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

To: TangledUpInBlue
Correct. But my point was/is , that right already exists in Arizona.

You may be right but someone in the AZ legislature doesn't think so. One woman from AZ described it as a "process law." I don't know what that means but she said it only had to do with giving a businessman standing in court. Sorry, that's not very illuminating but it was the best attempt I've heard or read at explaining the purpose of the law.

Another state rep from AZ was on Fox News this morning and said that originally this law had nothing to do with homosexuals but that it has been made to look that way by the press. It's not hard to believe that but he didn't have time to give explanatory details.

74 posted on 02/26/2014 12:44:37 PM PST by TigersEye (Stupid is a Progressive disease.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies ]


To: TigersEye

I saw another lawmaker say the same thing. Essentially he said that he glossed over it quickly and decided to vote for it without really considering what it would do. (duh!)

It would have cost the state almost 500 million to implement so I think it was easy to veto and a good call by Brewer. She’s been a good Governor from and economic standpoint and has helped bring that state through the recession very well. AZ relies big time on tourism, especially as a spring break destination for tens of thousands of college kids from CA and NV.

It’s been vetoed since we chatted so we’ll see what, if anything, happens from here.


88 posted on 02/27/2014 6:47:42 AM PST by TangledUpInBlue (I have no home. I'm the wind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies ]

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