FCPS should banned all tax players trips to Indiana till they fix the law.

I will email Dr.Gaza,

What law?

The law's been fixed and is now as it should be. I'm hoping something similar passes in VA. I'd like to know what business owners think so I can choose to (or not to) spend my money there. I'd support anti-faggot businesses by patronizing them. If a business is gay or Muslim owned, I'd like to know that so I can take my money elsewhere. Right of association.

"I'd like to know what business owners think"

Well, we're finding out. Angie's list has cancelled a 40 million dollar 1000 job renovation of their headquarters in the state to protest this ridiculous law. Other large corporations are voicing concern. Big price to pay to pander to ignorant bigots like you.

Actions Have Consequences Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "I'd like to know what business owners think"
>
> Well, we're finding out. Angie's list has
> cancelled a 40 million dollar 1000 job renovation
> of their headquarters in the state to protest this
> ridiculous law. Other large corporations are
> voicing concern. Big price to pay to pander to
> ignorant bigots like you.


Liberals love our corporate overlords just as much as neo-cons. This reminds me of the Arizona SB 1070 hysteria when all the brown people were going to be summarily executed by Sheriff Joe Arpaio. Jim Crow and Naziism and The Inquisition all rolled into one.

WHAT LAW? Am I missing something?

^ The Indiana legislature passed and the Governor signed a "religious freedom" bill that would give a green light to blatant discrimination against the LBGT community. These cowards then had the gall to say that the bill won't do exactly what it's intended to do (discriminate). Similar to imposing impossible standards on abortion clinics; the intent, of course, was to effectively ban abortion, not improve safety standards. Bunch of hypocritical assholes who never met an evangelical they wouldn't pander to.

Huh???? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WHAT LAW? Am I missing something?


Small businesses can refuse business they perceive to be against their professed religious beliefs without being sued.

For example a small bakery owned by a Christian could refuse to bake a cake for a gay wedding party or something along those lines.

It's basic Freedom of Association.

The Left Wing Hysteria is expected and will continue since they all have to move on from #handsupdontshoot

God is unhappy
He gave a whole town HIV in response to the bill

God unhappy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> God is unhappy
> He gave a whole town HIV in response to the bill


San Francisco?

Y4Lhk Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> God unhappy Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > God is unhappy
> > He gave a whole town HIV in response to the
> bill
>
>
> San Francisco?


Indiana

White part of town too Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Y4Lhk Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > God unhappy Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > God is unhappy
> > > He gave a whole town HIV in response to the
> > bill
> >
> >
> > San Francisco?
>
>
> Indiana

Dats a state, homie. It right between the town of Illinois and the city of Ohio.

That's what is so great about free markets: they can punish people worse than government ever could. Regardless of how you feel about the law, allowing it to play out might yet fix a lot of issues, including potentially overturning the law itself.

Same question I had about the Arizona bill - How will a business owner know who is LGBT? I don't see any of them wearing signs or buttons. Perhaps Indiana could require them to have LGBT tattooed on their arms or something. Can a business owner be sued if he refuses service to someone and it turns out the person is not LGBT? The lawyers could have a lot of fun with that. Indiana stepped in a pile of poop, and as much as they might try to wipe it off, the stink will stay for a long time.

oldguy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Same question I had about the Arizona bill - How
> will a business owner know who is LGBT? I don't
> see any of them wearing signs or buttons. Perhaps
> Indiana could require them to have LGBT tattooed
> on their arms or something. Can a business owner
> be sued if he refuses service to someone and it
> turns out the person is not LGBT? The lawyers
> could have a lot of fun with that. Indiana
> stepped in a pile of poop, and as much as they
> might try to wipe it off, the stink will stay for
> a long time.


The Arizona law was about deporting illegal immigrants after they were arrested for committing a crime. It was to counteract the federal governments refusal to deport criminal aliens for low level crimes.

oldguy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Same question I had about the Arizona bill - How
> will a business owner know who is LGBT? I don't
> see any of them wearing signs or buttons. Perhaps
> Indiana could require them to have LGBT tattooed
> on their arms or something.

IT'S JUST LIKE THE HOLOCAUST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! TATTOOS!!!!!!!!! INDIANA IS A FLAT AND CORN FILLED AUSCHWITZ!!!

FCPS should ban all travel. What is it accomplishing? How does sending the Gatehouse Mandarins help the kids?

taxx cian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> FCPS should banned all tax players trips to
> Indiana till they fix the law.
>
> I will email Dr.Gaza,

Why would FCPS employees have a need to go to Indiana in the first place?
Horse auction in Somerville? Bean Blossom Bluegrass Festival? Oh, I know.
The Miss Nude Universe Contest in Roselawn!

CKdGp Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> oldguy Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Same question I had about the Arizona bill -
> How
> > will a business owner know who is LGBT? I
> don't
> > see any of them wearing signs or buttons.
> Perhaps
> > Indiana could require them to have LGBT
> tattooed
> > on their arms or something. Can a business
> owner
> > be sued if he refuses service to someone and it
> > turns out the person is not LGBT? The lawyers
> > could have a lot of fun with that. Indiana
> > stepped in a pile of poop, and as much as they
> > might try to wipe it off, the stink will stay
> for
> > a long time.
>
>
> The Arizona law was about deporting illegal
> immigrants after they were arrested for committing
> a crime. It was to counteract the federal
> governments refusal to deport criminal aliens for
> low level crimes.


The Arizona legislature passed a religious freedom bill like Indiana's, but fortunately it was vetoed by the governor and there were not enough votes to override.

Good for Indiana. This Washington state florist not so lucky. She is being destroyed for not providing flowers for a gay wedding.
http://www.wnd.com/2015/03/1st-shoe-drops-for-washington-florist-under-fire-for-faith/

Who goes to Indiana?

taxx cian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> FCPS should banned all tax players trips to
> Indiana till they fix the law.
>
> I will email Dr.Gaza,


Unless there is a casino or amusement park in Indiana, FCPS credit cards will not ever be used there.

taxx cian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> FCPS should banned all tax players trips to
> Indiana till they fix the law.
>
> I will email Dr.Gaza,

Should we boycott only Indiana or also boycott the other 19 states, including Virginia, that have passed Religious Freedom Restoration Act ("RFRA") law? What about the ten or so states where court decisions have provided a religious exemption equivalent to RFRA? What about boycotting the whole USA since the feds passed a version of federal RFRA in 1993?

See the diagram from Washington Post (with darker states being those with RFRA law) March 27 piece titled "19 states that have ‘religious freedom’ laws like Indiana’s that no one is boycotting", 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/. See text quoted below from the Post.

The Post notes that President Clinton signed the bill. The Post piece doesn't mention it, but the federal RFRA passed unanimously in the U.S. Senate where Ted Kennedy was one of two chief sponsors. Neither Clinton or Kennedy were right-wing nuts, right? Maybe Indiana's legislators and Governor who back this bill are not right-wing nuts either?

FROM THE WASHINGTON POST:

Forty percent of U.S. states have something similar to Indiana, as does the federal government.

A federal RFRA signed by President Clinton in 1993 shares language with Indiana and other states' bills, prohibiting the government from "substantially burdening" individuals' exercise of religion unless it is for a "compelling government interest" and is doing so in the least restrictive means.

Dog Walker81 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> taxx cian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > FCPS should banned all tax players trips to
> > Indiana till they fix the law.
> >
> > I will email Dr.Gaza,
>
> Should we boycott only Indiana or also boycott
> the other 19 states, including Virginia,
> that have passed Religious Freedom Restoration Act
> ("RFRA") law? What about the ten or so states
> where court decisions have provided a religious
> exemption equivalent to RFRA? What about
> boycotting the whole USA since the feds passed a
> version of federal RFRA in 1993?
>
> See the diagram from Washington Post (with darker
> states being those with RFRA law) March 27 piece
> titled "19 states that have ‘religious
> freedom’ laws like Indiana’s that no one is
> boycotting",
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/201
> 5/03/27/19-states-that-have-religious-freedom-laws
> -like-indianas-that-no-one-is-boycotting/. See
> text quoted below from the Post.
>
> The Post notes that President Clinton signed the
> bill. The Post piece doesn't mention it, but the
> federal RFRA passed unanimously in the U.S. Senate
> where Ted Kennedy was one of two chief sponsors.
> Neither Clinton or Kennedy were right-wing nuts,
> right? Maybe Indiana's legislators and Governor
> who back this bill are not right-wing nuts
> either?
>
> FROM THE WASHINGTON POST:
>
> Forty percent of U.S. states have something
> similar to Indiana, as does the federal
> government.
>
> A federal RFRA signed by President Clinton in 1993
> shares language with Indiana and other states'
> bills, prohibiting the government from
> "substantially burdening" individuals' exercise of
> religion unless it is for a "compelling government
> interest" and is doing so in the least restrictive
> means.


The Post is still a left wing outlet but since they exploded the UVA rape hoax they've doing some real unbiased reporting. They have broken from the herd

When Chick Fil-A made the anti gay statements I saw an increase in their business. And today every one of them I see is packed here in Nova.

The great majority 99.99 percent of the human race finds gay "activities" to go against God , against nature and mankind itself.

So yes, people should be free to express their religous objections toward gays, and not serve them if they feel they go against their religon. And as far as them adopting children I say no way.

But no one has any right to hassle or harm them physically. Leave them be.

If I owned a place Yes I would serve them. But I dont approve of their life style and I should not be forced to approve, and thats my right.

fun and games only Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> Unless there is a casino or amusement park in
> Indiana, FCPS credit cards will not ever be used
> there.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

^^^^^^Roger that!^^^^^^^^

Dog Walker81 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> taxx cian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > FCPS should banned all tax players trips to
> > Indiana till they fix the law.
> >
> > I will email Dr.Gaza,
>
> Should we boycott only Indiana or also boycott
> the other 19 states, including Virginia,
> that have passed Religious Freedom Restoration Act
> ("RFRA") law? What about the ten or so states
> where court decisions have provided a religious
> exemption equivalent to RFRA? What about
> boycotting the whole USA since the feds passed a
> version of federal RFRA in 1993?
>
> See the diagram from Washington Post (with darker
> states being those with RFRA law) March 27 piece
> titled "19 states that have ‘religious
> freedom’ laws like Indiana’s that no one is
> boycotting",
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/201
> 5/03/27/19-states-that-have-religious-freedom-laws
> -like-indianas-that-no-one-is-boycotting/. See
> text quoted below from the Post.
>
> The Post notes that President Clinton signed the
> bill. The Post piece doesn't mention it, but the
> federal RFRA passed unanimously in the U.S. Senate
> where Ted Kennedy was one of two chief sponsors.
> Neither Clinton or Kennedy were right-wing nuts,
> right? Maybe Indiana's legislators and Governor
> who back this bill are not right-wing nuts
> either?
>
> FROM THE WASHINGTON POST:
>
> Forty percent of U.S. states have something
> similar to Indiana, as does the federal
> government.
>
> A federal RFRA signed by President Clinton in 1993
> shares language with Indiana and other states'
> bills, prohibiting the government from
> "substantially burdening" individuals' exercise of
> religion unless it is for a "compelling government
> interest" and is doing so in the least restrictive
> means.

Congratulations. You passed Right Wing Talking Points 101.

First, the bill supported by Democrats and signed by Clinton in 1993 pertained to the use of peyote by Native Americans in their religious ceremonies. It was NOT intended to discriminate against anyone. Why do you people always ave to misrepresent the facts?

Second, the Post publishes commentaries from people across the political spectrum - unlike it's conservative counterparts. It does not mean that they agree with their viewpoint.

Third, the Indiana law is considered to be much more sweeping in it's application than the other state laws (although they too are suspect). This law has nothing to do with 'religious freedom' and everything to do with discrimination. Observations from CNN...

"And standing behind Pence as he signed the bill were several socially conservative lobbyists, the ones who pushed for the law and are fiercely opposed to same-sex marriage.

One of those lobbyists, Eric Miller, explicitly wrote on his website that the law would protect businesses from participating in "homosexual marriage."

"The only reason these laws have passed is because of same sex marriage. Everybody knows that," Toobin said. The political calculation that states are going to have to make is, is the reward from the religious groups greater than the cost in lost business."

The only way you right wing nuts can pass legislation anymore is to pretend that it's not what it is. Grow some balls and own it, you dipshits.

99.99 percent of the human race dont agree with you so there all "Right Wing"

And they are all wrong too??

Lets see theres about 8 billion people on this planet so your in 1/10 of 1 percent of people who agree with the gay lifestyle. Thats about 80 million people world wide. Most are in the US and Europe.

And thats probably a high number in your favor. Many of your own Democrats roll their eyes at the thought that their children might become "Gay". As they are politically correct Democrats they will smile at you, but dont think they really agree, They are just stuck in a PC world.

Democrats lost much of their political base long ago and now must pick up any and all fringe groups to survive.

"One of those lobbyists, Eric Miller, explicitly wrote on his website that the law would protect businesses from participating in "homosexual marriage."

Yes, and your problem with a small business abstaining from participating in an act that violates their personal beliefs is what exactly?

"Honey, the wedding is cancelled?"

"Why?"

"The local bakery won't make our cake. They referred us to another bakery that we'll have to Google all by ourselves!!"

"You're right. We have to kill ourselves."

And the Right Wing Talking Points from Hunter Schwarz:

Hunter Schwarz covers the intersection of politics and pop culture for the Washington Post. A far right activist indeed

these businesses that I've been in that have this sign posted:

"We reserve the right to refuse service to any person".


I always wondered about these signs. So these businesses are blowing smoke out their ass because they can't legally refuse to serve certain people??

I'll intersperse my response to your comments.

Addressing the merits of the argument in favor of boycotting Indiana without ad hominem, I'll ask if you would be so kind as to do the same. If you are intellectually honest and confident in your arguments, no more ad hominem or other further fallacies will be required.


Ignorance is Not Bliss Wrote:

> Congratulations. You passed Right Wing Talking
> Points 101.
>

Intellectually sound arguments do NOT need ad hominem.

> First, the bill supported by Democrats and signed
> by Clinton in 1993 pertained to the use of peyote
> by Native Americans in their religious ceremonies.


"Pertained" is a word that should be explained here. It is correct to say, as you do, that the federal RFRA did indeed "pertain" to peyote, if by "pertain" you mean in the sense that RFRA was a response to a Supreme Court ruling about "the use of peyote by Native Americans in their religious ceremonies."

However, federal RFRA was not at limited to just allowing "the use of peyote by Native Americans in their religious ceremonies." Instead, it excuses a religious person from compliance with a rule of general applicability if that person's practice of religion is "substantially burdened" by a rule unless "the government demonstrates that application of the burden to the person—
(1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and
(2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest."(quoted from the federal RFRA)

You can see the full text of federal RFRA here https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/chapter-21B.

If you want to argue the merits, instead of simply another round of internet name-calling, I urge you to read federal RFRA, read the text of Indiana's RFRA law, compare them, and then report back as to why the Indiana law is so much worse.

> It was NOT intended to discriminate against
> anyone. Why do you people always ave to
> misrepresent the facts?
>

I certainly never said that federal RFRA was "intended to discriminate against
anyone."

I never misrepresented any facts and I challenge you to point to a fact that I misrepresented in that prior post and give a reputable cite to a contrary fact.

> Second, the Post publishes commentaries from
> people across the political spectrum - unlike it's
> conservative counterparts. It does not mean that
> they agree with their viewpoint.
>

Since my prior post did not include any statement favorable or unfavorable about the Post or any statement that the Post editorial page agrees with some viewpoint, your comments here are not relevant to my arguments. Maybe you intended to address those comments to someone who posted after me and who commented about WashPost political leanings?

> Third, the Indiana law is considered to be much
> more sweeping in it's application than the other
> state laws (although they too are suspect). This
> law has nothing to do with 'religious freedom' and
> everything to do with discrimination.

What in the text of the law makes it more sweeping? Here is Virginia's law http://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title57/chapter1/section57-2.02/ and a key portion quoted below:

B. No government entity shall substantially burden a person's free exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability unless it demonstrates that application of the burden to the person is (i) essential to further a compelling governmental interest and (ii) the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.

As I understand it, Indiana's law lays out the same general test, a substantial burden rule must pass the same two prong test. Why is Indiana more sweeping?

You do say that the other state RFRA laws "are suspect." I do agree that the RFRA laws in the 19 other states (and the ten or so other states that have a similar religious exemption by judicial rulings) would likely be objectionable to you and those who agree with you. This just makes my key point from my prior post:

Should we boycott only Indiana or also boycott
the other 19 states, including Virginia,
that have passed Religious Freedom Restoration Act
("RFRA") law? What about the ten or so states
where court decisions have provided a religious
exemption equivalent to RFRA? What about
boycotting the whole USA since the feds passed a
version of federal RFRA in 1993? [end quote from my prior post]

> Observations
> from CNN...
>
> "And standing behind Pence as he signed the bill
> were several socially conservative lobbyists, the
> ones who pushed for the law and are fiercely
> opposed to same-sex marriage.
>
> One of those lobbyists, Eric Miller, explicitly
> wrote on his website that the law would protect
> businesses from participating in "homosexual
> marriage."
>
> "The only reason these laws have passed is because
> of same sex marriage. Everybody knows that,"
> Toobin said. The political calculation that states
> are going to have to make is, is the reward from
> the religious groups greater than the cost in lost
> business."

To the extent that the quoted lobbyist is accurate about the law, it still doesn't show that the law is different than the 19 other state RFRA laws or the federal RFRA law.

Basically the argument here is that "the bad guys [i.e., from your standpoint] supported this Indiana RFRA so it must be bad." Might be a valid argument for your side being against the law on its merits, but did you guys drop the ball by not opposing RFRA in the 19 other states and the federal RFRA? Those same alleged bad guys or similar guys in the other states supported those other RFRA laws.

Is there a real problem with discrimination in those other 19 states with RFRA or with the federal RFRA?


>
> The only way you right wing nuts can pass
> legislation anymore is to pretend that it's not
> what it is. Grow some balls and own it, you
> dipshits.

Intellectually sound arguments do NOT need ad hominem.

I'll respect your point of view and argue in a civil fashion. Since junior high is a distant memory for me, name-calling is not amusing. I'll ask you to kindly reciprocate.

So I can smoke my peyote in Ames. I won't share with gays.

I know where I'm going for vacation this summer.
Hello "Hoosier" state!

behind closed dorrs, homos Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I know where I'm going for vacation this summer.
> Hello "Hoosier" state!

Check out Whitewater. Great place to visit and people actually behave themselves.
If they don't, they'll be thrown out in a heartbeat.

http://indianastateparks.reserveamerica.com/camping/whitewater-memorial-state-park/r/campgroundDetails.do?contractCode=IN&parkId=570033

mupgl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> behind closed dorrs, homos Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I know where I'm going for vacation this
> summer.
> > Hello "Hoosier" state!
>
> Check out Whitewater. Great place to visit and
> people actually behave themselves.
> If they don't, they'll be thrown out in a
> heartbeat.
>
> http://indianastateparks.reserveamerica.com/campin
> g/whitewater-memorial-state-park/r/campgroundDetai
> ls.do?contractCode=IN&parkId=570033


fun and games only Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> Unless there is a casino or amusement park in
> Indiana, FCPS credit cards will not ever be used
> there.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

^^^^^^Roger that!^^^^^^^^

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

It is greater than 10 miles to a theme park from this location, and I did not see any mention of a casino. This will not work.

fx co gov is helping europe russia use the two local airports as an LZ for any foreign intruder to spread population into the heart of the USA

the only possible motive i see for fx co gov - who before canceled school field-trips to DC as being too expensive

is to either implant illegals hiding in our area in that area OR pick up illegals in that area from mexico,CA who are tired of walking

BULLSHIT FIELDTRIP to 1/2 way across continent

BULLSHIT

FCPS used to run field trips for those who paid only to deals like: luxury bus trip to skiing or luxury bus trip to beach area

i can now guess the people that "could afford" these trips were actually children of county employees and the money came from their theiving parents doubling their pay - and using government equipment and gasoline: FREE