Oklahoma anti-gay religious freedom bill being redrafted amid Arizona firestorm
Source: Associated Press
OKLAHOMA CITY An Oklahoma bill that would allow business owners with strongly held religious beliefs to refuse service to gays will be rewritten and likely wont be considered in its current form this legislative session, the measures House author said Tuesday.
The bill (HB 2873), which is similar to one that has set off a political firestorm in Arizona and some being considered in other states, would have provided legal immunity to anyone who refuses services to gays and lesbians based on the persons sincerely held religious belief.
Were still in favor of running a bill like that, but were just trying to get the language tightened up to prevent there from being any fiascos like there have been elsewhere, said Rep. Tom Newell, R-Seminole.
Arizona Republican Gov. Jan Brewer is facing intensifying pressure from CEOs, politicians in Washington, D.C., and state lawmakers in her own party to veto a similar bill in that state. Critics denounce the measure as blatantly discriminatory and embarrassing to Arizona.
Read more: http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2014/02/oklahoma-anti-gay-religious-freedom-bill-being-redrafted-amid-arizona-firestorm/
We will likely see many more of these in the coming weeks.
olddad56
(5,732 posts)then choose between your business and your beliefs. Bigotry isn't a belief, it is a fear.
FreeState
(10,572 posts)cosmicone
(11,014 posts)"We know we are shooting ourselves in the foot but seeing how others shot themselves in the foot, we want to use a different aim so it won't hurt as much"
Behind the Aegis
(53,959 posts)William769
(55,147 posts)The person in post #1 said it best!
The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,732 posts)is the fact that their "sincerely held religious beliefs" don't give them an excuse to do whatever they damn please. If you were a sincere worshiper of Baal or Kukulkan and your beliefs included human sacrifice, that wouldn't be much of a defense at your murder trial after you sacrificed somebody. The Mormons found out years ago that polygamy was going to be just as illegal for them as it was for everybody else, no matter how sincerely they believed in it. The rule has always been that a religious practice that is deemed socially harmful is not protected, and if discriminating against any group of people is socially harmful - which it is - how can that be a protected religious practice?
Behind the Aegis
(53,959 posts)What if someone's "religious beliefs" disallowed them to serve interracial couples? What about Jews? Muslims? Pagans? Divorced people? This law could be used in so many ways, all of them bad.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)by the civilized people of this country. Which makes sense, because bigotry and cowardice go hand in hand.
Behind the Aegis
(53,959 posts)Once they find the "right" method, we could see some real problems. The problem is I feel their movement is dying and in deep trouble, and while good could come from it, a cornered snake is quite dangerous.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)If they can succeed on something as universally popular with heterosexual America as birth control, of course they'll try it against LGBT Americans.
A cornered snake is also sometimes a stupid snake and sticks its head out too far. Instead of chipping away, they went overbroad and tried to re-enact Jim Crow in one fell swoop.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)The Christian Dominionists promised they'd do it. Seems like they're making good on their threats.
And they've strongly stated that they intend to eradicate GLBT people when they seize power. And that may be sooner than later...
mwb970
(11,360 posts)Amimnoch
(4,558 posts)If a business chooses to elect not to sell to gays, but sells to females without inquiring to their virginity status... sue the fuck out of them. It's not deeply held religious beliefs, it's bigotry.
If a business chooses to elect not to sell to gays, but sells to Men or women, without concern about marital status, or if the customer might be divorced, then again, it isn't deeply held religious beliefs, it's bigotry. If them, or anyone in their family who they still have good relations with have ever been divorced really go after them, they don't have a moral leg to stand on.
If a business chooses to elect not to sell to gays, but sells to wealthy people, women who are either made up, or wearing jewelry.. sue them. It's not deeply held religious beliefs, it's bigotry.
If a business owner who refuses to serve gays based on their "religious belief" is caught saying the pledge of allegiance, sue the hell out of them. It's not deeply held religious beliefs.. it's bigotry (ref Matthew 5:32 "Dont swear an oath at all."
Here's a good catch all.. If he or she refuses to serve gays, then the gay person should just ask them for what they were going to pay for... for free, or to borrow it. If the business refuses to give it to them, or let them borrow it.. then sue the fuck out of them based off of Matthew 5:42 "Give to those who ask, and dont refuse those who wish to borrow from you."
That clause in these laws "strongly held religious beliefs" could give us the ammo to sock it to the businesses that decide to go with it. Enough lawsuits to shut them down for good if we just go for it.
so I say.. pass your hateful law.. and let's get together and really show them how to be the good Christians they want to be, and take every fucking thing they have, or make them follow what they preach, where they will have few, if any customers left. I'm sick of this shit. They want to play ball.. let's play.
NaturalHigh
(12,778 posts)This won't pass. I know most people have a very low opinion of Oklahoma, but I seriously doubt this will ever pass the state legislature.
MissMillie
(38,560 posts)There's been such a strong negative reaction to the Arizona bill that OK thinks it's a good idea to have one of their own???
yellowcanine
(35,699 posts)yellowcanine
(35,699 posts)He was blathering about people who bake wedding cakes as being artists who had a right to choose not to "participate in a gay wedding." It's a goddamn cake which is going to get eaten. I don't ever recall the cake baker being listed as a participant in a wedding. Get over yourself. You don't want one of your cakes being used in a gay wedding? Then don't bake cakes for sale. Simple enough.