Skip to comments.Religious rights, gay rights, and professional sports in the legal spotlight
Posted on 02/27/2014 5:12:05 PM PST by Impala64ssa
Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer vetoed SB1062 that would permit merchants to refuse service based on religious beliefs. Of course it was assumed it was generally aimed at businesses that have moral objections to serving gays, particularly in the context of wedding products and services. This has been an issue in the courts of other states previously, and because those cases havent turned up in Arizona yet, Brewer offered that as part of the reason why she was vetoing this bill.
Free market proponents seem to be split on this issue, some pointing out that businesses shouldnt be forced by the state to do anything, while others suggest that this truly is discrimination against a class of people. The latter argument may not necessarily hold water, especially if its placed in the context of racial discrimination. While there are people out there that claim to have identified themselves as homosexual (or at the very least, not heterosexual) their entire lives, there are also many people that have swayed from one sexual preference to another. It is difficult to equate a social status that can fluctuate with race, which does not change.
No matter which way one looks at it though, this is a case of one liberty clashing with another. The tough question that Brewer theoretically faced was which one should win. She probably was spared that, thanks to some Arizona lawmakers telling her that they had changed their minds about supporting the bill in the first place.
These businesses supposedly made no secret of their religious beliefs, or the fact that their business dealings were infused with their faith.
(Excerpt) Read more at politichicks.tv ...
Who’s suppressing the homosexuals’ liberty? They’re free to choose a bakery or photographer of their choice.
Brewer will be a loser in the base’s eyes for the rest of her life. Good riddance.
Yes. They could.
I would not give much chance to a neo-Nazi group suing a Jewish baker in Arizona who refuses to serve their party, or make a cake with “Hilter Rocks!” written on it.
Discrimination law sets aside certain people as more equal than others, and neo-Nazis are not one of those groups. In Arizona, neither are homosexuals. But in states where homosexuals ARE protected, they can and have successfully sued religious owners who refuse to support their marriage ceremonies.
Which is more fundamental to man, and found in the US Constitution - serving God, or sticking penises in other men’s bungholes? Because in the USA, the SECOND is rapidly replacing the first. Ask Obama if you disagree...
If I was the baker, I might have baked that cake.
I would have looked them in the eye and said, “Sodomy is a sin and an abomination in the eyes of God. Now what would you like on your cake?”
I think a solution is to get out of business selling services or goods secular humanists need for their holy days and celebrations...
The NFL by threatening Arizona was in fact discriminating against the people of Arizona.
No need to even say it...just ice it on the cake.
My biggest issue with all this homo stuff is it has resulted in mission creep into our foreign affairs.
Really? C’mon now...sex...SEX...is the biggest deal regarding our foreign relations?
There is something way wrong with our “POLICY” when it revolves around freakin’ sex
They are also free to keep their perverted sexual preferences to themselves!
I only know that you do abominable sex acts if you tell me!
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.