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

Skip to comments.

Brewer veto not best part of anti-gay billís demise
The Washington Post's Post Partisan ^ | February 26, 2014 | Jonathan Capehart, editorial board member & columnist

Posted on 03/02/2014 12:01:36 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet

(VIDEO-AT-LINK)

It took her a few (maddening) days, but Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer (R) did the right thing. She vetoed that horrible bill that would have made it legal to discriminate against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people by claiming that doing so violated their “sincerely held religious beliefs.” But this sensible and just end isn’t the best part of all this.

Never before have I seen such full-throated tri-partisan opposition to a piece of anti-gay legislation. By tri-partisan I mean Democrats, Republicans and corporations. That Democrats were against the measure was a no-brainer. That Republicans and businesses joined them to not only decry the bill’s passage bill but to also demand that Brewer veto it was remarkable.

Arizona’s two U.S. Senators, John McCain (R) and Jeff Flake (R), urged Brewer to veto the bill. Mitt Romney, the 2012 Republican presidential nominee, did the same. Three state Senators who voted for the noxious statute changed their minds. In a letter to Brewer last Friday, the head of the Greater Phoenix Economic Council warned that the “legislation will likely have profound, negative effects on our business community for years to come.”(continued)

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


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; Politics/Elections; US: Arizona
KEYWORDS: arizona; christians; homosexualagenda; janbrewer; mccain; romney; samesexmarriage; sb1062; sessions
Note: Apropos of nothing at all, Mr. Capehart is an out of the closet homosexual with a "husband."
1 posted on 03/02/2014 12:01:36 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I want Christians to go into all the gay-owned businesses and start making unreasonable demands for service.


2 posted on 03/02/2014 12:02:53 AM PST by GeronL (Vote for Conservatives not for Republicans!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

How much decorating, floristry and steam baths do we need?


3 posted on 03/02/2014 12:04:41 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet (I will raise $2M for Sarah Palin's next run, what will you do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

” By tri-partisan I mean Democrats, Republicans and corporations.”

Hmmm a partnership between business and government. We should come up with a handy word to describe that. Something about how we are strong when we are all bound together,,,, like how its hard to break a handful of arrows held together.
Its right on the tip of my tongue,,,,,


4 posted on 03/02/2014 12:08:14 AM PST by DesertRhino (I was standing with a rifle, waiting for soviet paratroopers, but communists just ran for office.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

true


5 posted on 03/02/2014 12:08:37 AM PST by GeronL (Vote for Conservatives not for Republicans!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: DesertRhino

Rethuglican? Oh, and saying “tip of my tongue” to Jonathan is a dog whistle, just ask Chris Matthews.


6 posted on 03/02/2014 12:11:32 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet (I will raise $2M for Sarah Palin's next run, what will you do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
Isaiah 5:20

Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil...

7 posted on 03/02/2014 12:16:12 AM PST by kingattax (America needs more real Americans.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Tri party? LOL. We’re under one party rule. McCain, McFlake, McRomney, et al, are no better than dimmiecrats. We definitely need a second party.


8 posted on 03/02/2014 12:16:19 AM PST by Jim Robinson (Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

While I’m convinced that gay fascism is one of our generation’s greatest threats to freedom, I’m not sure this veto was bad. Having a law that codifies the First Amendment is a bad thing if that law is a lightning rod for court challenges and leads to further encroachments from a lawless Supreme Court. Simply leaving the silly question to natural law and human ingenuity may be the best option until the far left fringe loses their obsession with homosexuality. We have the power today to refuse service - we need only be creative.

A baker/photographer/artist cannot refuse service and give an honest reason, which is a shame, but decent people who refuse to endorse perversion by participating can still refuse service. They need only write the contract carefully to specify no penalty for non-performace if given a 24 hour notice and then gracefully and regretfully apologize at the last minute due to an unspecified but unanticipated problem.


9 posted on 03/02/2014 12:43:35 AM PST by Pollster1 ("Shall not be infringed" is unambiguous.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

The opposition to this Bill have committed themselves spiritually, and will be culpable before the Lord for their stances until such time that they publicly renounce their actions and seek absolution from sin. Until then, they are no more than pieces of coal in the box, waiting to feed the fires of HELL!


10 posted on 03/02/2014 12:54:49 AM PST by Birdsbane ("Onward through the fog!" ... Oat Willie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

What a surprise... Unfortunately, he happens to be right as well. This bill was a stupid idea. You can’t codify moral behavior in this way - it always backfires.


11 posted on 03/02/2014 1:14:24 AM PST by Vanders9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vanders9

The bill said nothing about homosexuals. It was simply an amendment to a 15 year old law.

It would protect gay business owners from having to cater to those they dislike intensely as well. Would you want the law to force a jewish baker to produce cakes for a neo-nazi rally?


12 posted on 03/02/2014 1:24:03 AM PST by GeronL (Vote for Conservatives not for Republicans!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Vanders9

You do realize that business people in several states have been forced by the courts to provide goods and services for homosexual marriages, despite their religious beliefs, right?


13 posted on 03/02/2014 1:29:25 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet (I will raise $2M for Sarah Palin's next run, what will you do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
Never before have I seen such full-throated tri-partisan opposition to a piece of anti-gay legislation. By tri-partisan I mean Democrats, Republicans and corporations.

A perfect description of the uniparty. Democrats, GOPe, and large corporations...

All conspiring together against the people.

14 posted on 03/02/2014 1:34:08 AM PST by markomalley (Nothing emboldens the wicked so greatly as the lack of courage on the part of the good -- Leo XIII)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vanders9

>> You can’t codify moral behavior in this way - it always backfires.

I generally agree that change is a slow process, but yet the depravity was forced on us virtually overnight.


15 posted on 03/02/2014 1:57:36 AM PST by Gene Eric (Don't be a statist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1
The far left will not lose its obsession with homosexuality because they know homosexuality is one of the keys to overthrowing decent society. The present day left is out to destroy and men having sex with men (or women having sex with women for that matter) is a good way to do it. That businesses have to cater to these perverts is a symbol of the venality and cowardice of our present day leadership -- democrat and republican.
16 posted on 03/02/2014 2:18:38 AM PST by Stepan12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Vanders9

Incidentally, a bill to protect private property, as this bill seemed to do, is not a bad idea. It is a reaffirmation of property rights. Jan Brewer, afraid of PC nonsense and pressure, does not seem to understand that. This is the state that once had Barry Goldwater as its Senator who was principled enough to oppose the rotten Civil Rights law? How far that state has fallen. Maybe they’ll elect McCain for another term. The rino is running for one.


17 posted on 03/02/2014 2:24:20 AM PST by Stepan12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

Comment #18 Removed by Moderator

To: Gene Eric

Anti-sodomy law is endemic to western civilization as well as laws prohibiting adultery. All of this was a result of the revelation at Sinai: That there is an infinite and personal G-d who created the universe and everything in it, including people. As such He has the wisdom, and the right to tell man when to have sex, how to have sex, and who to have it with. Until Sinai men did whatever they wanted at any point in time. The result was chaos and misery. It was the Sexual Revolution of the Torah that made an enduring and life giving culture possible. Before Torah the Romans would stuff themselves with gourmet food and then head to the vomitorium to throw up and run back to the table for more. Today’s sexual libertines engage sexually for maximum pleasure and utilize aboritoriums to throw the “product of conception” in a garbage can. The abuse of little children is absolutely inevitable once you leave the sex ethic of Torah behind. The “Progressive” movement is a conspiracy of ideas to forge a Global Culture in direct opposition to the G-d of Israel and His Law. That is why Israel must be destroyed. She stands in the way of their utopian dream of great economic progress and unbridled lust.


19 posted on 03/02/2014 2:45:39 AM PST by Torahman (Remember the Maccabees!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

There is a practical solution. Salt looks just like sugar. Enjoy your cake!


20 posted on 03/02/2014 3:25:57 AM PST by doosee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

“I want Christians to go into all the gay-owned businesses and start making unreasonable demands for service.”

This is an unfairness that only works in one direction.


21 posted on 03/02/2014 3:31:52 AM PST by Gen.Blather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1

“until the far left fringe loses their obsession with homosexuality. “

The left is only for and about identity politics. Since this is a recognizable identity they will never lose their obsession. It’s not an obsession. It’s politics. As long as they can use gayness as a rallying point they will.


22 posted on 03/02/2014 3:34:09 AM PST by Gen.Blather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
The real reason why SB 1062 was vetoed: the very possibility the NFL was going to move the next Super Bowl to Raymond James Stadium in Tampa, FL. That would have cost the state of Arizona maybe $700 million in revenue from Super Bowl Week activities.

And equally likely, Apple would have immediately terminated its plans to buy sapphire crystal display screens from GT Advanced Technologies in Mesa, AZ, which would have resulted in the loss of several hundred jobs and a very visible public relations fiasco in terms of business.

23 posted on 03/02/2014 4:02:21 AM PST by RayChuang88 (FairTax: America's economic cure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

Sorry, I won’t set foot in any of those dens of filth.


24 posted on 03/02/2014 4:21:25 AM PST by Mouton (The insurrection laws perpetuate what we have for a government now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

And I want a NewYorker to jump in a cab with a visible bottle of Jack Daniels & a dog under his other arm & see what happens.


25 posted on 03/02/2014 4:59:03 AM PST by FES0844
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Vanders9

You can’t codify moral behavior. Exactly,and that is why we should immediately repeal all laws against murder, theft, robbery, and rape.


26 posted on 03/02/2014 5:23:13 AM PST by freedomfiter2 (Brutal acts of commission and yawning acts of omission both strengthen the hand of the devil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
I'd like to insert a few items like SAYGAMIC into the internet memestream.


27 posted on 03/02/2014 6:11:31 AM PST by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Torahman
The “Progressive” movement is a conspiracy of ideas to forge a Global Culture in direct opposition to the G-d of Israel and His Law.

Bump.

28 posted on 03/02/2014 6:14:54 AM PST by VRW Conspirator ( 2+2 = V)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

When a people or a nation tolerate sin more then valuing God’s commandments and His Word it has never ended well. This nation is provoking the Lord’s anger. If there isn’t a massive national repentance and show of humility we could be in for much more than just our current evil leadership and shame being brought on us from other nations.:(


29 posted on 03/02/2014 9:34:02 AM PST by 444Flyer (How long O LORD?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
I've heard this point about the bill saying nothing about homosexuality. Its a nonsense argument. Repeating it makes conservatives look manipulative and stupid. We all know that this bill was intoduced primarily to protect religious folk from bullying by the gay lobby.

As for the reverse situation - How often have gay business owners complained about having to cater to those they dislike? The primary response of people who dislike gays (or jews for that matter) is to avoid them and their businesses, not try to force them to act against conviction.

30 posted on 03/03/2014 12:53:56 AM PST by Vanders9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Yes I do. I still believe a bill like this is the wrong response.


31 posted on 03/03/2014 12:55:05 AM PST by Vanders9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Gene Eric

Then let us point that out, continously, as a response. It puts the gays and the liberals on the defensive, not us. They’re the ones seeking to enforce their “rights” at the expense of others. Writing bills like this makes them out to be victims instead.


32 posted on 03/03/2014 12:57:04 AM PST by Vanders9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: doosee

Oh great plan. A Christian/republican/conservative baker brought up on poisoning charges. Just the publicity we need.


33 posted on 03/03/2014 12:59:19 AM PST by Vanders9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: freedomfiter2
I said you cannot codify moral behavior in this way There's a difference between personal behavior and behavior that directly affects another person.
34 posted on 03/03/2014 1:02:10 AM PST by Vanders9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: 444Flyer

Agreed.


35 posted on 03/03/2014 1:02:44 AM PST by Vanders9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Vanders9

Your suggestion?


36 posted on 03/03/2014 1:19:19 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet (I will raise $2M for Sarah Palin's next run, what will you do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Vanders9

This law was passed because militant fags are using existing anti discrimination laws to attack religious business owners. As things stand, their perversion trumps our religious convictions.


37 posted on 03/03/2014 6:03:09 AM PST by freedomfiter2 (Brutal acts of commission and yawning acts of omission both strengthen the hand of the devil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: freedomfiter2
I understand. Presumably when these anti-discrimination laws were passed this consequence was forseen. The answer therefore is to highlight the result with "We told you so", which is proving very effective in the Obamacare fiasco, not so?

Also anti-discrimination works both ways. If militant gay organisations can be proven to be deliberately targeting religously inclined business owners in order to enrich themselves and/or advance some pro-gay agenda, then I would suggest they are vulnerable to a counter-suit.

38 posted on 03/04/2014 12:28:34 AM PST by Vanders9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Gen.Blather

Agreed.


39 posted on 03/04/2014 12:28:50 AM PST by Vanders9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

See post #38


40 posted on 03/04/2014 12:29:20 AM PST by Vanders9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

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