Mississippi House Passes Religious Freedom Bill, Edit ACLU files suit over bill

[Derpist]

Going to be a test to see whether Bryant believes more strongly in his religion or the power of the almighty corporate dollar. As he is a politically well-connected American, I suspect the latter, but he could always pleasantly surprise me.

[Derpist]

You guys cheated. We voted for traditional marriage state by state (even California). We used the democratic processes to protect the definition of marriage. You guys used oligarchs in black robes. This fight isn't over by a long shot. Get ready for a president Cruz and a conservative replacement to Scaila. Restoring the rights of the states to decide laws regarding social issues (life, marriage, religious liberty). The rainbow jihad is going for revenge wanting to directly attack the economic and civil liberties of people of religious conscience. You can't say that that's not happening.

I have to be honest, I doubt I'm on board with the rest of your political agenda, but I really like the term oligarchs in black robes and rainbow jihad. There has always been something oligarchical and intolerant about the gay movement. Then again, Goldman Sachs is the leading corporate ally of the Human Rights Campaign...

[Derpist]

So it's the standard "Religion-based organizations are allowed to fire or refuse to hire LGBT+ people" law or does it go deeper than that.

It doesn't even go into that. But businesses probably don't have to participate in gay marriages or any gay agenda. Presumably, you can refuse to adorn a cake with pro-gay marriage slogans, but you would still have to sell a normal cake to them.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This is probably very distressing to the interests in our society that want to both compel compliance with and forced participation in their cultural agenda.

[Derpist]

There's no necessity for a religious freedom bill. We've had a religious freedom bill since the ratification of our Bill of Rights December 10, 1791.


Republicans trying to undermine progress and are sore sports they lost.

You guys cheated. We voted for traditional marriage state by state (even California). We used the democratic processes to protect the definition of marriage. You guys used oligarchs in black robes. This fight isn't over by a long shot. Get ready for a president Cruz and a conservative replacement to Scaila. Restoring the rights of the states to decide laws regarding social issues (life, marriage, religious liberty). The rainbow jihad is going for revenge wanting to directly attack the economic and civil liberties of people of religious conscience. You can't say that that's not happening.

So to protect religious people, LGBT people shouldn't have...you know...any rights?

Hold on afletich. Besides my opposition to gay marriage and military service, I'm actually quite tolerant of those of lgbt persuasion. When the debate over domestic partner benefits was going on I actually supported that. Just because I'm on the other side of the marriage issue doesn't mean I don't want to trample on all the progress the lgbt community has made. What has raised my anger is that an element of your community wants to threaten legal and economic destruction on folks of conscience just because they want to follow closely held beliefs on marriage and family.

One thing I despise about modern American rhetoric is when people refer to the "xxx community." As soon as you phrase an aggressive agenda as coming from a made-up community, you've lost.

[Derpist]

CNN is reporting that Governor Bryant has signed the bill into law.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLTZctTG6cE

[Derpist]

New York and Vermont delcare war on Mississippi - bans official travel to there.

http://news10.com/2016/04/06/new-york-vermont-ban-official-travel-to-mississippi-over-lgbt-law/

Mark Dayton bans non-essential state-funded travel to Mississippi: http://www.startribune.com/mississippi-s-limits-on-gay-rights-prompt-dayton-to-impose-travel-restriction/374758611/

That's unacceptable and dickish. The last thing we need is for the rest of America to turn their backs on us.

The art museum in Jackson had to cancel some big event there because the artist is a government employee in New York and has been forbidden to travel here. I can assure you the art museum and its patrons aren't discriminating against gays.

On the other hand, the people who support this law are proud that Yankee liberals aren't coming down here. These gotcha travel bans are having the opposite intended effect.

You have to be sympathetic to how similar this would sound to the debates of the 1960s if we swapped out some words ... That's what's unacceptable.

You could also say the exact same for modern Israel - and I think BDS is dumb.

[Derpist]

Isn't this whole punishing states unconstitutional? That would be like a waiter refusing to serve a person who has differing political beliefs. Wouldn't the waiter lose their job?

But I'm guessing you'd be perfectly fine with it if the waiter refused to serve a gay person.

I doubt that has any religious freedom implications because no religion proscribes gays from eating food unless that food is funsauce.

I suppose you might claim religious freedom if you didn't want to sell sex toys to a gay couple, but that's probably not your real concern if you're in the sex toy industry.