Kansas Really Damn Close To Legalizing Anti-Gay Discrimination

[Kuya]

There are probably still a lot of white shop owners who hate blacks but serve them anyway because money is green no matter who it comes from.

And also because they cannot legally turn them away for being black.

[Gredival]

The bakery case (I believe from Colorado) is a good example, the gay couple was upset because a religious man refused to make a cake for their wedding. If I were a gay person (obviously I am not and thus I might be completely different, but if I were a gay person who is essentially the same as I am now, just into chicks), I would have probably been like "All right, fuck you buddy, I'll take my business elsewhere," and then told all my friends not to go there because they're bigots. Then if the outrage at their bigotry is high enough, they'll lose business and the free market will sort itself out. But if they had simply said, "We're booked up, sorry guys, we can't," while secretly meaning but never explicitly stating, "Go elsewhere, homos," would that have changed it?

From a legal standpoint? Totally. An admission of discriminatory intent like "We don't serve homosexuals/hispanics/blacks/etc." is basically an outright admission of guilt. But when there's a legitimate nondiscriminatory reason provided for an action, then the burden of proof shifts to the charging party to either prove the reason was illegitimate and/or pretextual.

The caveat here is that sexual orientation is not recognized as a suspect or quasi-suspect class like race, gender, religion, etc. under federal anti-discrimination statutes, and therefore does not fall under the jurisdiction of the Equal Protection or Due Process clauses of the Constitution. So there's usually gray area to discriminate. That's why I was interested in the specific court decision for that case to see how the judge ruled that sexual orientation discrimination as legally prohibited discrimination.

[Aksannyi]

And also because they cannot legally turn them away for being black.

Obviously, but you get the point I was making.

[Meresgi]

And also because they cannot legally turn them away for being black.

But they can call the cops on them afterwards! (lol NYC)

[Kuya]

Obviously, but you get the point I was making.

Yes, you also cannot legally turn someone away for being a christian, so it seems they enjoy a right they don't want to share with gay people.

[Serra]

This seems like the most current thread for this:

A federal judge in San Antonio overturned the Texas ban on same-sex marriage, ruling that the prohibition is unconstitutional and stigmatizes the relationship of gay couples in the conservative state.

The ruling by U.S. District Judge Orlando Garcia does not allow same-sex couples to immediately marry because he stayed the injunction pending any appeal.

http://www.latimes.com/nation/nation...,2668246.story
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/texas-gay...an-struck-down

Texas, now more progressive on gay marriage than 32 other states (kinda, but not really..). Also, calling it now -- in 50 years, Texas will be saying that they were in the first 50% of states to allow gay marriage.

[Restrat]

"We lead the South in acceptance"!

[Jaybar]

"We lead the South in acceptance"!

For WASSPs. Ain't got room for the WASGPs.

[Serra]

I don't have an article to link, but hats off to the NFL. As much as they get criticized for things like the Michael Sam debate going on, they've done something good today by saying they'll consider pulling the Super Bowl out of Arizona (currently scheduled to be played in Arizona next year). They've actually done this to Arizona before (in the 90s when Arizona wouldn't hold MLK day), so a good chance that if Brewer passes it, they'll pull out.

[Waraji]

They've actually done this to Arizona before (in the 90s when Arizona wouldn't hold MLK day), so a good chance that if Brewer passes it, they'll pull out.

That was back in 1987 after the governor had signed an executive order of which was rescinded by the new governor. I think they finally got it going back in 1993 via ballots, due to pressure from media/companies including the NFL. There wouldn't be a Superbowl held there until 1996.

If this goes through, man there will be hell to pay. They are going to get so much more shit than the previous fiasco in 2010 (or was it 09).

[Waraji]

Welp.

http://news.yahoo.com/arizona-govern...011021802.html

Arizona governor vetoes controversial anti-gay, ‘religious freedom’ bill

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer announced that she has vetoed a bill that would have allowed state businesses to discriminate against gay and lesbian customers.

“The bill is broadly worded and could result in unintended and negative consequences," Brewer told reporters at a press conference on Wednesday. "After weighing all of the arguments I have vetoed Senate Bill 1062 moments ago.”

Brewer made her remarks during a press conference announced with little notice on Wednesday evening.

Despite the short notice, a large crowd of demonstrators quickly gathered outside the state capital in Phoenix before Brewer made her remarks. The crowd of demonstrators erupted into cheers after Brewer’s announcement.

Senate bill 1062 generated national attention after it was passed by the Republican controlled legislature. However, its momentum quickly stalled after it was criticized by a number of local business leader and the state’s two Republican U.S. Senators, John McCain and Jeff Flake.

“I have protected religious freedoms when there is a present concern,” Brewer said, defending her decision during the press conference. “And I have a record to prove it.”

Despite herself being conservative Republican lawmaker, Brewer used her remarks to criticize the state Senate for making the religious freedom bill a priority over other concerns.

The bill was pushed by the Center for Arizona Policy, a conservative group opposed to same sex marriage.

“This is the first policy bill to cross my desk,” Brewer said. “It does not address a specific concern related to Arizona. I have not heard one example where a business owner’s liberty has been put into jeopardy.”

Brewer said she had previously instructed state lawmakers that “passing a responsible budget that continues Arizona’s economic comeback,” should be the legislature’s top priority.

“I call them like I see them despite the tears or the boos from the crowd,” Brewer said. “I took the necessary time to make the right decision.”

Brewer said she met with attorneys and policy advisers who both supported and opposed the bill. She also offered condolences to religious individuals who feel their freedom is being called into question in light of rapid advancements in gay rights and marriage equality.

“Religious liberty is a core American and Arizona value. So is nondiscrimination,” Brewer said. “Going forward let’s turn the ugliness over Senate bill 1062 into a greater search for greater respect and understanding among all Arizonans and Americans.”

After concluding her remarks, Brewer quickly exited the podium without taking questions from the press.

[Xno Kappa]

Good. I was also glad to see the NFL and a fuckton of other huge corporations tell Brewer "Fuck Arizona" if this shit passed.

[Draginhikari]

Not a big surprised once business interests starting going against the bill. If there is anything that gets a politician to act in a opposite direction it's business interest. It was just the money was on the progressive side of the issue in this particular case.

[ringthree]

Best conservative whine after the Brewer veto:

CNN led full court media press to take away rights of Christians. Just the beginning. Using tolerance as weapon against us. Wake up.

TOLERANCE IS A WEAPON! WAKE UP AMERICA!

[kuronosan]

I've taken part in these sorts of debates over Facebook in the last few weeks.

Apparently if you force your will over others, you're doing God's work. But, if you advocate freedom and tolerance for all people apparently you are trying to oppress their religion.

It's just like people of "devout" religious faith to try to put their tail between their legs when their bigoted beliefs are called into question, but it's totally cool for them to do the same because it's "God's Will".

[Jaybar]

Incoming Christian schism, 2040 - the oppressed vs. the tolerant.

[Acevalefor]

Those religious people have a constitutional freedom to discriminate!

[kuronosan]

Those religious people have a constitutional freedom to discriminate!

Seriously. When it comes to oppression it's okay because it's the word of God. When it comes to the law of the land, fuck what Jesus said, we're going with the Bible.

[Acevalefor]

It's a battle that cannot be won. Either you have religious freedom to discriminate and can use the bible as justification, or you are being discriminated against and your religious freedom has been taken from you in the name of equality and tolerance.

[Aksannyi]

It's a battle that cannot be won. Either you have religious freedom to discriminate and can use the bible as justification, or you are being discriminated against and your religious freedom has been taken from you in the name of equality and tolerance.

Basically this, though I am of the firm belief that they can hang out with whoever they want outside of their professional lives, but just like the rest of us, you'll have to put up with people/things you don't like when you're at work. Plenty of people I encounter at work every day that I don't want to deal with, but I suck it up. When I'm off the clock, I can chill with whoever I want.