Indiana's Religious Freedom Law

[5GallonBucket]

Thoughts?????

[RETIREDFAN1]

Indiana got it right......

[Tee]

I read the reviews on the Internet from various agencies, most felt as though it would hurt business, education, etc...

What is right about it? Does it not allow some bit of bias towards some groups trying to exercise their views/beliefs?

As in the 1st amendment? I am sure religious folk are against it.

[RETIREDFAN1]

If I own a business and I don't want to do business with someone who's perverted lifestyle violates my beliefs, I should not be forced to do so by a tyrannical despotic government........people FREELY EXERCISING (as per the FIRST AMENDMENT) their religious beliefs at their place of business can no longer have that used against them by Indiana courts.......Indiana got it right......we need this in Texas.......

[RETIREDFAN1]

This will only affect those folks who run photography or wedding type services......no one else even knows who is or is not practicing perversion......it was in response to the couple losing their business who refused to do a cake for a perverted wedding, thus having their FREE EXERCISE rights blatantly violated.......that will not be possible now in Indiana........

[Tee]

To verify, you would turn down business with those you don't agree with their religious beliefs, lifestyle?

Generally speaking, what type of Buis. do you own?

Is it retail?

[RETIREDFAN1]

To verify, you would turn down business with those you don't agree with their religious beliefs, lifestyle?

Generally speaking, what type of Buis. do you own?

Is it retail?

 

 

I see the concept of hypotheticals is beyond your comprehension.....try reading my previous posts again.......

[Tee]

I am sure you are much wiser and educated than me, so to grasp the concept of hypotheticals must be above me.

Gotta ask -- are you from Colmesneil?

I would like to thank you for the entertaining posts you have on this site.

[RETIREDFAN1]

I would like to thank you for the entertaining posts you have on this site.

 

You are very welcome......:P

[Mr. Buddy Garrity]

I am sure you are much wiser and educated than me, so to grasp the concept of hypotheticals must be above me.

Gotta ask -- are you from Colmesneil?

I would like to thank you for the entertaining posts you have on this site.

:lol:

[RETIREDFAN1]

:lol:

 

:P

[baddog]

When I was young, most businesses had signs on their doors or inside walls that said, "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone".

Most people I know would not allow just anyone inside their home. Why not? Is it because it is "their" property. Well, the business is "their" business. You can't hide "everything" behind the first amendment. Just the way I see it.

[RETIREDFAN1]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/03/27/19-states-that-have-religious-freedom-laws-like-indianas-that-no-one-is-boycotting/?tid=sm_fb

[Mr. Buddy Garrity]

Looks like Ol' Indiana is making some changes now. Im not surprised. 

[Tee]

Usual BS. When athletes/celebs and $$$$ mix in every body double talks.

I don't know why you would turn down someone's money based on their personal beliefs?

Remember Jesus went amongst prostitutes, thieves, etc...

Fr. Jamals homily was on this Sunday before last.

In fact talked how Francis (Pope) went among the prostitutes, HIV, gay people 3 weeks ago!!!

Even came out of the Popemobile to mingle with them????

Don't tell me the Pope is communist and a pinko liberal, please

[smitty]

The gay mafia strikes again!  The left talks about tolerance.  But just listen to all the anti-Christian bigotry going on right now concerning Indiana from the left/liberals.  We need to fight back at this intolerance on the left.  I suggest go vacation in Indiana!

 

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/416176/want-evidence-hysterical-anti-christian-bigotry-look-no-further-boycottindiana-david

[smitty]

More liberal hypocrisy!  He's playing to the "Low Information" crowd.  What an idiot!!

 

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/mar/30/rahm-emanuel-tries-lure-companies-indiana-over-law/

[RETIREDFAN1]

Usual BS. When athletes/celebs and $$$$ mix in every body double talks.
I don't know why you would turn down someone's money based on their personal beliefs?
Remember Jesus went amongst prostitutes, thieves, etc...
Fr. Jamals homily was on this Sunday before last.
In fact talked how Francis (Pope) went among the prostitutes, HIV, gay people 3 weeks ago!!!
Even came out of the Popemobile to mingle with them????
Don't tell me the Pope is communist and a pinko liberal, please

Jesus went among them to teach them that they needed to repent and cease their sins.....NOT to accept and tolerate the sins.......

The man who has assumed unscriptural authority is a pinko commie.....all you have to do is look at his political positions......

[smitty]

This parallels the other liberal lie known as Ferguson.  The template was that white cops shoot innocent black kids for no reason. Well, we know that "HANDS UP, DON'T SHOOT" was a lie.  This, too, by the gay mafia and it's media sycophants is also a lie.  In the end, though, the TRUTH will always win out!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Mr. Buddy Garrity]

Lmao! 

[Mr. Buddy Garrity]

Like gays and lesbians dont have more rights than everybody. You stupid. Lol. Good luck on yall wishful thinking though. 

[smitty]

This law was to protect against religious discrimination.  The is the same law clinton signed 22 years ago on the Federal level.  This is also the same law obama voted for in Illinois.  The gay mafia was trying to project another lie to, again, show THEIR intolerance.  And it has nothing to do with them.  But the lap-dog media went right along.

[Mr. Buddy Garrity]

This law was to protect against religious discrimination.  The is the same law clinton signed 22 years ago on the Federal level.  This is also the same law obama voted for in Illinois.  The gay mafia was trying to project another lie to, again, show THEIR intolerance.  And it has nothing to do with them.  But the lap-dog media went right along.

Lol 

[smitty]

Lol 

"This law was to protect against religious discrimination."

I sense a air of doubt on your part in this statement.  Or am I misreading this?   ;)

[Mr. Buddy Garrity]

"This law was to protect against religious discrimination."

I sense a air of doubt on your part in this statement.  Or am I misreading this?   ;)

You misread alot, thats nothing new here. Also you forgot to quote the whole post, may have been why you misread. ;)