what you're thinking: Civil rights problems. Women's rights problems. Voting rights problems. Segregated schools.)
Allen told the Times, "People prayed, people went to church. I remember on Sundays the stores were closed. The biggest thing is religion was kicked out of our public places, out of our schools."
Sen. Allen would make church mandatory. God help us.
Well my home state is famous for it's share of azzholes but like everywhere else, if you look beyond the first impression, you may find a decent person or two.
I'd still prefer living somewhere else however
I'd still prefer living somewhere else however
This legislation should not be required. Everyone should have the right to live and operate their business the way they want. If they want to exclude serving someone, then that is their right, and everyone else has the right to not attend their business if they don't agree with how that business is run. No one should be forced to do something that they feel is against their conscience.
Here's a question. Will the restaurants now be asking as you are waiting to be seated what your sexual preference is? Ridiculous. And actually, damn stupid.
It's a stupid question. Should I take it as your level of intelligence? LGBT rights have not always been what they are. When LGBT's had no rights, did restaurants ask if one was gay? If not, then I doubt they would ask now. What I see this whole thing as, is the LGBT lobby going too far. Here in Canada a few shops have been sued, and lost, for refusing to serve gays. This is not right. Taking away one persons right to give YOU, what amounts to, more rights. It's not like there are not lots of other places that don't give a rats a$$ what your sexual preferences are, skin colour, nationality, etc. For some, Homosexuality is an abomination. They feel that even the act of serving someone is the same as supporting that life style. In their mind and mores, doing such a thing puts their eternal soul at risk. Whether you agree with that or not, is irrelevant. It is their beliefs. There are other stores that can be used.
How would you know if the person or persons seeking your services were of a particular sexual orientation loud mouth? Same ole ignorant perception. Must be a ditto head. You should live here.
Walk straight ahead your neck seems to be frozen maybe a chiropractor is in order Mr. Know it all.
Walk straight ahead your neck seems to be frozen maybe a chiropractor is in order Mr. Know it all.
Limited brain capacity, I see. Unable to see beyond your own limited, biased, bigoted nose.
2 examples from Canada.
Wedding dress store, wedding cake bakery. Both were targeted by gays to be set up as an example. Try opening your eyes and seeing beyond what you are told.
No it's an accurate title and it's been explained why.
Like this?
or this?
or maybe this?
Or maybe why stop there? Why not require customers to show proof of their political affiliation prior to service as well? That way you can just draw battle lines everywhere. Wouldn't that be fabulous.
It was a stupid bill and it would have made an asinine law.
and how long would any of those establishments stay in business today?
I use to spend a minimal amount of time in my younger days discussing certain issue with morons who cannot seem to grasp what the fvck the issue was about. Now, I grow weary of idiots. Nothing changes except my tolerance for loudmouth representatives of the so called "morality" police. You know nothing of morality.Talk with someone else I'm tired of your sorry azz.
Wow, preach, brother!
Mind you, I agree with gerryh on the substance, though I have different reasons. Mostly I'm hoping the hate will lead to violence.
It is all about hatred sir,,,which is a world away from morality.That's just my opinion. Also I have no time for pukes that hurl insults behind the safety of a computer.
One wonders what agreement they reached.....Muslim Barber-Gay woman
Muslim barbers and woman whose hair they wouldn’t cut resolve dispute with ‘a good talk’ | Toronto Star
Muslim barbers and woman whose hair they wouldn’t cut resolve dispute with ‘a good talk’ | Toronto Star
Actually, to see the moron, look in the mirror. YOU are now the one that is bigoted and taking away "rights", not me. I supported gay rights. I supported SSM. What I don't support is taking away others rights which is what has happened. What is happening now, is if you don't support the LGBT lobby 110%, if you don't agree with doing things "their way", then tough shyte, we will force you to do it "our way". There are those in the LGBT lobby that talk of forcing ALL the Churches to allow SSM. WTF?
That's another one. WTF? Why the hell would you want to force someone to do or allow something that is fully against their religion?