Arizona Republican Bigots

[Solitary]

A veteran state lawmaker is pushing legislation that would allow businesses to discriminate against gays — and maybe even women and Jews — as long as they were acting on sincerely held religious beliefs.  :roll:  Solitary

[Minimalist]

And Mexicans.... nothing that AZ republicunts hate more than Mexicans.

[Thumpalumpacus]

[youtube:3gxualjo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrFOb_f7ubw[/youtube:3gxualjo]

[AllPurposeAtheist]

SCOTUS really needs a branch office in Arizona just for the sole purpose of overturning damned near every new law passed there.  :roll:

[GSOgymrat]

If the discrimination was against Christians there would certainly be an outrage.

[gomtuu77]

I think private businesses ought to be able to choose who they do or do not do business with, so long as they are not discriminating on the basis of unchangeable immutable characteristics like race and gender.

This would leave open the possibility of excluding others based upon their beliefs, religion, and behavior.  This does not mean that I would personally choose to discriminate in this fashion, but I think people ought to be allowed to do so.

[Hijiri Byakuren]

This would leave open the possibility of excluding others based upon their beliefs, religion, and behavior.  This does not mean that I would personally choose to discriminate in this fashion, but I think people ought to be allowed to do so.

And people wonder why atheists get pissed off so easily at Christians.

[stromboli]

I think private businesses ought to be able to choose who they do or do not do business with, so long as they are not discriminating on the basis of unchangeable immutable characteristics like race and gender.

This would leave open the possibility of excluding others based upon their beliefs, religion, and behavior.  This does not mean that I would personally choose to discriminate in this fashion, but I think people ought to be allowed to do so.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/2 ... 03361.html

What does science tell us about sexual preference?

Genes

We know, from many twin and adoption studies, that sexual preference has a genetic component.

A gay man is more likely than a straight man to have a (biological) gay brother; lesbians are more likely than straight women to have gay sisters.

In 1993, a study published in the journal Science showed that families with two homosexual brothers were very likely to have certain genetic markers on a region of the X chromosome known as Xq28. This led to media headlines about the possibility of the existence of a "gay gene" and discussions about the ethics of aborting a "gay" fetus.

Homosexuality is not a "behavior" that is exclusive to humans. It has been exhibited in a number of other species. It is not based on either behavior or belief. To exclude someone from a business because of their homosexuality is not different from excluding for racial reasons.

The establishment clause, the one that prohibits a specific religion being taught in public schools, also can be applied to businesses. If a business opens it doors to the public but then excludes on the basis of belief, it is essentially doing the same thing. The concept of a free society that then by turns does not allow certain picked groups to participate is not then a free society.

This is how you wind up with places like the Warsaw Ghetto in Poland in WW2; exclude the Jews from every shop and residence except where they are allowed to go. The German soldiers that enforced the Ghettos and pogroms of that era were by and large good believing Christians. Same as the Papacy of the Catholic church that turned Jews over to the SS for deportation to death camps.

[frosty]

But I thought gaaaaaaaawd loved the Joos? Don't Conservative Christians (read: "true believers") also tend to believe that gaaaaaaaaaawd favors the Joos as a chosen people? I've read that so many times it's like a broken record now.

[Plu]

This would leave open the possibility of excluding others based upon their beliefs, religion, and behavior.  This does not mean that I would personally choose to discriminate in this fashion, but I think people ought to be allowed to do so.

Be glad we don't. Unlike atheists on christian forums (who tend to last anywhere between 1 and 5 posts before being randomly banned) we don't believe one should discriminate against people for the things they believe, so you're allowed to stay here.

[Shiranu]

I think private businesses ought to be able to choose who they do or do not do business with, so long as they are not discriminating on the basis of unchangeable immutable characteristics like race and gender.

This would leave open the possibility of excluding others based upon their beliefs, religion, and behavior.  This does not mean that I would personally choose to discriminate in this fashion, but I think people ought to be allowed to do so.

Enjoy that mindset when you find yourself in a minority and no one will choose to do business with you.

[Jason78]

I think private businesses ought to be able to choose who they do or do not do business with, so long as they are not discriminating on the basis of unchangeable immutable characteristics like race and gender.

This would leave open the possibility of excluding others based upon their beliefs, religion, and behavior.  This does not mean that I would personally choose to discriminate in this fashion, but I think people ought to be allowed to do so.

Discriminating based on behavior is ok.  No one working in retail should have to serve a customer that's being unreasonable.

But discriminating against someone's sexuality?   How does that achieve anything?

[Plu]

Discriminating based on behavior is ok. No one working in retail should have to serve a customer that's being unreasonable.

Even this is still a very limited subset of discrimination based on behaviour... you shouldn't have to serve a customer that's being unreasonable, but it's not a good thing to discriminate a customer because he happens to be acting too friendly, speaks with an accent, or any other of a million behavioural traits that aren't detrimental to another person life and health.

[sdelsolray]

I think private businesses ought to be able to choose who they do or do not do business with, so long as they are not discriminating on the basis of unchangeable immutable characteristics like race and gender.

This would leave open the possibility of excluding others based upon their beliefs, religion, and behavior.  This does not mean that I would personally choose to discriminate in this fashion, but I think people ought to be allowed to do so.

The US Constitution, as amended, disagrees with you.  Private business operating in interstate commerce can be regulated.

[Minimalist]

He sounds like one of those libertarian fuckwits who thinks "property rights" are more important than human rights.