I think it is crazy to have a business that would discriminate against gays but hey if that's what they want to do and call it religious freedom then there are just less customers for them I guess. Now to the abortion deal, I wouldn't say Dems are out to kill as many babies as they can as Zit puts it. I am not much for abortion, I wouldn't want my GF to have one but I am not going to tell other women what to do. I think what really sucks about abortion is that the man has no choice, if he wants the baby he is fucked.
[h=1]Indiana Republicans Were Warned About Their Anti-Gay Bill[/h]Insiders say Mike Pence was told about amendments to strengthen LGBT protection before he signed the bill into law. Now he’s trying to “fix” what he broke.
Governor Mike Pence promised Tuesday to “fix” a controversial law with anti-gay undertones in an attempt to stop the constant hammering the state has received since he signed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act into law last week.
“I don’t believe for a minute that it was the intention of the general assembly to create a license to discriminate or right to deny services to gays, lesbians or anyone else in the state, and it certainly wasn’t my intent, but I can appreciate that has become the perception,” Pence said.
But advocates for changes to the law said if Pence didn’t know this would turn into a public-relations dumpster fire, he was either willfully ignorant or simply didn’t care.
Gay-rights advocates said they flagged the problem with the lack of protective language early in the process and pushed minor amendments to the bill, they say, would have largely resolved the issue.
It is unclear whether Pence himself knew about the amendments, but two people familiar with the lobbying effort behind the measures pro-LGBT measures said it was clear very early in the process that the governor did not want any changes to the bill.
“Pence and his party insisted that the bill not be balanced,” said Indiana Representative Ed Delaney, a Democrat and the author of an amendment that would have added the sentence “the protection of civil rights; or the prevention of discrimination; is a compelling government interest” to the bill.
“He’s created this problem,” Delaney said.
Another amendment would have exempted civil rights laws from RFRA—a change modeled after similar laws inMissouri and Texas. (Indiana’s civil rights laws do not protect LGBT individuals—but several local municipalities, like Indianapolis, have laws on the books that extend civil rights protections to the LGBT community).
Both amendments were rejected by the Republican-led Indiana legislature.
Pence’s retreat—just Sunday he said the law would not be changed—signified that Indiana’s culture warrior had, once again, bit off more than he could chew.
As the uproar started, Pence staff thought the issue would fade, according to a source last week familiar with a conversation between Pence and his aides. So while Pence expressed surprise at the vitriol created by the law, LGBT advocates said he should have seen it coming.
“There is no surprise in this,” Dale Carpenter, a constitutional and civil liberties law professor at the University of Minnesota Law School.
“They chose to reject those changes in the committee and again on the House floor that suggests to be the legislative intent here is to allow religious freedom to impact anti-discrimination laws,” said Tyler Deaton, senior advisor at American Unity Fund, a pro-gay conservative group.
Pence insisted in an uncharacteristically defensive interview on This Week last Sunday the bill was about religious liberty, not discrimination.
“There’s been shameless rhetoric about my state and about this law and about its intention all over the Internet,” he said. “People are trying to make it about one particular issue.”
“Shameless rhetoric” aside, there are plenty of reasons to be skeptical of Pence’s explanation, starting with the actual signing of the bill.
And it had everything to do with the “particular issue.”
In a photo of the private signing ceremony, Pence is surrounded by a small group of people—including the three wise men of the anti-gay marriage movement of Indiana: Micah Clark, executive director of the American Family Association of Indiana; Curt Smith, president of the Indiana Family Institute; and Eric Miller, executive director of Advance America.
Delaney said the presence of those individuals at the signing ceremony spoke volumes about the intent of the law.
“Is Mike Pence the only person who hasn’t read their press releases?” Delaney asked. “He knows what they wanted to do.”
Pence, himself, has a long, proud record of opposing gay rights during his tenure in Congress.
It also isn’t the first time he carried it into the governor’s mansion, where it has had some pretty embarrassing results.
A push for a constitutional ban on gay marriage in Indiana ended in failure but only after the Pence team tried to censor the opposition.
When gay-marriage proponents posted their displeasure with the measure on Facebook, Pence’s staff simply deleted the messages.
Initially, Pence and his staff said they just deleted comments that were obscene— but later fessed up to removing only the comments that disagreed with the governor’s position.
“On careful review, it appears that this was not always the case and some comments were being deleted simply because they expressed disagreement with my position. I regret that this occurred and sincerely apologize to all those who were affected,” Pence wrote in a Facebook post at the time.
Adding insult to injury the measure failed, giving Pence a black eye just a year into his governorship.
This is a slightly different response than Pence was used to during his time in Washington.
As a member of Congress he had no problem opposing rights for the LGBT community.
He voted for a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage and against the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which would have added LGBT as a protected group on the federal level from discrimination in the workplace.
When the federal amendment to ban gay marriage failed to pass the House in 2006, Pence proclaimed it a “successful failure.”
“We poured a little more concrete in the footings of a building that will be built,” Pence said at the time, according to the Associated Press.
He was lauded as a hero by the right for his positions on social issues—receiving multiple “True Blue” awards from the Family Research Council for “his commitment to the family and sanctity of human life.”
The Indiana Family Institute, which was instrumental in crafting the RFRA bill, has likewise awarded him the “Friend of the Family Award.”
But being a culture warrior as governor, as he has found out, has higher stakes.
“He could afford to be a culture warrior because it wasn’t impacting an entire state’s economy,” Deaton said, referring to the burgeoning “boycott Indiana” campaign. “And now he has a different burden on his shoulders and this is turning out to cost the state tens of millions of dollars on the bottom line, thousands of jobs. This is really problematic for a governor.”
Governor Mike Pence promised Tuesday to “fix” a controversial law with anti-gay undertones in an attempt to stop the constant hammering the state has received since he signed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act into law last week.
“I don’t believe for a minute that it was the intention of the general assembly to create a license to discriminate or right to deny services to gays, lesbians or anyone else in the state, and it certainly wasn’t my intent, but I can appreciate that has become the perception,” Pence said.
But advocates for changes to the law said if Pence didn’t know this would turn into a public-relations dumpster fire, he was either willfully ignorant or simply didn’t care.
Gay-rights advocates said they flagged the problem with the lack of protective language early in the process and pushed minor amendments to the bill, they say, would have largely resolved the issue.
It is unclear whether Pence himself knew about the amendments, but two people familiar with the lobbying effort behind the measures pro-LGBT measures said it was clear very early in the process that the governor did not want any changes to the bill.
“Pence and his party insisted that the bill not be balanced,” said Indiana Representative Ed Delaney, a Democrat and the author of an amendment that would have added the sentence “the protection of civil rights; or the prevention of discrimination; is a compelling government interest” to the bill.
Pence’s retreat—just Sunday he said the law would not be changed—signified that Indiana’s culture warrior had, once again, bit off more than he could chew.
Delaney said Pence’s office either didn’t know or didn’t care about the amendments.
“He’s created this problem,” Delaney said.
Another amendment would have exempted civil rights laws from RFRA—a change modeled after similar laws inMissouri and Texas. (Indiana’s civil rights laws do not protect LGBT individuals—but several local municipalities, like Indianapolis, have laws on the books that extend civil rights protections to the LGBT community).
Both amendments were rejected by the Republican-led Indiana legislature.
Pence’s retreat—just Sunday he said the law would not be changed—signified that Indiana’s culture warrior had, once again, bit off more than he could chew.
As the uproar started, Pence staff thought the issue would fade, according to a source last week familiar with a conversation between Pence and his aides. So while Pence expressed surprise at the vitriol created by the law, LGBT advocates said he should have seen it coming.
“There is no surprise in this,” Dale Carpenter, a constitutional and civil liberties law professor at the University of Minnesota Law School.
“They chose to reject those changes in the committee and again on the House floor that suggests to be the legislative intent here is to allow religious freedom to impact anti-discrimination laws,” said Tyler Deaton, senior advisor at American Unity Fund, a pro-gay conservative group.
Pence insisted in an uncharacteristically defensive interview on This Week last Sunday the bill was about religious liberty, not discrimination.
“There’s been shameless rhetoric about my state and about this law and about its intention all over the Internet,” he said. “People are trying to make it about one particular issue.”
“Shameless rhetoric” aside, there are plenty of reasons to be skeptical of Pence’s explanation, starting with the actual signing of the bill.
And it had everything to do with the “particular issue.”
In a photo of the private signing ceremony, Pence is surrounded by a small group of people—including the three wise men of the anti-gay marriage movement of Indiana: Micah Clark, executive director of the American Family Association of Indiana; Curt Smith, president of the Indiana Family Institute; and Eric Miller, executive director of Advance America.
Delaney said the presence of those individuals at the signing ceremony spoke volumes about the intent of the law.
“Is Mike Pence the only person who hasn’t read their press releases?” Delaney asked. “He knows what they wanted to do.”
Pence, himself, has a long, proud record of opposing gay rights during his tenure in Congress.
It also isn’t the first time he carried it into the governor’s mansion, where it has had some pretty embarrassing results.
A push for a constitutional ban on gay marriage in Indiana ended in failure but only after the Pence team tried to censor the opposition.
When gay-marriage proponents posted their displeasure with the measure on Facebook, Pence’s staff simply deleted the messages.
Initially, Pence and his staff said they just deleted comments that were obscene— but later fessed up to removing only the comments that disagreed with the governor’s position.
“On careful review, it appears that this was not always the case and some comments were being deleted simply because they expressed disagreement with my position. I regret that this occurred and sincerely apologize to all those who were affected,” Pence wrote in a Facebook post at the time.
Adding insult to injury the measure failed, giving Pence a black eye just a year into his governorship.
This is a slightly different response than Pence was used to during his time in Washington.
As a member of Congress he had no problem opposing rights for the LGBT community.
He voted for a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage and against the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which would have added LGBT as a protected group on the federal level from discrimination in the workplace.
When the federal amendment to ban gay marriage failed to pass the House in 2006, Pence proclaimed it a “successful failure.”
“We poured a little more concrete in the footings of a building that will be built,” Pence said at the time, according to the Associated Press.
He was lauded as a hero by the right for his positions on social issues—receiving multiple “True Blue” awards from the Family Research Council for “his commitment to the family and sanctity of human life.”
The Indiana Family Institute, which was instrumental in crafting the RFRA bill, has likewise awarded him the “Friend of the Family Award.”
But being a culture warrior as governor, as he has found out, has higher stakes.
“He could afford to be a culture warrior because it wasn’t impacting an entire state’s economy,” Deaton said, referring to the burgeoning “boycott Indiana” campaign. “And now he has a different burden on his shoulders and this is turning out to cost the state tens of millions of dollars on the bottom line, thousands of jobs. This is really problematic for a governor.”
Indiana is more than likely going to fix the language of their law. They are getting too much backlash right now and the governor not very bright if he thought this wasn't going to be scrutinized this week with the Final Four there. If this doesn't get fixed say goodbye to the NCAA Championships, say goodbye to the NFL combine, say goodbye to hosting a Super Bowl. That's just the tip of the iceberg, Pat Haden's son is gay and he is boycotting an event in Indiana, would he quit scheduling in South Bend?
I'm not surprised you don't understand the comparison...because it couldn't be any more accurate. I'm also not surprised you couldn't grasp what I meant about humans only being here for 2,000 years. But keep bringing that up since it's literally the only thing you have in your arsenal that makes you pretend you're smart. Keep playing with your wrestling dolls, btw...chicks love that sort of thing! And just an FYI...if you're wondering whether there's a connection between your love of adolescent-level entertainment and having made it to what, 70 years of age now without having ever touched a woman before...there is. You're probably too dense to get that, too.
Nice punt on Harry Reid. The guy admits he lied, and you shrug your shoulders. As for the Stuttering Clusterfuck, don't you think it's a little strange that someone who defends Muslims endlessly claims not to be one?
Exclusive — Ted Cruz: My first act as president will be to undo Obama’s unconstitutional executive orders
http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...ndo-obamas-unconstitutional-executive-orders/
HOUSTON, Texas — Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) tells Breitbart News that if he’s elected President, one of his first actions will be to undo all of President Barack Obama’s unconstitutional executive orders.
“Absolutely,” Cruz replied when asked if one of the first things he would do if elected would be to undo all of Obama’s unconstitutional executive orders in an exclusive interview with Breitbart News in Houston.
“President Obama is fond of saying he has a pen and he has a phone,” Cruz said. “Well, live by the pen and die by the pen. Every illegal executive action that he puts in place can be undone in an instant by the next president through the same mechanism. The proper avenue for creating law in this country is not unilateral decree. It is rather passing legislation through Congress that is signed into law by president pursuant to the dictates of the Constitution.”
http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...ndo-obamas-unconstitutional-executive-orders/
HOUSTON, Texas — Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) tells Breitbart News that if he’s elected President, one of his first actions will be to undo all of President Barack Obama’s unconstitutional executive orders.
“Absolutely,” Cruz replied when asked if one of the first things he would do if elected would be to undo all of Obama’s unconstitutional executive orders in an exclusive interview with Breitbart News in Houston.
The next 20 months are going to be very dangerous because President Obama, unfortunately, seems to have decided to disregard the United States Congress and disregard the American people and instead is trying to force through as much of his extreme agenda as possible via unilateral executive action—and I think we’re going to see that only accelerate through the end of 2016 with more and more unconstitutional executive orders, more regulatory abuse and more and more efforts to go to the United Nations and foreign war tribunals in an effort to end run Congress. In January 2017, we will have a new president and if I am elected president, the very first thing I intend to do on the first day is rescind every single unconstitutional or illegal executive action from President Obama.
Cruz jabbed at Obama’s line where the current president said he has a “pen and a phone” as well.
“President Obama is fond of saying he has a pen and he has a phone,” Cruz said. “Well, live by the pen and die by the pen. Every illegal executive action that he puts in place can be undone in an instant by the next president through the same mechanism. The proper avenue for creating law in this country is not unilateral decree. It is rather passing legislation through Congress that is signed into law by president pursuant to the dictates of the Constitution.”
Except this law has nothing to do with discrimination against gays.
Watching you pretend this is some new type of law or issue is funny, but sad. Do you understand that 31 states have RFRA protections? Since this is all about "discrimination" perhaps you can find just 1 example from any other state. I'd like to see that.
Way to shift the topic from your idiot lie, stupid.
Nobody said anything about a horrible beat, dumb fuck. You claimed that someone else, other than you, came up with the "should have won" nonsense. When your laughable lie is pointed out to you, your response is to pathetically try and change the subject.
Except this law has nothing to do with discrimination against gays.
Watching you pretend this is some new type of law or issue is funny, but sad. Do you understand that 31 states have RFRA protections? Since this is all about "discrimination" perhaps you can find just 1 example from any other state? Just 1 example.
I'd like to see that.
[h=1]All the lies told about an Indiana law[/h]
It is so funny how easily misled dumb leftists like guesser are.
It is so funny how easily misled dumb leftists like guesser are.
You couldn't be more wrong.
Your job is your business. Ain't no law or person that can force you to do business with someone who doesn't share your values - that's tyranny.
It's the principle of the matter: 'progressives' worship the Anus more than they respect the Bible and the Constitution.
ucking:
You couldn't be more wrong.
Your job is your business. Ain't no law or person that can force you to do business with someone who doesn't share your values - that's tyranny.
It's the principle of the matter: 'progressives' worship the Anus more than they respect the Bible and the Constitution.
Instead of trying to make a point I don’t understand why a business doesn’t just charge an outlandish fee for their services, make their profit and donate the rest to their church.
That would make their point and avoid all the bullshit.
