Saturday, February 22, 2014

Arizona proves it. Anti-gay groups have FINALLY gone too far

I am predicting it. In their zeal to hinder lgbt equality, anti-gay groups and their supporters have finally gone too far. The video above shows a protest in Arizona over the passage of that awful bill which would allow business to discriminate against lgbts on the grounds of "religious liberty." All it needs is Gov. Jan Brewer to sign it.

If she does, expect there to be a rocket-like attempt to push other bills throughout the nation. Granted, there is already a failed attempt going on, but if this particular bill becomes law in Arizona, it will give a sense of momentum to anti-gay groups.

And it will be a false momentum. If that bill becomes law in Arizona, not only will you see a raising of hell by the lgbt community at large to rival anything done in the past, but America in general will finally be able to see anti-gay groups without their masks of religious piety.

This country will finally see the face of hypocrisy that the lgbt community has known about too well. Granted, anti-gay groups will still have their supporters but they won't be able to fool unsuspecting Americans into thinking that they are Christian groups fighting for tradition and morality.

To many Americans, the pushing of Jim Crow-like legislation against the lgbt community will be their introduction to groups like the National Organization for Marriage and the Family Research Council. And these Americans will NOT like what they see.

So proceed at your own risks, guys.  The next move you make may begin your funeral dirges.


Chris Williams said...

I have libertarian views so this law is fine by me. Any private business owner should be able to refuse service to anyone they want to. This shouldn't apply to government workers though of course.

BlackTsunami said...

Nope. The law is dangerous. We begin to allow stuff like this and where is the cutting off point? One more thing. No offense but I find some libertarians to be extremely naive when it comes to this sort of thing. Do any even study history? Remember how dangerous this sort of thing was to African-Americans under segregation?

Anonymous said...

Black Tsunami:

I believe libertarians remember (know) what happened, but simply don't care, because of course most of the time they were not the ones being discriminated against. Sad to say, but unfortunately that is the only conclusion one can draw from such indifference. Just my opinion.

I totally agree that this law, and laws like it, are very dangerous. Reminds me of too many times in history when groups of people were made out to be 'the other'. :(


BJ Jackson Lincoln said...

So, Chris Williams, you would not have a problem if you find a product you want but are denied that purchase because of something you have no control over? You believe legal discrimination against any group is OK?! If this law was against any other group, would that bother you?
You may want to read up, from both sides, and really think about your answer. Frankly, I find your attitude about it repulsive.

JCF said...

"Any private business owner should be able to refuse service to anyone they want to."

And if, say, this private business's SUPPLIERS wanted to deny it good&services, would that be OK, too?

The above is a recipe for chaos, and economic COLLAPSE.

There's a reason the cash economy replaced voluntary (able-to-refuse) barter. "If your money's green" (so to speak) it's legal tender, at ANY business in the USA. Fail to honor that, and your business license gets yanked. And that's the way it should be.

The taxpayers of Arizona will end up funding the (winning!) litigants, if they're fool enough to pass this thing...

Hope Neudert said...

This REALLY needs to be challenged on the grounds of violation of the Civil Rights act. We should NEVER be able to dictate to others where they can eat, stay, shop etc.

Chris Williams have you EVER read the Civil Rights Act? It's under Title II Public Accommodations. No it doesn't list gender or sexual orientation but it SHOULD... the whole idea was we as human being shouldn't be allowed to discriminate just because someone else is something we don't like.

Anonymous said...

seftI am hopeful that the Gov signs it. A loud, ugly, messy court case, with the haters on full display, might finally convince most of the supreme court that this kind of jim-crow hate has to be put down and put down NOW.

Otherwise, it will just keep bursting like the foul infection that it is.

Anonymous said...

I do not have much sympathy for gay couples who expect non-gay-friendly people to design wedding invitations for them. Blondie turned down the Olympic gig and was praised for it. Freedom of speech and religion is guaranteed in the US Constitution, so no further protection should be needed on the state level. There is not much we can do about churches encouraging their members to be verbal about attitudes, but does government really have to underwrite churches with tax exemptions? Especially when they campaign against the liberty and happiness of other citizens.

BlackTsunami said...

With all due respect anonymous, you get the situation totally wrong. In all of the public cases, the gay couple did not seek out non-friendly folks. They had no idea that these businesses weren't gay friendly until they sought the services. Furthermore freedom of speech and religion does not protect discriminatory acts. In the words of a judge who ruled against one of these businesses - baking a cake is not a religious act.

And it is not an act of speech. A secular business has no right to discriminate on religious basis. If they do, where do u stop?

glendenb said...

Alvin - I'm less sanguine about the effect of these bills than you are. I agree they are going too far. It shocks me that anyone would consider bringing back segregation and that supporters are cynical enough to clothe their bigotry in the language of religious liberty. FWIW, I think most of the people writing and supporting these bills know there's no threat to religious freedom but they're sufficiently anti-gay that they're willing to debase religious freedom in their pursuit of bigotry.

That said, I think a great many people who misunderstand the way the law works are genuinely afraid that there's some mysterious lawsuit coming along that will force their churches to perform gay weddings. These folks (I see them all the time in Utah) believe that their objection to gay rights is about religious teaching not simple bigotry. The thought process goes something like "My church teaches that being gay is bad," or "is okay but engaging in gay activity is bad," therefore "it is a religious teaching and anything that disagrees is an attack on religion." They rarely stop to ask if anti-gay religious teachings are the result of anti-gay bias. They connect taught by church to religious freedom and make the leap to believing any religious teaching is protected by freedom of religion. Add in their personal fear and lack of experience with actual real-live gay people and you have a scenario in which lots of otherwise well-meaning people can see these laws for the shockingly immoral return of segregation that they are.

Add to that witch's brew the fact that lots of Americans get confused information about the various much publicized cases (i.e. Elane Photography) and we have the makings of very real problem. Our national lgbt organizations have been largely silent and ineffective on these bills. I think we're in for a long and unpleasant slog.

Anonymous said...

We will see if the mods let this one through.

Hope said ,"This REALLY needs to be challenged on the grounds of violation of the Civil Rights act. We should NEVER be able to dictate to others where they can eat, stay, shop etc. " But it's okay to dictate to business owners and force them to accept people that lead a life style that they find revolting? What about how the business owners feel? Oh, no!! Let's not hurt the homosexual communities feelings. The first Amendment is a two way street. You people don't realize that as your screaming and yelling about gay people's rights, you are at the same time removing other peoples rights.

How about this? If it's a Christian business and they don't support gays, then don't go to that business. Think about people who are Anti-Military and they hear about a business who is Pro-Military. Should the business have to change its stance on how it feels about the Military to make the Anti-Military community feel better about their lifestyle? Absolutely not. The anti-military community should just stop bringing their money to the business. Basically, all I'm trying to say is, get over it. There are more important things going on then homosexuals trying to bring attention to themselves.

P.S. By being homosexual, that means you won't reproduce, meaning that you are not helping the future of this nation by having smart, strong, children. I find this to be absurd. The very fact that you demand so much, while giving so little. Quite selfish in my opinion.

BlackTsunami said...

Anonymous, you strange child. How about this - a secular business should act like such regardless of the religious beliefs of the owner. If you allow people to discriminate on the grounds of religious liberty, where does it stop? You would be able to hide all sorts of discrimination behind the grounds of religious liberty.

What you call gays bringing attention to ourselves is merely us making the simple demand that we be treated fairly just like everyone else.

Lastly, check your ignorance. Who says we're not reproducing? I won't even bother to answer such a ridiculous assumption.

Anonymous said...

First off, don't use the word "Freedom" because if you don't respect others rights to not agree or support your lifestyle your not a supporter of Freedom but force...the opposite of freedom. Because you are gay, you believe that you deserve some special privilege, heads up, you don't.

You say I make assumption about gays reproducing, which in fact, two people of the same sex can't reproduce with each other, you make the assumption that it's not actually their religion that makes them disagree with homosexuality, but it's their hidden bigotry. It would appear you are just pulling things out of your ass. Have you spoken with the Christian owners of the businesses? I would guess not. You yell freedom, as you attempt to strip away other peoples rights. It's their business, they own it, they can decide who they want to serve. If you knew the slightest bit about economics, then you would realize that if a bunch of business openly went anti-gay, then another pro-gay business would arise to meet the demand. JUST GET OVER IT. WE DON'T GIVE A FLYING MONKEY IF YOU ARE GAY. JUST STOP DEMANDING SPECIAL TREATMENT BECAUSE YOU LIKE THE OPPOSITE SEX!!!

Patrick said...

Anonymous, your mother may have been heterosexual, but she didn't have any smart children, either.

Anonymous said...

And you also have to ask, how would the business know if someone was gay, unless they were openly displaying it? Despite what you people think, and what the joke of a main stream media says, most people in this country do not agree with homosexuality. Having said that, many of those same people do not care if you are gay, as long as you don't openly flaunt it. When you openly flaunt it, i.e. Being a woman and dressing like a dude vice-versa, you are doing nothing more then seeking attention, to be noticed. That is why I say, we don't give a fuck about you, or the fact that you are gay, no one does. And the shear fact that you expect people to respond positively to something they don't agree with is astounding.
Black Tsunami, you said ". If you allow people to discriminate on the grounds of religious liberty, where does it stop?" Here is a question for you ," If you allow people to control other peoples personal businesses, where does it stop? What happens when it gets to the point that the business can't make a single decision without being questioned about its motives. Or being forced to do things they don't that to do, what you call liberty. What you gays don't realize is your just a pawn in the game. Just a little tool to bring about degeneracy, and corruption. Oh and by the way, I am a firm atheist, so any move you make to slander Christianity won't mean a thing to me. I am here to simply question your beliefs, and attempt to make you understand how you are hurting EVERYONE'S freedom's with your actions. When I don't like something, I don't demand it change, I just get over it and move on, but apparently if I like someone of the same sex, then if I don't like something that is against my lifestyle, I somehow have the right to make demands of people and businesses. That logic.

BlackTsunami said...

First of all, anonymous, I will use whatever words I want to use on MY blog. You don't control that. Secondly, for someone who writes a lot of words, you display a lot of ignorance.

You also need to educate yourself when it comes to your phrase of taking someone's freedom. Telling a business that they must treat everyone equally is not taking away a freedom. Lastly my friend, this is not about an acceptance of homosexuality. It is about treating everyone equally. Of all of the ignorance you have displayed, your ignorance about lgbts is the most pitiful. We don't care whether ignorant folks like yourself accept us. We want to be treated equally. Also, what right do you have to dictate what constitutes "flaunting" when it comes to someone else's life. Let me take a wild guess. Your definition of flaunting is a gay couple walking together alone or with their children, an lgbt talking about his or her partner, maybe having a picture of his or her family on the desk at their job. That's not flaunting. That's normal behavior. How dare you have a problem with that. How dare you attempt to force lgbts to live our lives based upon your ignorance. Now see, THAT is the taking away of freedom.

James Willett said...

How long is it In Arizona that people use "Religous freedom" to deny services to single mothers, Jews or people of differing colour to their own?

Anonymous said...

What a surprise.. You failed to address even a single one of my points and then quickly assert a straw man argument and use the word ignorant over and over. I clearly stated was I thought flaunting it was, i.e. Female dressing male, etc.. This is not necessary, nor does it have anything to do with how you feel. You do it because you want others to know that you are gay.

Other Anonymous making comments about my mother.. You made no attempt to refute any of my claims, therefor your comment is invalid.

You seem to miss my entire point here. Once again, GET OVER IT. Just because someone does not like your lifestyle, and because they don't want your business, does not mean you are deserving of something special. You just don't seem to grasp that concept. Here is one for you, America was founded by Christians. It is a Christian nation, with a majority Christian population. Now what exactly gives you the right to demand it change? Because you like a dick in your ass? Does that constitute you being treated special? Once again, get over yourself, your not that important.

BlackTsunami said...

Anonymous, it amazes me how you continue to show your ignorance. To whit you make absolutely ridiculous assumptions about my transgender sisters. I also find it ironic that you claim that your problem is supposedly how lgbts flaunt our sex lives when it was YOU who pushed sexual intercourse into this debate. However I see what your problem is. You are suffering from entitlement issues. You seem to think that this is a Christian nation -defined by your brand of Christianity - and the rest of us here exist at the will and pleasure of folks like you. Well to borrow one of your favorite sayings - GET OVER IT. This is not nor has it ever been a Christian nation and lgbts ate not beholden to anyone. This country is about fairness for all and not solely for those who claim to be Christian. If you run a business, you have to treat all potential customers the same. Period. The end. Thus ends our debate. Any future comments by you will be ignored and not posted. Get over that, too.

Chris Williams said...

I wanna make it clear that I think this law should apply to everyone, not just gays. You may think it's morally wrong to discriminate against someone because they're gay, but I think it's morally wrong to force a business owner to provide a service to someone they don't like.

BlackTsunami said...

You're not in business to like people. You're in business to make money. Check into some history, particularly that of segregation, and see how your so-called innocent belief caused so much havoc in people's lives.

Chris Williams said...

Who are you to tell me how to run my hypothetical business though? That's the problem we have here. Remember your freedom ends where mine begins.

Segregation has nothing to do with this and actually forcing people by law to eat at different restaurants, use different public bathrooms, etc would be anti-libertarian.

BlackTsunami said...

No one is telling you how to RUN your business, only to be fair and serve all of your customers. I fail to see how being fair hurts your "freedom."

Also, check out your last sentence - "Segregation has nothing to do with this and actually forcing people by law to eat at different restaurants, use different public bathrooms, etc would be anti-libertarian."

By denying services to lgbts, you are in fact putting them in a position where they would have to, by law, eat at different restaurants, etc.