Mississippi Senate Passes Religious Freedom Bill

Discussion in 'THREAD ARCHIVES' started by SacredWarrior, Mar 31, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. For those who don't know, the Mississippi Senate has passed a bill that allows LGBT discrimination in places such as school, work, and possibly emergency services (ok that's probably stretching it a bit). It will also allow businesses to not serve LGBT people without repercussions. All under the name of Religious Liberty.

    I'm not very surprised at this honestly. This is Mississippi after all. The exact same state that still has the Confederate Flag as a part of their State Flag. Yet another reason for me to hate that shitty state.


    This is not gonna end well. But I will end on this footnote: Businesses who refuse to serve LGBT people most likely won't last long anyways and you're better off taking your business elsewhere. Consumers have more power than they realize. If Wal-Mart came out and said they would stop serving a particular race, they would most likely go out of business pretty quickly.

    Canada is looking like a much better country to live in now.
  2. Half of me says "Who cares?" because I'm tired of seeing political posts on Iwaku.

    The other half says "I don't know what you expected." because this is Mississippi. (Am I the only one who needs the song to spell it?)
  3. It's fine. Businesses will start to pull out of the state just as they have when other states tried to pull this shit. The state will be heartily shit on by national and international news services. Eventually the law will be challenged in court and will be struck down for violating constitutional rights, just like all the other recent attempts to discriminate against LGBT people that have made it to the judicial system. Or perhaps they'll cave to the economic and PR threats and revert and/or revise the law before that can happen.

    It's shitty that people still exist who think this kind of thing is a good idea, but it's not the end of the world or anything. Be worried if the Supreme Court upholds this kind of bullshit, because without that affirmation this is just another group of old conservative dickheads flailing about until they get slapped down for their foolishness.
    • Like Like x 4
    • Thank Thank x 1
  4. The banner says it's all your fault.
    • Nice execution! Nice execution! x 3
    • Love Love x 1
  5. I'm innocent I tells ya! D:
  6. I don't understand how this is allowed. To me, it's the same as refusing service to someone who is black, or Asian. You can't help how you are born.

    You should be able to refuse service to religious nutjobs who are too worried about where people put their penises. That should be totally legal.
    • Love Love x 1
  7. The people who push these kinds of laws are the same kind of people who say being gay or trans or whatever isn't something people are born with that they can't help. That's why they force kids into so-called conversion therapy: they think it's just some sinful choice the person is making and they just need some tough love to get back on the right path.

    It's fucked up, but at least their bullshit has internal consistency? :|
    • Bucket of Rainbows Bucket of Rainbows x 1
  8. I know. They're also the people who disagree with homosexuality being removed from the DSM and no longer considered a psychological disorder.

    Being a religious nutjob is a choice too though, which is why refusing services to them should be allowed. But, they can cry religious freedom and get that thrown out too.

    Maybe my understanding of the Constitution is wrong, but I thought that the right to practice any religion is all that it covered under it. How is being gay denying them their right to practice their idiotic beliefs? Must have been a memo I didn't get....
  9. This ain't new. This shit is real old, and atheists have been aware of it for quite a while. It's a classic "letter of the law" vs "spirit of the law" bullshit argument that's persisted throughout the decades. Of course, it's only a problem when it's convenient: It's why an ostensibly secular country has "In God We Trust" on the currency, instead of "E Pluribus Unum" like it once was. (circa 1950's decision to combat godless communism.)

    Since they're abusing the letter of the law to support themselves whenever convenient, it's important to know how they're doing it.

    "Amendment I. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

    The key words here are "prohibiting" and "abridging." The Christians arguing (and let's be real here, it's Christians doing it) and citing this law as their justification for it, are doing it under the pretense that forcing Christian businesses to participate in actions or behaviours which go against their religious beliefs, "abridges" their religious freedom. This is then usually combined with a couple of other tactics, such as...
    1. Claiming that the other faction in question (whether it be "durrhh gays", or the atheists, or the scientific community, or whoever else they hold grievances against) is religious, just like them, and is imposing their religion over the poor, innocent, victimized Christian religion. You'll often find this argument at the front line of creationism "intelligent design" vs evolution. Faux News loves it.
    2. The good ole hysterical "you wouldn't force a church to do it" argument, in which they'll compare and contrast public services (ex: schools) or private businesses (ex: cake shops) to churches. You know, churches: Tax exempt entities which get special rights and privileges exclusively because they're considered sacrosanct places for Christians.
    So an example argument, taking in the above and playing a little word bingo, goes a little something like this.

    "To force Christian privately owned enterprises to engage with a consumer base they have no interest in providing services for, violates their constitutional rights to operate their businesses free from atheist and gay government tyranny!"

    It sounds quite convincing, I'm sure, so long as you don't think about it, and subconsciously hold the view that a Christian's rights are more equal than anyone else's rights.

    Then again, I'm the kind of godless heathen that thinks that if churches are going to contribute political dollars to political campaigns, that they deserve to have their tax exempt status revoked. So maybe I'm not the best sort of person to ask about "Christian rights."
    • Useful Useful x 2
  10. This whole religious freedom thing is annoying not only because of that though, but.....

    Where the hell is the separation of church and State?

    And more importantly, as an Atheist.....

    Why the hell are these people's beliefs being shoved down my throat?

    Not everyone is a damn Christian. The US is full of people who follow a different faith other than Christianity. What about those people? The whole thing is fucking ridiculous and I don't understand how it's even legal that these laws can be put into place, because they are violating a lot more people than just homosexuals. Justifying homophobia and slapping a religious label on it is the most retarded thing this country has ever done.

    A little fact: Phobias are considered mental disorders, which means that every single person who signed their name to this bill has mental problems, and should (Especially if they hold a public position) seek professional help for it. We're already paying for their healthcare which is better than everyone else's. I wouldn't mind if my tax dollars went toward getting help for their issues against gays.
    • Love Love x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Can I just say that @Nydanna should be in office now?
  12. Eh... Kind of.

    I mean yes, there's nothing biological about Religion. So technically speaking you're never born as any religion.

    But there is something to say about child indoctrination raising. Thanks to our friend Evolution we gain a lot of amazing traits that allow us to learn, survive, take our parents advice etc. The issue is though 'taking parents advice' doesn't discriminate between "Don't get near that snake, it has poison" and "There's an old man in the Sky who hates you for Masturbating and eating shellfish". And once an innocent child's mind has been filled with such propaganda and hate speech, it becomes an insanely difficult task to knock them out of it as an adult.

    So yes, it is a choice cause they are choosing to remain this way. But this isn't exactly an easy choice either, you're asking them to go against their entire upbringing, their entire look on life, fear they developed for things like hell, death etc needs to be satisfied from elsewhere, and they also risk being denounced by a lot of their loved ones.

    A few people who explain it better than I can (open)

    Being someone who was raised religious (although casually) but later became involved with extremest churches in my teen years?

    This is completely on the ball.
  13. Preserved in the more important establishments. (Namely, the Supreme Court.) There's an unwritten rule that no matter how raving and religious Congress or the President becomes, the Supreme Court will uphold the Constitution's separation of church and state in the most important of cases via pulling their law change card. It's why something like "In God We Trust" got a pass: It's unimportant. Irritating, but unimportant. All you need is for a gay person to challenge this "right" that the state has created and have that case cycle its way through the circuit to the Supreme Court level, and they will (generally) rule in favour of individual liberties over collective establishment comforts. Take when Intelligent Design challenged Evolution's place in the class room, and got utterly fucking wrecked by the Supreme Court, who called it out to be what it rightfully is: Rebranded Creationism. (Notably, also rejected by the Supreme Court.)

    Frustrating as this may be, these are the dying breaths of homophobia in government in the United States. The Supreme Court has made it quite clear via marriage that gays and their rights do not get to play second fiddle to Christian comforts. Considering the precedence set by not allowing businesses to ban other minority customers, this pain that has been created will pass in time. Christians will keep trying, and failing, until they either...
    • A. Run out of things to try and play "word of the law" games on.
    • B. Public opinion grows sufficiently sick of the economic and civil liberties damages these people keep playing and turn on them.
    Both of which are proving true over time, though it is good to note cases like these and fight them repeatedly and constantly. One side is going to run out of energy and it should preferably be the side that is obviously wrong.

    The greatest strength and weakness of Democracy is that it allows peaceable social change without violating the sacrosanct rights of individuals. The issue being: That change will be gradual, as those who hold to more socially conservative values will generally need to die of old age first, because the new norm established by the forces of change becomes the generally accepted norm. Meaning that changes established today, will be best felt and best enforced in the generations of tomorrow and the day after. Not our own.

    The only thing that really concerns me is if the political minority of the extremely regressive right--largely voting for Ted Cruz--wins the day. Not because I think it would stop progress, but because I could imagine it doing sufficient damage so as to delay it for decades more.
  14. This is how I feel about any Republican candidate that decides to run for President. Romney terrified me as a woman. His views on women, and those of his running mate actually made me consider disguising myself as a man for the four years they would be in office.

    Most Republicans are closed minded bigots, not all, but those who aren't are overshadowed by the big mouths who are.

    Where are the atheist politicians? Where are the ones who believe that the people have the right to decide what to do with their lives and the government isn't there to tell them what's allowed and what isn't when it comes to what is legally an individuals choice? Pro-lifers, anti-gay, freedom suppressing assholes are all I ever seen when I look at Republicans.

    But, as it stands with homosexuality the most depressing fact is that these people refuse to place any value on scientific research and go off a book that could have been written by some random drunk with lots of craziness going on in their minds. Even worse is that they're contorting the true message behind that very book to cherry pick what they want to follow and what they do not.

    The real message of the bible is not to judge people, yet these laws are going against that. And the biggest slap in the face? There is not a fucking person out there that's pointing that fact out! Where are the politicians coming in with the reality slap to the face? Where are the people in an uproar, the decent Christians that believe the true meaning of the bible and the message of love and acceptance that it's meant to be taken from it?

    The only bright side to these rules is that it's much easier to point out the assholes in society, and see what businesses should be avoided like the plague and where support should be placed. I am not the biggest fan of Disney, but they earned a huge deal of my respect when they threatened to boycott Georgia for their anti-LGBT law. The problem is, there's going to be a time when boycott threats lose their effect, and a state is going to shrug their shoulders and say 'So what? We've got other names that will support us.'

    I'm not gay at all, but my daughter is. These laws scare the living shit out of me because of that. I fear for what her future it going to be like when all I see is hatred simply because she loves someone who is the same gender that she is. People aren't going to look at who she is as a person when they see her holding hands with another girl. Who a person loves does not change who they are as a person. It doesn't make them evil, and it certainly doesn't make them a terrible person who doesn't deserve to be treated like a decent human being. The fact that people can even think that it's okay to treat someone in such a way just because they don't fall into what another person considers normal, it just gives me even less hope for humanity.
    • Love Love x 2
    • Thank Thank x 1
  15. Losing the majority of voters the second they admit to being one.
    Seriously, according to surveys and polls they'd actually have better luck admitting to being a rapist.
    • Like Like x 2
  16. As I've said before, anyone who uses the Bible to push their hateful rhetoric are cherry picking the everloving shit out of it to push their jackass agendas while ironically going against other bits of scripture they're violating, like wearing cotton, eating shellfish, not stoning magicians, etc.

    As Brovo pointed out, this is the last dying breaths of establishment homophobia that's being pushed by the same withering sacks of shit who think that men have the right to tell a woman what they are allowed to do with their bodies and probably more than a few wish they could go back to Jim Crow laws.

    Thing is, every generation becomes more civil minded and progressive, and generally kids grow up thinking their parents' ignorance and bigotry is wrong, save for really insular communities where this narrow minded and hateful shit is so saturated in culture, the best thing we have is the Internet to expose people to a different world view. Some people will double down on their beliefs, but others will have their eyes open and change. It's a slow process, like a rock being weathered by waves, but it happens. The more connected the world is, the better we all are. It's a lot harder to hate someone for being gay or Muslim or whatever if you get to know them well before finding out.

    We honestly live in the best time we've ever had for civil rights.
  17. I would argue the genocide and forceful removal of lands of native tribes or slavery would take that label, but that's just me.
    • Nice execution! Nice execution! x 1
  18. Like most Americans are going to admit that they're in the wrong for that. Didn't you know that they were entitled to the land because they outgunned the Native Americans? If you can take it by force, it's yours and no one can say differently. :P
  19. [​IMG]
  20. Honestly, that pisses me off more than anything else here, though that's a topic for another day.
    On the matter of LGBT rights, @Nydanna pretty much stated what most of my thoughts are on the matter.

    Frankly, I find arguing about it to be a rather futile task. My family is anti-gay and no amount of what I could ever say could possibly change their minds; it just absolutely amazes me how close minded people can be. I tried to speak openly with them about my opinions and they acted as though I was attacking them personally and got really defensive even though I was being considerably polite about it. Once they asked me if I was gay, which I just found really insulting. I mean, it really says a lot about my parents when they start implying that the only way I could be so openly pro-gay rights was if I was gay myself.

    Experiences like that can be a real drain on morale, so at this point I've just about given up. As if what I have to say makes any difference anyways.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.