Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Sources: Brewer Will Veto Gay Discrimination Law
http://www.newsmax.com ^ | FHebruary 25, 2014 | Drew MacKenzie

Posted on 02/25/2014 2:59:04 PM PST by NKP_Vet

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer will veto a controversial bill that would allow business owners to refuse service to gays and lesbians on the grounds of their religious conviction, NBC News is reporting via Twitter.

More: Brewer "doesn't want to take any actions that could jeopardize the economic momentum" in Arizona, source says

How 1 Free Guide Saved This American's Retirement Home | Newsfront Tags: Gay Marriage | Arizona | gay | discrimination | Jan Brewer Sources: Brewer Will Veto Gay Discrimination Law

Tuesday, 25 Feb 2014 01:29 PM

By Drew MacKenzie Share: A A | Email Us | Print | Forward Article | Get Short Link Copy Shortlink

0 inShare

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer will veto a controversial bill that would allow business owners to refuse service to gays and lesbians on the grounds of their religious conviction, NBC News is reporting via Twitter.

Brewer has been under intense pressure from business groups and political leaders to diffuse the situation and veto the legislation which they fear will draw unnecessary attention to Arizona a year before it hosts the next Super Bowl and following economic losses on controversial immigration stances.

(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Arizona
KEYWORDS: antichristianbigotry; az2014; brewer; homosexualagenda
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-93 next last
My bet is she caves. She'll be scared that republicans will be blamed if homo-friendly NFL and Apple take their business elsewhere. She also can't run for reelection and last time I checked a democrat was the leading contender to replace her. So she will put party and politics over the word of God.....the except same thing 99% of worthless republicans do every day of the week.
1 posted on 02/25/2014 2:59:04 PM PST by NKP_Vet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

So sad she’ll leave behind this legacy of caving into sodomites.


2 posted on 02/25/2014 3:03:30 PM PST by zerosix (Native Sunflower)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

Dirty Brewer.


3 posted on 02/25/2014 3:03:51 PM PST by Third Person
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

The bill does not mention gays. This is a religious freedom law. The legislature made the mistake of not having press releases before it went public instead of letting the media define what they passed.


4 posted on 02/25/2014 3:03:53 PM PST by DLfromthedesert (She accomplished nothing: should have stayed at home and baked cookies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet
And people wonder why God strongly advised the ancient Hebrews against allowing this type of behavior in their society.
They destroy everything they come in contact with.
5 posted on 02/25/2014 3:03:56 PM PST by Psalm 73 ("Gentlemen, you can't fight in here - this is the War Room".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet
I just read the one page bill (not sure if it was the final version sent to the governor). I do have problems with certain provisions... It is certainly not an absolute religious freedom bill. It allows for the state to regulate for “compelling interest”. I wonder if the state could force you to sell a cake to a gay couple to prevent economic boycott of the state- seems like a compelling interest.
6 posted on 02/25/2014 3:04:03 PM PST by 11th Commandment ("THOSE WHO TIRE LOSE")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

More misleading reporting with propaganda lies: it’s not a “Gay Discrimination Law”.


7 posted on 02/25/2014 3:06:00 PM PST by Fledermaus (If we here in TN can't get rid of the worthless Lamar, it's over.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

So veto the “gay discrimination law” so gays can discriminate against Christians exercising their right to free association and freedom of religion. Nice.


8 posted on 02/25/2014 3:08:03 PM PST by Ironfocus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

Another one bites the dust?


9 posted on 02/25/2014 3:08:41 PM PST by x1stcav ("The past is a foreign country: they do things differently there.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

10 posted on 02/25/2014 3:09:03 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet (I will raise $2M for Sarah Palin's next run, what will you do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

God help us if the country clubbers at the Chamber of Commerce don’t make money. we surely should not stand in their way. In fact we should just open the borders and allow everybody want to come in just so they can have cheap labor also and put the rest of us out of work. (sarcasm)


11 posted on 02/25/2014 3:11:43 PM PST by amnestynone (Lindsey Graham is feckless, duplicitous, treacherous, double dealing backstabbing Corksucker.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

How many electoral votes did Barry Goldwater get? Purity in intent rarely works in real life. I’m against gay marriage AND this bill. It goes WAY over the top. It would also give practitioners of Islam a wide-open door to Sharia law. I doubt you would want that result.

Just because the lesser of two evils is evil doesn’t mean you don’t have to live with one of those options sometimes. This law helps very few people and has the words UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES written all over it.

This is just ‘crony capitalism’ practiced by our side.


12 posted on 02/25/2014 3:11:46 PM PST by LRoggy (Peter's Son's Business)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

These days, the First Amendment - indeed, the entire constitution - means nothing to our professional pols.


13 posted on 02/25/2014 3:12:09 PM PST by Jack Hammer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LRoggy

Well said.


14 posted on 02/25/2014 3:14:48 PM PST by SueRae (It isn't over. In God We Trust.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

So another “conservative” bites the dust...too bad she doesn’t have another letter to hand Obozo...it worked so well the last time...so the NFL rules, McCain influences and AZ is off my list to visit.


15 posted on 02/25/2014 3:16:43 PM PST by matginzac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

Coward.


16 posted on 02/25/2014 3:17:22 PM PST by icwhatudo (Low taxes and less spending in Sodom and Gomorrah is not my idea of a conservative victory)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet
Brewer has been under intense pressure from business groups and political leaders to diffuse the situation...

Is that like defusing a situation? (And yes, she's going to Veto.)

17 posted on 02/25/2014 3:18:52 PM PST by Cyber Liberty (H.L. Mencken: "The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: amnestynone
God help us if the country clubbers at the Chamber of Commerce don’t make money. we surely should not stand in their way..

These are the same corporatists that steamrollered the boy scouts and this is how they plan to force homo marriage nationwide - with economic blackmail.

18 posted on 02/25/2014 3:19:36 PM PST by Menehune56 ("Let them hate so long as they fear" (Oderint Dum Metuant), Lucius Accius (170 BC - 86 BC))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: DLfromthedesert

I disagree with the notion this will inhibit business growth.

Declaring religious freedom will attract lots of businesses and God fearing, believing tolerant people who just don’t want the state forcing them to bend to the 2% GLAD crowd.
People of faith have rights too and the constitution says they have the right to religious freedom. Making people violate their deeply held religious tenants with laws outside the traditional legal boundries of the constitution is a problem for many.

I think Arizona will see a big swing of people who go there like the Pilgrims,Quakers for living with other decent people who aren’t perverts.


19 posted on 02/25/2014 3:20:51 PM PST by Zenjitsuman (New Boss Nancy Pelosi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

“doesn’t want to take any actions that could jeopardize the economic momentum”

As the old saying goes, “you’re only a whore once.”

Once any part of you can be bought for money, you are one.


20 posted on 02/25/2014 3:21:26 PM PST by I cannot think of a name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

Here’s a gay bar owner who refuses service to people who don’t think like he does:

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2014/02/25/weho-bar-to-ban-lawmakers-who-support-anti-gay-legislation/


21 posted on 02/25/2014 3:22:44 PM PST by GOPJ ({David} "Gregory, usually as alert and twitchy as a squirrel, flat-lined." Richard Cohen NYT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

There was a scene in the Charton Heston movie Moses that always out to me.

It was when the Jews were worshiping the golden calf and Arron was standing there half halfheartedly lifting up some type of incense to be part of the crowd. He always stuck out to me as such a coward. McCain, Romney, and so many other rinos are doing the same thing.


22 posted on 02/25/2014 3:23:03 PM PST by icwhatudo (Low taxes and less spending in Sodom and Gomorrah is not my idea of a conservative victory)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

Gutlessness hag. To hell with her and the GOPe flip flops in the senate


23 posted on 02/25/2014 3:24:59 PM PST by Viennacon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LRoggy

You are right.

This was a can of problems that had the right desires, but would have been completely unworkable.


24 posted on 02/25/2014 3:26:55 PM PST by VanDeKoik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: DLfromthedesert
The ‘public accommodations’ clause in the 1965 Civil Rights Act did away with personal property rights.
25 posted on 02/25/2014 3:26:58 PM PST by TurboZamboni (Marx smelled bad and lived with his parents .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

THIS is exactly to type of crap that makes us despise and mistrust the GOPe but they can’t figure that out. Here it is morons; this is why we hate you.


26 posted on 02/25/2014 3:27:38 PM PST by jmaroneps37 (Conservatism is truth. Liberalism is lies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GOPJ

And he should have that right!!! Freedom of association!


27 posted on 02/25/2014 3:27:38 PM PST by DLfromthedesert (She accomplished nothing: should have stayed at home and baked cookies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

If the legislation is signed into law, then pro-left activist judges will overturn it, anyways.


28 posted on 02/25/2014 3:27:39 PM PST by johnthebaptistmoore (The world continues to be stuck in a "all leftist, all of the time" funk. BUNK THE FUNK!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LRoggy
How many electoral votes did Barry Goldwater get?

Goldwater was libertarian. Certainly not a social conservative. If a purity test were to be applied for social conservativism (including views on homosexuality), Goldwater would have failed it.

29 posted on 02/25/2014 3:30:14 PM PST by peyton randolph (Show me the man and I will find the crime. - Lavrenti Beria)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: DLfromthedesert

I agree. But the baker who refused to make wedding cakes for gay marriages was NOT given that right...


30 posted on 02/25/2014 3:35:11 PM PST by GOPJ ({David} "Gregory, usually as alert and twitchy as a squirrel, flat-lined." Richard Cohen NYT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: peyton randolph

Religious freedom? Wasn’t there a case in AZ a few years ago where a religious group was forbidden from convening inside of a member’s home due to a public gathering ordinance?


31 posted on 02/25/2014 3:39:37 PM PST by RedStateNotShirt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

I think you’re right, just because everyone seems to be doing the wrong thing anymore, but I wonder, if she’s not running for re-election, what would it cost her to just do the right thing and sign this?


32 posted on 02/25/2014 3:42:40 PM PST by mrsmel (One Who Can See)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Psalm 73

Yes. It also warns that hardened rebellion goes hand-in-hand with this sin.


33 posted on 02/25/2014 3:43:43 PM PST by mrsmel (One Who Can See)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: peyton randolph

52 electoral votes; he barely won in AZ and was crushed in TX.


34 posted on 02/25/2014 3:43:59 PM PST by Theodore R. (Alas: TX Republicans to endorse Cornball and George P! Stay tuned March 4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: matginzac

She was never a reliable conservative. I saw her on TV several years ago hem-hawing and making no sense of an issue I have forgotten.


35 posted on 02/25/2014 3:45:34 PM PST by Theodore R. (Alas: TX Republicans to endorse Cornball and George P! Stay tuned March 4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

The media is working hard to make veto a done deal. The right to refuse service to someone is as “anti-gay” as the Affordable Care Act is affordable. Deceptive labels is liberalism 101.


36 posted on 02/25/2014 3:46:22 PM PST by CivilWarBrewing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mrsmel

It shouldn’t cost her anything to merely reaffirm what Arizona’s State Legislature consisting of nearly 100 people have already passed.


37 posted on 02/25/2014 3:49:44 PM PST by CivilWarBrewing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: I cannot think of a name

““doesn’t want to take any actions that could jeopardize the economic momentum”

As the old saying goes, “you’re only a whore once.”

Once any part of you can be bought for money, you are one.”

I just now had time to poke around the web and saw the NFL’s threat on this issue. HEY YOU FOOLS RUNNING SOMETHING THAT USED TO BE ONE OF MY FAVORITE SPORTS - The above sentiments apply to you as well!

Guess I’ll have lots more Sunday time on my hands.


38 posted on 02/25/2014 3:51:25 PM PST by I cannot think of a name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

I guess it should be vetoed with that name. What about the religious freedom bill? Certainly she will sign that? /sarcasm


39 posted on 02/25/2014 3:56:37 PM PST by Ingtar (The NSA - "We're the only part of government who actually listens to the people.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.

Yes, this isn’t her first screw up along these lines.


40 posted on 02/25/2014 3:56:57 PM PST by John W (Viva Cristo Rey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

Not one dimes worth of difference.


41 posted on 02/25/2014 3:57:44 PM PST by VRWC For Truth (Roberts has perverted the Constitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

Yep. In modern America, Christians are expected to submit to homosexual activists. And the GOP-E is marching in lockstep with the homosexual activists...including McCain and McFlake in Arizona. Brewer won’t fight the GOP-E on this one.


42 posted on 02/25/2014 4:00:30 PM PST by Mr Rogers (Liberals are like locusts...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet
refuse service to gays and lesbians on the grounds of their religious conviction

RELIGIOUS conviction? So, it's evolved beyond sexual practices and has now become a RELIGIOUS issue...........Clever, very clever.

43 posted on 02/25/2014 4:01:15 PM PST by Hot Tabasco (Occam's razor was made by Gillette)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
52 electoral votes; he barely won in AZ and was crushed in TX.

Texas was yellow dog demonrat back then. Didn't shift to the GOP until Reagan/Bush. Note that current Governor Perry was a demonrat who was part of Al Gore's quest for the presidency back in '88.

Re: '64 election. Didn't matter who the GOP ran. Charles Manson could have been the Dem nominee and won in a landslide based on JFK's memory/legacy.

44 posted on 02/25/2014 4:04:25 PM PST by peyton randolph (Show me the man and I will find the crime. - Lavrenti Beria)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: LRoggy
Just because the lesser of two evils is evil doesn’t mean you don’t have to live with one of those options sometimes.

Correct, but a very unpopular sentiment here. I'm not sure on this particular bill, I actually support it - though if I read enough of the counter arguments I might be able to at least see the reasoning.

Your point is correct though. It's no different than elections in our 2 party form of government. So long as we have a winner take all system with no option for coalition government, you will virtually always be voting for the lesser of 2 evils because "pure" candidates can almost never get through the process. Casting a ballot in a general election, for example, is not usually an affirmative vote FOR someone, it is just as often (or perhaps more often) a vote AGAINST a politician who's policies you disagree with even more.

What is sad is how fast the culture/morality has deteriorated that a bill like this would even feel necessary to so many people. I suppose the bright side is there is a libertarian streak that accompanies the normalization of destructive lifestyles, that libertarian streak may also result in more and more people rejecting government at all levels rather than just the social libertarian stuff. Then again, we may just be on the proverbial highway to hell here.

45 posted on 02/25/2014 4:05:07 PM PST by Longbow1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: DLfromthedesert
I don't see how ANY man can demand the labor of another...That would be slavery...Yes??

perhaps we made our big mistake when we allowed the state to license us for any and every business...

To be forced to take a license was at one time a big deal....

46 posted on 02/25/2014 4:18:24 PM PST by unread (Rescind the 17th. Amendment...bring the power BACK to the states...!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]


We are within striking distance for yellow!

Keep Free Republic Alive with YOUR Donations!
Make a difference.
PLEASE Contribute Today!

Woo hoo!! And now over less than $450 to the yellow!!

47 posted on 02/25/2014 4:18:39 PM PST by RedMDer (May we always be happy and may our enemies always know it. - Sarah Palin, 10-18-2010)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: DLfromthedesert

Religious freedom says don’t bake a cake for a gay? Refuse to do photos for a gay? I don’t understand that. Doesn’t sound very Christian to me.


48 posted on 02/25/2014 4:33:44 PM PST by abclily
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: abclily

>Religious freedom says don’t bake a cake for a gay? Refuse to do photos for a gay? I don’t understand that. Doesn’t sound very Christian to me.

Christ says to flee from sin. Christ also says in Matthew 19 that marriage is between a man and a woman.

You be the judge.


49 posted on 02/25/2014 4:37:34 PM PST by struggle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

As as I can see, this is just another ‘smoothly worded’ disaster waiting to happen.
Pretty sure the intention was just so a bakery wouldn’t have to make a specific cake etal ....

If I owned a bakery, I think that to get around this ‘problem’ you just set up a catalog of cakes that you make for certain events...NO DEVIATIONS.

Then again there is nothing stopping Joes Bakery up the street from putting out the word “WE DON’T CARE WHAT YOU PUT ON YOUR CAKE”.

Restaurants do it...They can put ‘mashed potatoes’ on the menu with the Pot Roast and if you want ‘french fries’ they can say it is not on the menu that way.

Same with a cake. Traditional cake has man and woman on top.
Show that in your catalog.
Offer to make a ‘plain cake’ with NO characters on it and direct them to where the figurines are sold.
Plain cake and sell the figurines yourself, separate, in pairs. If you want 2 dudes, or 2 dudettes, buy 2 sets and do with them what you wish. OUTSIDE MY SHOP.
Charge an outlandish price for the figurines if sold separately as it messes up your inventory.
NO, I do not want the ‘extra’ set in case another ‘couple’ shows up.
NO, I will NOT place them on the cake, MY cakes are made with a Man and Woman on top.
Try Joes bakery up the street.
If Joe gets enough referrals from you and you start losing business, that is called Capitalism.
You can’t force people to buy from you BUT if your business suffers because you don’t ‘cater to certain groups’, either change or go out of business.

That is the way they should have handled the smoking situation in bars.

Govt has no problem telling me I CAN’T - under any circumstance in many jurisdictions - allow smoking in MY business, so, in the same vein I should be able to sell what I want - legally.

Let Government set your ‘menu’ and next they will be setting your hours and how many people you can hire.


50 posted on 02/25/2014 4:41:37 PM PST by xrmusn (6/98 --When you have them by the short hairs, the minds and hearts soon follow.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-93 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson