Posted on 02/25/2014 9:18:45 AM PST by Olog-hai
Three Republicans who supported a bill bolstering the rights of business owners to refuse service to gays and others on the basis of religion reversed course Monday and asked the governor to veto the controversial measure.
Republican state Sens. Adam Driggs, Steve Pierce and Bob Worsley wrote a letter to Gov. Jan Brewer pleading for her to reject SB 1062. The measure is intended to support business owners who refuse service to gays and others because they believe serving them violates the practice and observance of their religion. …
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
How about his criticism of Pharisees and Sadducees?
No, but in this they are right. Otherwise, where does it end? You get that business license and you are subject to the rules.
Criticism of the Pharisees and Sadducees had more to do with pointing out the corruption of religious and government figures.
I meant they hate religious freedom NOW, since they are asking Brewer to veto the bill.
There’s a defined end in the law.
And a church is its members.
Merely saying “you get the business license and you’re subject to the rules” is a justification of any type of market, even communism.
Next if you don’t vote for a gay person, that’s discrimination.
godless weenies
I understand and agree with your position as it applies to NON-emergency businesses like catering services, restaurants, retail stores, gas stations, banks, etc. However, would 1062 apply also to emergency service providers, such as paramedics at the scene of a major accident or a doctor in a hospital emergency ward? Would the paramedic/doctor be protected by 1062 to refuse to provide essential medical services to someone with life-threatening injuries if he or she believes the person is gay?
No, were not talking about going into a halal butcher and demanding they sell you some ham.
They simply wouldn't have that product in stock, and I hope you'd agree that they shouldn't be FORCED to. Notice, though that pharmacies HAVE been forced to stock abortofacients.
Nor is it the case of a baker refusing to sell cakes to a gay person, or gay couple.
However if said couple (or anyone) came in and requested say a penis-shaped cake for a bachelorette party, would that be considered "discrimination" if the baker refuses to make it on religious grounds?
After all, it's a bakery, and they have the equipment to make such a cake.
Sure the people wanting the penis cake COULD go to the erotic bakery, but they want to FORCE the religious cake maker to obey.
Do you not see the difference?
Not quite the same thing unless penis shaped cakes are in your inventory. Like I said earlier, it's a dumb law and will accomplish nothing except to cause more trouble. If a "religious" person limits their wares to acceptable products and they are sold in the normal course of their business how are they violating their conscience? God will judge everything ultimately.
I meant they hate religious freedom NOW, since they are asking Brewer to veto the bill.
Oh yeah, I can see that now.
despite media kissing up to gays, only 21 states have anti-discrimination laws. back in nov. ‘13, gop lobbyists pushed the senate to add gay rights to federal civil rights laws. passed the senate. but boehner refuses to bring the bill up. guess boehner is good for something after all.
Good question. I think a careful reading of the bill may give you the answer.
http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/51leg/2r/bills/sb1062p.pdf
I think public safety would fall within compelling government interest, thus requiring equal treatment in that regard.
It also addresses substantial burden. I don’t believe this legislation would allow unchecked discrimination. Selling a loaf of bread to a homosexual would probably not qualify as a substantial burden. As public morals continue to decline, I can foresee a time when being forced to create a homosexual “wedding” cake may not be recognized as a substantial burden, and this legislation would become worthless.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.