Skip to main content

Protestors Alex Corona (C) and David Milligan (R), partners who say they wish to get married if the Defense of Marriage Act is overturned, rally in support of gay marriage in front of the Supreme Court in Washington, March 27, 2013. For the second day run
Allowing businesses to refuse to serve gay customers for religious reasons appears to be the latest Republican legislative craze, sweeping the states. Kansas and Arizona have made the most headlines, but they're far from alone: Idaho, Oregon, South Dakota, Tennessee, Hawaii, Ohio, Oklahoma, and Mississippi have all seen similar bills introduced in recent weeks. The good news is that, just as Kansas Republicans pulled back on their bill and Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer seems poised to veto after public outcry, the bills have been dead on arrival in several of the other states.

But even if public pressure is forcing Republicans to shelve the discrimination bills, you don't get similar bills being introduced in this many states if it's not a for-serious part of the Republican agenda. And it's backed by the usual network of far-right think tanks and advocacy groups, as Dana Liebelson reports:

According to the Wichita Eagle, the American Religious Freedom Program (ARFP)—which is part of the Ethics and Public Policy Center, a conservative organization founded in 1976—crafted the language for the Kansas bill. Brian Walsh, executive director of the ARFP, which supports religious freedom measures,acknowledges that his group consulted with the legislators on the bill, but he says that lots of other groups did as well: "We gave them suggestions and they took some of them." Walsh says that ARFP was contacted by legislators who wrote the Tennessee bill and that the group frequently talked to legislators in South Dakota about "religious freedom" but not the state's specific bill. Julie Lynde, executive director of Cornerstone Family Council in Idaho, one of many state groups that are part of Citizen Link, a branch of Focus on the Family, told Al Jazeera America, "We've been involved in working on the language" of the Idaho bill. Another member of Citizen Link, the Arizona Policy Center, has been active in supporting the Arizona bill. And the Oregon ballot initiative was proposed by Friends of Religious Freedom, a conservative Oregon nonprofit.
The good news is that bigots are losing. They're mostly losing on these bills now, and they're definitely losing in the long run. But they're not going without a fight, and even one state passing a law that allows businesses to say "I won't serve you because you're gay" is a moral horror:
"This seems to be a concerted Hail Mary campaign to carve out special rights for religious conservatives so that they don't have to play by the same rules as everyone else does," says Hurst, from Truth Wins Out. "In this new up-is-down world, anti-gay religious folks are 'practicing their faith' when they're baking cakes or renting out hotel rooms to travelers. On the ground, [these bills] hurt real, live LGBT people."
As Liebelson points out, we're talking about an effort to put new Jim Crow-style laws into effect. In 2014. With marriage equality steadily gaining ground in public opinion, in the courts, and in the laws of the states, Republicans are trying to claw us back in time and write the right to discriminate into law. Even if they fail everywhere, remember that this was what they wanted badly enough to brave public outrage over their efforts to pass it.

Originally posted to Laura Clawson on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 10:31 AM PST.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Another Litmus Test for the True Believers.... (9+ / 0-)

    Something to strive for.

    •  Ok, if they want to play this game... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      eggplantfl, worldlotus, Dodgerdog1

      I have some questions about this. Since this proposed law is about religious beliefs, how can it be enforced without a legal definition of religion in general, and a comprehensive list of religions and the groups that each religion's adherents are legally allowed to discriminate against? There also needs to be a process for creating a new religion just like there is for creating a new business.

      At every level of society, people have documented rules they are required to follow. Employees must follow company policies. Citizens must follow laws: national, state, and local. Hell, even members of an online community like DailyKos have written rules they have to follow if they want to remain members of the community. This shouldn't be any different. To be enforceable, it must be documented.

      So, who is the arbiter for each religion's set of beliefs, and who determines that? What happens when some cult members disagree with the decision makers about who they want to discriminate against? Can they claim it as a religious right at that point since they aren't following the official position of their religion?

      Until each religion documents the list of people they are supposed to hate, this is nothing more than a law that allows people to discriminate against whoever they want and it has nothing to do with religion.

      On the other side of that, what does it say about religious people that they have to hide behind arbitrary sets of beliefs to justify their hatred of others?

      I am sick of people using their religion as an excuse to be assholes.

  •  What's next on the GOP agenda? (13+ / 0-)

    Dogs and fire hoses?
    Poll taxes?

  •  "Voter-ID becomes subcutaneous RF-ID" meme (9+ / 0-)

    the ultimate GOP wedge issue will split the tinfoil hat libertarians from the fetus-hostess evangelicals

    Republicans are trying to claw us back in time and write the right to discriminate into law. Even if they fail everywhere, remember that this was what they wanted badly enough to brave public outrage over their efforts to pass it.

    Warning - some snark may be above‽ (-9.50; -7.03)‽ eState4Column5©2013 "I’m not the strapping young Muslim socialist that I used to be" - Barack Obama 04/27/2013 (@eState4Column5).

    by annieli on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 10:41:17 AM PST

  •  When my dog farts it sounds like ARFP n/t (6+ / 0-)

    Nuclear Reactor = Dirty Bomb

    by olo on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 10:43:20 AM PST

  •  Hey Wall Street Journal and Chamber of Commerce... (9+ / 0-)

    the horse you backed has got to be put out of its misery.

  •  By these laws, (9+ / 0-)

    I can assume that anyone with Don't Tread On Me paraphernalia is also gay, and refuse them service on religious grounds, correct?

    I'm living in America, and in America you're on your own. America's not a country. It's just a business.

    by CFAmick on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 10:43:57 AM PST

  •  Hey, slavery is an institution accepted in the (14+ / 0-)

    Bible, so why shouldn't my religious beliefs about slavery trump the goddam constitution?

    Fiat justitia ruat caelum "Let justice be done though the heavens fall."

    by bobdevo on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 10:45:26 AM PST

    •  We put slavery in the (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jessical, geekydee, bobdevo

      Constitution too, but the Civil War finally put an end to that.

      "The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?" ~Orwell, "1984"

      by Lily O Lady on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 10:56:53 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  No it didn't; they just changed the name to Jim (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        cama2008, bobdevo, nolagrl, Lily O Lady


        The South won after 1876 when the North stopped caring.

        nosotros no somos estúpidos

        by a2nite on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 11:19:48 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Jim Crow at didn't (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          appear in the Constitution, but was enacted in spite of the Constitution.

          I do agree that the South did eventually win the war they started because they are persistent stinkers. That is the tactic of the Right. They never give in; they just push harder than ever, until they get what they want. One hundred and fifty-two years after the Civil War, that tactic is still an important part of their arsenal. When I think about it, they really are still fighting the Civil War and have made it the War of Southern Aggression.

          "The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?" ~Orwell, "1984"

          by Lily O Lady on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 12:15:30 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  It seems so desperate (9+ / 0-)

    and out of touch with the broader culture. And even if they passed one of these laws, it would stand almost no chance in the federal courts, clearly an establishment clause violation.

    •  Desperation is their modus operandi. (0+ / 0-)

      They've got nothing.

      "Onward through the fog!" - Oat Willie

      by rocksout on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 11:14:31 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Actually, probably not an Establishment Clause (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      violation, because the law doesn't define which religious beliefs are protected; it just says that if you have them, you can act on them. ("Establishment" cases are usually where the state is endorsing a particular religion, such as the nativity scenes on the state house lawn, religious symbols in public schools, etc.)

      It might get into trouble for privileging religious beliefs over secular ones, but in this Supreme Court, I wouldn't bet on that. There are other places where they have allowed religious exemptions, such as vaccination laws and forced medical treatment, and not working on Saturdays or having your store closed on Saturdays rather than Sundays, and wearing religious headgear (hijab, yarmulkes) even where hats are otherwise banned.

      The better arguments against this law are that it is impractical, and so broadly written as to allow discrimination by anyone against anyone on any pretext whatsoever -- and that the backlash will damage the state economy.

  •  To debunk an already disingenuous talking pernt: (9+ / 0-)

    If the great free market really does lay these discriminating businesses to waste, as the libertarians like to claim (by the way, if the free market will force these businesses to close, why would they knowingly go into this head on, knowing their businesses will fail??), how long does it take for the free market to solve our problems?   6 months?  1 year?   10 years?  50 years?  Maybe it takes 50 years for this great pendulum of the free market to correct all of our problems.  Do we really have to wait that long?

    (notice how nobody EVER EVER EVER asks these disingenuous pieces of shit how long this great free market correction will take!)

    Please know I am not rude. I cannot rec anything from this browser. When I rec or post diaries I am a guest at some exotic locale's computer. Ayn is the bane!

    by Floyd Blue on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 10:46:53 AM PST

    •  Agreed. (0+ / 0-)

      I'll add (it's my evergreen topic): Much like Naderites and Hillary-Obama-haters saying we need to nominate only the purest liberals even if in the meantime, the losses pile up and the years go by.

      Because hey, I have a job and insurance so it won't hurt the pure me.

    •  The appropriate answer to 'wait' is: "No." (0+ / 0-)

      Just say 'no' to credit checks, pee tests, 'austerity' idiocies, and really, really stupid people.  They don't matter.  Your children's lives matter.

      This is evolution of the historic variant at its most obvious.  Those who will not adapt to conditions as they are, in favor of conditions they want to see, will not prosper.  

      The GOP can't adapt.

      Joy shared is doubled. Pain shared is halved. Spider Robinson

      by nolagrl on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 12:08:55 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  The "free market" nonsense is bullshit. (0+ / 0-)

      Civilized societies don't rely on market forces to determine civil rights. Rand Paul can shove his free market civil liberties crap right back up his ass.

  •  of course it could be like the school voucher . . (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sfbob, drmah, BachFan

    law in Louisiana.

    Because they can't specifically target any one group, they use the guise of religious freedom.  However when another group who they hate more than Teh Gay(tm) tries to use the laws for their own benefits the TP appeal of these laws will be lost.

  •  I wish I could buy a store ... (7+ / 0-)

    Then ask customers if they are Republican ... and if so, tell them to get the hell out and piss up a rope because their existence offends me.

    Which it does.

  •  Service (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JeffW, IamGumby, Forest Deva

    I think we should start a petition to create a new law to protect our right to not serve bigoted Republicans.  They'd be hard pressed to find a good restaurant or place to shop.

  •  I love this framing in the blocked quote: (14+ / 0-)
    "This seems to be a concerted Hail Mary campaign to carve out special rights for religious conservatives so that they don't have to play by the same rules as everyone else does,"
    emphasis mine.

    Now, it is THEM who want "special rights".  And, truly, that is precisely what they want.  Whereas, all that the LGBT community has ever wanted was EQUAL rights.

    With the Decision Points Theater, the George W. Bush Presidential Library becomes the very first Presidential Library to feature a Fiction Section.

    by Its the Supreme Court Stupid on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 10:49:20 AM PST

  •  Introduce in Maine too (7+ / 0-)

    But here LD1428 failed in both chambers of the Legislature, with even five GOP House members voting to kill it.

    Form follows function -- Louis Sullivan

    by Spud1 on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 10:50:25 AM PST

  •  Maybe we ought to bring back the good ole days.... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    of the Roman Empire and persecute xistians. I could see lions as a good investment for the future! Imagine watching Tony Perkins or James Dobson running away from hungry lions in a football stadium.

    While not all republicans are bigots, all bigots are republicans.

    by Maximilien Robespierre on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 10:51:10 AM PST

  •  Both the fundamentalist yahoos... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    librarisingnsf, Calamity Jean

    ...and the Ayn Randian Libertards have embraced these legislative efforts; in other words, all the marks of the Republican base.
    But ultimately, their bent toward "freedom" for private businesses to discriminate in the name of Jayzus is nothing more than a new means for institutionalizing their long standing and ongoing douchebaggery.  

  •  Here is the argument that should be made (10+ / 0-)

    If my "religious freedom" demands that I discriminate against a certain group, in this case, gay and lesbian people, then by asserting that right I am insisting that the person I am discriminating against essentially practice MY religion by agreeing with my assessment that he or she is a "sinner."

    There is another aspect as well: since, according to some interpretations of the bible EVERYONE is a sinner, then by that definition NOBODY should be served by a true believer---not even the believer himself or herself. Picking and choosing which group of sinners it's okay to serve constitutes hypocrisy, which is also a sin.

  •  I just hope someone is totalling up the cost (9+ / 0-)

    all these measures are forcing taxpayers to pay not just in the legislator's time but in defending these measures in court.  That would be a campaign issue when the Republican tries to claim they want smaller government and responsible lawmaking.

  •  There is a new Jim Crow Law in Indiana (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    librarisingnsf, drmah, worldlotus

    SB 367 is out of committee and headed to the floor for a vote.  The bill allows religious employers to discriminate.

  •  We always knew (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    drmah, Calamity Jean, jayden

    that the right was dominated by racists and bigots.  Nice of them to forcefully and obviously prove it.

  •  A Republican USA? (12+ / 0-)

    Is not a place that I want to live.  If Mitt Romney had won, I was prepared to leave.  I am a Military veteran, educated on the GI Bill.  My father was a WW2 veteran.  My family has roots that go back to the 1680's.  I can trace my ancestors and I studied Scotch-Irish American immigration patterns to the shores of the North Atlantic Coast, through the hills of Pennsylvania, into what became West Virginia, Kentucky, North and South Carolina, then Georgia and Alabama.  The migration split into Arkansas and Texas.  

    I should be a red-necked, deeply conservative, Texas Baptist, but I saw the light and it was not pretty.

    I read, and I learned.  I read now, and what I see from people who I knew years ago in high school and college writing on Facebook and other social media and what I see is, should I say, disgusting.  If there is a Republican elected President in my lifetime, I will probably opt to be an ex-Patriot.  I don't think that the USA would be able to survive the ignorance, bigotry and hatred that another Republican might bring to the Oval Office.  I am not gay, but I support the rights of those who are.  I am not black or brown or red or yellow, but I don't see any reason that the rights of those who are should not be the same as mine.

    It is distressing to see what they do in the Congress and the Senate.

    My wife, daughter and granddaughters should have more privacy in their doctor's office than I have buying another rifle or shotgun.

    by NM Ray on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 11:02:21 AM PST

    •  We Made That Choice But Got Stuck By a Needy (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      family member after we were well along with the application process.

      It's not easy for an American to get in somewhere else; if you're thinking seriously about it, best to get the arrangements under way early.

      It gets hard to be let in after your 40's because of your potential costs to a society you weren't paying into during your cheap years.

      Good luck whichever way you choose.

      We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

      by Gooserock on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 11:24:45 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I've said many times (0+ / 0-)

      that I'd go back to the UK my great-grandfather left if they'd take me.  Didn't think of this early enough in my life and now I'm too old.  Stuck here for the coming Gilead holocaust.

  •  This looks like an attempt to extend the (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cama2008, LillithMc

    religious objections to providing birth control in company health plans. The thing about the Right is that they never stop pushing. The Right looks to subvert the Bill of Rights to deny rights to others: life (2nd Amend. gunz), birth control, being gay (2nd Amend. religion).

    By perverting our government and the Constitution that established it the wingers are delivering us into the hands of The Deep State. Our government only functions when The Deep State wants it to.

    "The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?" ~Orwell, "1984"

    by Lily O Lady on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 11:06:02 AM PST

  •  Can we make them post "I discriminate" signs (6+ / 0-)

    in their windows so we know who to avoid?

    “To the world you may be just one person, but to one person you may be the world.”-Brandi Snyder (in memory of my Nick)

    by YellowDogInGA on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 11:06:26 AM PST

  •  Hey Reince, how's that GOP overhaul working? (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    drmah, RichM, MadMs, Calamity Jean

    Wasn't it almost one year ago now?

    An unflinching analysis commissioned by the Republican National Committee and released Monday (3/18/13) said female, minority and younger voters have been alienated by what they see as the GOP's stale policies and image of intolerance. "We need to campaign among Hispanic, black, Asian and gay Americans and demonstrate we care about them too," the report advised. "But it is not just tone that counts. Policy always matters.

  •  This is very simple to me (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    The Dixiecrats vs. the Plutocrats.

    Personally, I hope that MAD becomes a reality and I will eat some popcorn in the meantime.

  •  Indiana Legislature has proposed discrimination (4+ / 0-)

    law, allowing employers to refuse to give full insurance benefits to women for religious reasons, even though the employer accepts federal and state tax funds for their operation. If the Religious College wants to be totally out of the insurance loop, then all tax supported funds to their organization need to be cut off.

    The startling part of this legislation was it was slipped into a tax bill, totally unrelated to the issue.  I'm mad as hell that my district representative is the one who introduced it.  This technique is reminiscent of the tactics Mitch Daniels used when governor.  The Right-Wing agenda he was able to get passed in Indiana is just as bigoted as Wisconsin and Florida, yet Daniels was able to come off as a moderate Republican because he buried his agenda in other state business.

    After the bigoted sentence was unearthed, the tax bill was sent back to committee today.  Stay tuned to hear whether this statement is removed from the tax bill.

  •  shove people back in the closet project (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    drmah, Calamity Jean

    WTF do they care so much?

  •  Lincoln (3+ / 0-)

    The party of Lincoln is now the anti-Lincoln party.  The party whose existence owes to elimination of bias is now the party that hates all "others."  Even worse, they feel they have the right to determine who is an "other."

    Actions speak louder than petitions.

    by melvynny on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 11:20:32 AM PST

  •  Some have called it 'death pangs'... (0+ / 0-)

    But I think it is more of reaching diminishing returns.  They've run out of 'reasonable' ideas.  You can chip away at abortion with 'reasonable ideas' like notification for anybody under 18, partial birth, etc. (I'M NOT saying these are reasonable - only that they sound reasonable to the average voter).  Sooner or later, your base is not placated and you have to move to more extreme 'unreasonable' sounding ideas - like personhood bills.  Then most people who don't pay attention start to realize the implications.  Then your movement becomes radical.

    The same thing is happening with marriage equality, even more so.  Because the target on homosexuality acceptance is actually moving backwards (from their perspective).  People are becoming more tolerant of homosexuality, not less.  So fast, that it is exposing bigots before they can develop the 'reasonable' solutions.  So now they are just reacting.  And it's ugly.

    “Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.” - John Steinbeck (Disputed)

    by RichM on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 11:21:32 AM PST

  •  They Always Push Culture War in Midterm Years (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, JGibson, Calamity Jean

    That's how they turn out their base in years we underperform at turning out ours.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 11:21:47 AM PST

  •  NOT okay to discriminate (0+ / 0-)

    I like that we are winning this in America.  Although there are very small exceptions, most businesses and most places of employment and most government offices have stopped their discrimination with regard to gays.  It is getting better.  Slow but sure.  We're winning.  We are seeing improvements in this on a big scale.

    And, it is only right and it is only a good thing.  We should be showing the improvements and the gains and the progress we've made rather than be bitching about how some of the small minority entities in our nation are fighting this.

    Good is good, bad is bad.  It is how this should be presented.

  •  Come, Righteous Banhammer! (0+ / 0-)

    It's really beyond my suspension of disbelief that any decent person would be willing to support these laws. When even Jan Brewer may not be willing to take a political hit for that signing such a law, however, I am encouraged that these efforts are almost certainly doomed to fail at the state level, and if not, killed in the federal courts. The only other potential upside I can see is that Republicans are spouting some of most godawful nastiness I can remember hearing ("Pregnant women are 'hosts!'" "I should be able to shoot anyone who crosses my south Texas land if I think he's a [ugly word for undocumented immigrant]!" ahead of the 2014 elections. The major downside is even that may not be enough to keep them out of power.

    "Moderate" Republicans are like concern trolls; Tea Partiers are like keyboard-igniting, foam-flecked, enraged clown trolls. I can't help but believe that sooner or later, the banhammer of the DailyKos that is our Nation is going to fall on both.

    [Apologies for the strained analogy.]

    "Seeing Leela fly off the Hexadecapus and crash through the moon dome and survive inside a stuffed animal by breathing a balloon was a dose of reality." Farewell, Futurama--I will avenge you!

    by IamGumby on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 11:22:18 AM PST

  •  So - Pink Triangles? (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    swampyankee, drmah, BachFan, Calamity Jean

    I think I see some problems with these laws from an administrative standpoint.

    If we are really going to protect these poor innocent businesses from the evil of second hand gay, we need more than these laws seem to offer.

    For example -- a fit and fashionable Broadway fan might just be a fit and fashionable Broadway fan.  That may be a good basis to question his sanity, but not his manity.

    Or, for that matter, a big old mean and growly defensive lineman who knocks quarterbacks on their kiesters might turn out to be -- well, you, know --  gay.

    We cannot leave poor merchants at the mercy of this ambiguity.  If you're going make these laws work, you've got to do better than heterosexual Gaydar.  Looking back into history, it seems that the only really solid solution to the problem was actually implemented in 1930s Germany: Pink Triangles on clothing.  That should be a win-win, because I hear those gay people really like pink. Those 1930s Germans -- they were real innovators.  I wonder whatever became of them?

    LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

    by dinotrac on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 11:25:05 AM PST

  •  just wondering? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    drmah, Calamity Jean

    What happens when some halal grocer refuses to serve a woman because she's not wearing a hadib?

    Of course, since the GOP really worships the almighty dollar, I wonder if these laws ever would apply. (snark).

  •  They are emboldened by the fact that they think (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, BachFan, Calamity Jean

    SCOTUS is going to uphold all those religious freedom challenges to the contraception mandate. This is the opening salvo towards Gilead.

    "Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." --M. L. King "You can't fix stupid" --Ron White -6.00, -5.18

    by zenbassoon on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 11:32:21 AM PST

    •  Unfortunately (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      drmah, Calamity Jean

      I fear that they might actually uphold them- with corporations now being people, my friend.  I don't know how they will rationalize it but I'm sure that some of them will.  Maybe Roberts will overcompensate and try to "make up" for his ACA ruling by throwing the right a bone and voting to uphold it.  If I felt that most of the Justices were ruling on purely Constitutional grounds, not ideological ones, I'd sleep a whole lot better at night but some of them I think make up their minds based on their ideology and then dig into the Constitution to try to find some kind of justification for it no matter how weak it might be- sort of like how Bush, Cheney, et. al "fixed facts around a policy" and not the other way around.    

  •  A proposed project for a political cartoonist (0+ / 0-)

    or someone proficient in Photoshop:

    How about two water fountains, one marked "Straight Only," and the other "Gay Only."

  •  FYI - Link to Arizona's bill (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Forest Deva

    The key parts are...

    -expanding protections to all individuals/organizations, not just religious entities.

    -expanding protections from civil lawsuits versus just government actions.


    To me this is a dangerous bill considering biblical passages such as "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live" and "whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death".

    "If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them." - Asimov

    by dfcord on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 11:36:17 AM PST

  •  Makes me wonder what they're planning (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    drmah, Calamity Jean, worldlotus

    behind closed doors while having us jump from one of their atrocious bills to another.  I don't trust them.  They do not have Americans' best interests at heart anymore; maybe they never have.  My father told me back in the 70s when I started paying attention to politics as a teen that Republicans were for the rich only, and "don't ever forget it, kid."

    The GOP will destroy anything they can't own.

    by AnnieR on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 11:37:16 AM PST

  •  Backlash - Discrimination is illegal (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Calamity Jean, worldlotus

    2-25-14: Pat Buchanan Says Conservative Christians Are True Victims in Arizona
    2-25-14:  Anderson Cooper Slams Senator Who Doesn’t ‘Know Anyone In Arizona That Would Discriminate’
    2-24-14:  George Takei Threatens Arizona With A Boycott
    2-23-14: On Our Radar – Arizona Kicks Off Its Rainbow Shades by Jean Ann Esselink
    2-22-14 Arizona’s Anti-Gay Legislation Is Anti-Human Rights
    2-21-14: Arizona Governor Asked To Nix Bill Angering Gays
    2-20-14 AZ Senate GOP Pass Wide-Sweeping Religious License To Discriminate Against Gays  becoming the state that “Because Jesus” could literally become  a valid excuse for refusing service to queers in the Grand Canyon State.”

    2-19-14: Idaho’s New Anti-Gay Bill: Doctors and Teachers Can Turn Away Gays  - suspended after backlash.

    2-15-14:  Kansas State Senators face Backlash and plot retreat - A Report from the Capital  'Oh, you come from that state that voted for discrimination, right?  Suspended after backlash.'
    2-15-14: Kansas clergy condemn 'religious freedom' bill as fraud Ministers urge Legislature to drop discriminatory House-passed measure
    2-15-14: Kansas Senate Comes To It’s Senses And Nixes Extreme Anti-Gay Legislation  -Suspended after backlash.
    2-16-14 KANSAS From a friend: I live in Stockton, Kansas, in a county of about 5,000 people. Our state rep voted 'yes' on that 'religious liberty' bill that's been all the talk of town in the last few days. Great news coming from my little community! Liberals and conservatives, and independents and libertarians all agree on one thing. We all agree this bill, passed in our state house, was disgusting and abhorrent. We stand together against bigotry, hate, and homophobia, something I'm sure these Republicans  Tea Party didn't think would happen. I can only imagine our elected officials thought pass a law that rode that Duck Dynasty wave of bigotry, disguised as religion, but they were wrong. They tried 'playing us too close,' and they failed. Here's hoping my tiny town and surrounding community remembers come November, and in 2016, how their representatives voted. — in Stockton, Kansas.

    2-20-14: Breaking: Maine Rejects ‘Religious Freedom’ License To Discriminate Against Gays

    2-16-14 MISSOURI  Showing Love instead of Hate! Students Block Westboro Baptist Church's Michael Sam Protest With Wall Of Love

    4-29-13: Washington State Staffer: Gay People Should 'Just Grow Their Own Food' To Deal With Discrimination
    5-13-13: Washington state Sen. Sharon Brown (R-Kennewick) introduced Senate Bill 5927, Co-Sponsor Senator Mike Hewitt's (R-Walla Walla) COMMITTEE REJECTED which would allow businesses in the state to deny services to individuals based on religious or philosophical differences. This is unconstitutional and against the law, did not come to a vote.

    Time Line  - Discrimination Backlash
    2-24-14:  George Takei Threatens Arizona With A Boycott
    2-23-14: Elie Wiesel knows more about Nazism and the Holocaust than one can learn from a book because he experienced and survived it.  He experienced and survived Auschwitz and Buchenwald. And he knows what “values” make it possible for a government to establish concentration camps and work people to death. He understands what can arise from dehumanizing people for who they are or taking all the good things they do as human beings and labeling it a threat to an ideological ideal. It’s Time to Call the Republican Spade a Spade Instead of a Spoon -
    2-21-14: Exposing the Christian Right's New Strategy for Reversing Years of Progress on Gay Rights The GOP has introduced bills to grant zealots the right to the segregate their businesses against LGBT Americans.
    2-21-14: Human beings deserve the right to be treated equally as fellow human beings.  After the Civil War, the Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act, the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, and so many other  pieces of legislation and accomplishments that were fought and paid for – oftentimes in blood – over so many years, the mere thought that a gay man or woman should have to live in a state where their publicly elected officials are still granted the power to deny them basic humanity simply because gay human beings make them uncomfortable? Arizona’s Anti-Gay Legislation Is Anti-Human Rights
    COURTS:  How the Supreme Court's Outrageous Assault on Our Lives Might Be Used to Knock Republicans Out of Power in Congress The damage to this country that the Supreme Court's right-wing majority has done could be employed by Dems to destroy House Republican majority.

  •  Born and raised in Idaho. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    drmah, Calamity Jean, jayden

    and I still have family there...who will NEVER see me in that state again if they pass their version of this bill.  I will not spend one gay dime in the state again.

    And they wonder why I left as soon as I had a diploma, a driver's license and a job.  

  •  This is just the latest issue of the week (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Go back through the issues we've been hearing about for years now. How many of them have any legs? Who even remembers them? It's like playing whack-a-mole. They're always popping up another one.

    Last week's issue, for example, was (and keeps trying to be) people who "lost" their health insurance. It's quickly fizzling out. In a month, nobody will remember it.

    I would love to know what other brainless ideas the Republicans have lined up. We should use some of the energy here to penetrate their planning and get that list. It shouldn't be hard.

    The purpose of all this activity is to divert our energies and keep us on the defensive. Somebody needs to make this activity itself an issue and get the 'pubs to explain themselves.

    "Life is uncertain, eat dessert first!" -- Tony's Donut Shop, Portland, ME

    by DtheO on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 12:46:28 PM PST

  •  Do you know what it is like . . . (0+ / 0-)

    . . . to be the subject of legislation like this? Quite frankly, it makes me hate straight people. HATE you. It has been a lifetime of being told I am awful, and I have had enough.

    •  Why do you lump "us" all together (0+ / 0-)

      even though more than half of us hate this law as much as you do, and all sorts of straight people have already vowed to boycott Arizona if this goes through?

      Isn't lumping all straight people together the same sort of problem?

      If you read these boards, you will notice a great many of us (straight people) who do not think you're awful (unless it's for something else that we don't know about), and who are just as outraged about it as you are.

    •  Yes, I do. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      I was going to write a lengthy comment but I'll just post this instead:

      Not this mind and not this heart, I won't rot.
      Straight people aren't your enemy. We wouldn't have the rights we enjoy in many states today without their help, support, and advocacy.
      •  Yes, they are (0+ / 0-)

        I'm sorry, but gay people don't write and pass laws that discriminate against gay people. Straight people do that. Straight people evict us, straight people fire us, straight people assault us. Furthermore, nearly all progress on the gay rights front has been won by gay people -- we fought in the streets, we organized, we elected gay people to public office, we hired lawyers, we paid for the legal teams. Nearly all of our victories have been court victories -- the only reason state-level gay marriage bans are not OK now is because the Supreme Court ruled on a case fought by a lesbian and her butch lawyer that makes the legality of the bans questionable. There hasn't suddenly been a change of heart among straight people about these bans -- the bans they voted for -- the courts slapped their wrists. Listen, I get the problem with overgeneralizing, I understand it is unfair to straight people who really do care and makes them uncomfortable. But quite frankly straight people aren't doing enough to right their wrongs when it comes to the treatment of gay people.

  •  It's all they've got left (0+ / 0-)

    Condemn "the gay lifestyle" and force people back into the closet: Fail.
    Prevent same-sex couples from being foster parents or adopting children: Fail.
    Prevent same-sex marriage: Fail (17 states so far, potential for Federal court to take it on)
    Keep DADT and military discrimination: Fail.
    Keep one-man-one-woman as the only kind of marriage recognized in the Federal tax code, Federal employment benefits, Social Security: Fail.

    So as they retreat, like Napoleon's army limping back from Russia in the snow, all they have is the fallback:

    You may be able to do it, but you can't force me to like it or even accept it. And I won't have it in my house, no way, no how, and you can't make me.
    Nyah, nyah, na nyah, nyah.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site