Mississippi governor signs law allowing service denial to gay couples - Polidicks

[media]https://twitter.com/PhilBryantMS/status/717386566897963008[/media] [url]http://www.cbsnews.com/news/mississippi-governor-phil-bryant-signs-law-allowing-service-denial-to-gays/[/url] [quote]Mississippi's governor signed a law on Tuesday that allows public and private businesses to refuse service to gay couples based on the employers' religious beliefs. Gov. Phil Bryant signed House Bill 1523, despite opposition from gay-rights groups and some businesses who say it enables discrimination. Some conservative and religious groups support the bill. The measure's stated intention is to protect those who believe that marriage should be between one man and one woman, that sexual relations should only take place inside such marriages, and that male and female genders are unchangeable. "This bill merely reinforces the rights which currently exist to the exercise of religious freedom as stated in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution," the Republican governor wrote in a statement posted to his Twitter account.[/quote]

Goooo fuckkk yourselfffffffff

Although it sucks, the way he worded it makes me thing he's only doing something we consider wrong, for reasons he considers to be right, which I guess isn't as bad as doing it even though you know its wrong. Still.

"we're going to protect religious freedom by allowing discrimination against gay people"

[QUOTE=James xX;50074612]Although it sucks, the way he worded it makes me thing he's only doing something we consider wrong, for reasons he considers to be right, which I guess isn't as bad as doing it even though you know its wrong. Still.[/QUOTE] Can you explain how being gay makes serving food different? Oooooor getting your internet fixed harder? Or getting a tire changed more difficult? Having a hard time figuring that one out.

I'm fairly certain this is unconstitutional, morbidly so.

He's right on one thing, that legislation is designed to target one specific group [editline]5th April 2016[/editline] Oh also it's a religious freedom bill that only protects Christian religions no others

Since when is breaking the law justifiable by religion?

Good old Mississippi, proudly marching forward into the 19th century. [QUOTE=Shisno;50074680]I'm fairly certain this is unconstitutional, morbidly so.[/QUOTE] [t]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CfSrN6cWAAA6sK3.jpg[/t] Nah but see he said it doesn't violate anyone's rights so that means it's okay. (I'm pretty sure this violates federal discrimination laws.)

The supreme court is going to shoot this down so fucking hard

This is so dumb, didn't the supreme court have a ruling last year that was supposed to make this sort of thing illegal?

I love how people think Christians are oppressed

My religion says I don't have to give service to blacks or infidels. Is that protected?

Never understood why someone would want a religious service under someone who stands against who you are or an entire group of people who fundamentally hates you on a faith level. I'm all for gay rights (being gay myself... duh) but why would you want to be married by someone who is repeatedly saying 'fuck you sinners, burn in hell' in his head repeatedly while going through the service marrying you to said love one?

Dude is a moron who is ruining Mississippi. How he got re-elected surprises me. Laws like these make Mississippi worse than it truly is and makes it a laughing stock state. Hopefully this bill will get repealed.

[QUOTE=nuttyboffin;50074930]Never understood why someone would want a religious service under someone who stands against who you are or an entire group of people who fundamentally hates you on a faith level. I'm all for gay rights (being gay myself... duh) but why would you want to be married by someone who is repeatedly saying 'fuck you sinners, burn in hell' in his head repeatedly while going through the service marrying you to said love one?[/QUOTE] There are plenty of priests who aren't anti-gay, but I don't know how many people actually have priests at their weddings anymore. When I get married it'll just be a justice of the peace. I've never been to a wedding with a priest, I know that

[QUOTE=nuttyboffin;50074930]Never understood why someone would want a religious service under someone who stands against who you are or an entire group of people who fundamentally hates you on a faith level. I'm all for gay rights (being gay myself... duh) but why would you want to be married by someone who is repeatedly saying 'fuck you sinners, burn in hell' in his head repeatedly while going through the service marrying you to said love one?[/QUOTE] If only this applied solely to wedding services. From the OP: [QUOTE]Mississippi's governor signed a law on Tuesday that allows public and private businesses to refuse service to gay couples based on the employers' religious beliefs.[/QUOTE] "Welcome to McDonalds, can I take your or--oh, no, we don't serve [I]your kind[/I]." I'm pretty sure it's established precedent in the US that churches cannot be forced to marry people if it violates their (being the church's) religious beliefs, and if it isn't it should be. It's how it's been in Canada since we legalized gay marriage over a decade ago and literally nobody complains (except diehard homophobes who'd complain anyway).

[QUOTE]The measure allows churches, religious charities and privately held businesses to decline services to people whose lifestyles violate their religious beliefs.[/QUOTE] That's very one sided. If it allowed anyone to decline services, I'd say it's fair, but the way it is right now is very unfair. [QUOTE]Individual government employees may also opt out, although the measure says governments must still provide services.[/QUOTE] This is just plain wrong. A government employee should never be able to opt out of service.

[QUOTE=Ragekipz;50075221]This is just plain wrong. A government eployee should never be able to opt out of service.[/QUOTE] You'd think this guy never heard of Kim Davis. But the reality is probably that he thinks she was the victim of injustice. :pudge:

[QUOTE=BigJoeyLemons;50074814]I love how people think Christians are oppressed[/QUOTE] See God Is Not Dead 1 & 2 People actually believe that.

Religion is a silly cult to be part of, what if my religion requires I smoke weed at my job? Is that my religion freedom, to use my sacrament?

I'm presuming that Muslims denying non-believers from entering their businesses would also be permitted by this act? Or does this only apply to homophobic Christians?

[QUOTE=27X;50074650]Can you explain how being gay makes serving food different? Oooooor getting your internet fixed harder? Or getting a tire changed more difficult? Having a hard time figuring that one out.[/QUOTE] Stop trying to start shit. He's not defending the bill or endorsing it. He's saying that the governor is doing what [I]he[/I] feels is right, which is better than him twirling his curly mustache and evilly signing laws named "fuck gay people for no real reason act" [editline]5th April 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Jamsponge;50075490]I'm presuming that Muslims denying non-believers from entering their businesses would also be permitted by this act? Or does this only apply to homophobic Christians?[/QUOTE] It'll get abused by anyoneelse-phobic fake-as-shit "christians" until someone does it to them, and then they'll sue, it'll go to court, and the whole bill will likely just get overturned.

Little Rock Nine two when? Just have the Army escort some gays into some restaurants and stores, and see if anyone speaks up about it then.

Fed government is gonna be on this like flies on shit

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;50075109]If only this applied solely to wedding services. From the OP: "Welcome to McDonalds, can I take your or--oh, no, we don't serve [I]your kind[/I]." I'm pretty sure it's established precedent in the US that churches cannot be forced to marry people if it violates their (being the church's) religious beliefs, and if it isn't it should be. It's how it's been in Canada since we legalized gay marriage over a decade ago and literally nobody complains (except diehard homophobes who'd complain anyway).[/QUOTE] Well... uh... fuck Miss-isis-ippi

"This bill merely reinforces the rights which currently exist to the exercise of religious freedom as stated in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution" I'm sorry, but if "Congress shall make no law... prohibiting the free exercise thereof" also means "allowing religious beliefs to be used as a legal scapegoat for any crime or any form of discrimination" then you're gonna have a whole bunch of shit on your hands with the precedent you're setting.

Things like these are the reason why separation between Church and State is so important and I find it baffling that anyone would defend the contrary.

[QUOTE=nuttyboffin;50074930]Never understood why someone would want a religious service under someone who stands against who you are or an entire group of people who fundamentally hates you on a faith level. I'm all for gay rights (being gay myself... duh) but why would you want to be married by someone who is repeatedly saying 'fuck you sinners, burn in hell' in his head repeatedly while going through the service marrying you to said love one?[/QUOTE] To say that all of Christianity is anti-gay is like saying that the entire LGBT community is anti-Christianity. Not true. Plus loads of people always use this argument to dismiss legitimate rights concerns: "You shouldn't want to get married anyway, it's outdated and traditionally practiced by people who decry you as sinners".

mormons believe black people are black because they are descdendants of cain and the black skin is gods punishment. along these same lines that this bill was signed, mormons in missippii could discriminate against black people on religious grounds, and we all know how that would go. absolutely ridiculous the level of cognitive dissonance going on around this.,