Edwards signs LGBT non-discrimination exec. order, against Jindal's preferences

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

"Louisiana Governor Signs Executive Order To Protect LGBT Rights" - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2016/04/13/louisiana-lgbt-anti-discrimination_n_9682614.html

FF!

[RINO Tom]

Seriously, do you have an "ideology" at all?  LOL.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Seriously, do you have an "ideology" at all?  LOL.

My position is pretty clear - I support "religious freedom" with wedding-related services and "nondiscrimination" everywhere else. But a blanket "non-discrimination bill" is better than discriminating everywhere.

[White Trash]

That's my governor!

[Figueira]

Good to know that Edwards isn't completely a DINO.

EDIT: And good news, generally.

[RINO Tom]

Good to know that Edwards isn't completely a DINO.

EDIT: And good news, generally.

Or one at all.  I find it amusing how a socially liberal Republican can fall short of worshiping unions and he's a closet right-winger but if any Democrat has like a token half-pro-life view or something, he or she is a DINO.

[Figueira]

Good to know that Edwards isn't completely a DINO.

EDIT: And good news, generally.

Or one at all.  I find it amusing how a socially liberal Republican can fall short of worshiping unions and he's a closet right-winger but if any Democrat has like a token half-pro-life view or something, he or she is a DINO.

Well, the opposite is true if you're a right-winger. People tend to have higher standards for members of their own ideologies.

[Antonio the Sixth]

FF!

[SteveRogers]

Seriously, do you have an "ideology" at all?  LOL.

My position is pretty clear - I support "religious freedom" with wedding-related services and "nondiscrimination" everywhere else. But a blanket "non-discrimination bill" is better than discriminating everywhere.

Your position is far from clear. Are you now saying you no longer oppose marriage equality?

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Seriously, do you have an "ideology" at all?  LOL.

My position is pretty clear - I support "religious freedom" with wedding-related services and "nondiscrimination" everywhere else. But a blanket "non-discrimination bill" is better than discriminating everywhere.

Your position is far from clear. Are you now saying you no longer oppose marriage equality?

I see marriage equality as settled law. I don't like it, but there's no point in fighting it anymore. I don't think clerks should be forced to hand out ssm licenses against their religious beliefs though, and that is worth legislating.

[Virginiá]

I see marriage equality as settled law. I don't like it, but there's no point in fighting it anymore. I don't think clerks should be forced to hand out ssm licenses against their religious beliefs though, and that is worth legislating.

Government is supposed to be independent of specific religions. If they don't want to hand out SSM marriage licenses, they should stop complaining and get another job.

[Bojack Horseman]

I'm starting to really love JBE.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

It would actually be a good thing if Trump won just so we could get JBE 2020. This nation needs this man!

Also, Wulfric "no longer for marriage equality" ROFL. Why would the bigot ever take that position?!

[Derpist]

The nice part about executive orders is that they can be unilaterally revoked by the next executive.

[Heisenberg]

I see marriage equality as settled law. I don't like it, but there's no point in fighting it anymore. I don't think clerks should be forced to hand out ssm licenses against their religious beliefs though, and that is worth legislating.

Government is supposed to be independent of specific religions. If they don't want to hand out SSM marriage licenses, they should stop complaining and get another job.

If one clerk doesn't want to issue SSM licenses, just let another clerk sign them.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

I see marriage equality as settled law. I don't like it, but there's no point in fighting it anymore. I don't think clerks should be forced to hand out ssm licenses against their religious beliefs though, and that is worth legislating.

Government is supposed to be independent of specific religions. If they don't want to hand out SSM marriage licenses, they should stop complaining and get another job.

If one clerk doesn't want to issue SSM licenses, just let another clerk sign them.

Yes. And what happens in places with only 2-3 and all refuse to sign?

[NeverAgain]

I see marriage equality as settled law. I don't like it, but there's no point in fighting it anymore. I don't think clerks should be forced to hand out ssm licenses against their religious beliefs though, and that is worth legislating.

Government is supposed to be independent of specific religions. If they don't want to hand out SSM marriage licenses, they should stop complaining and get another job.

If one clerk doesn't want to issue SSM licenses, just let another clerk sign them.

It's their job. Look I work at a fro-yo place, and I said that I had a religious objection to giving out toppings, my boss would say suck it up, the same thing I say to these clerks. It's the law, so either let the gays be happy and do your job, or leave your job.

[IceSpear]

It would actually be a good thing if Trump won just so we could get JBE 2020. This nation needs this man!

Also, Wulfric "no longer for marriage equality" ROFL. Why would the bigot ever take that position?!

I'm starting to really think he has national ambitions. He seems to be going out of his way to prove he's not a Conservadem.

[SteveRogers]

Seriously, do you have an "ideology" at all?  LOL.

My position is pretty clear - I support "religious freedom" with wedding-related services and "nondiscrimination" everywhere else. But a blanket "non-discrimination bill" is better than discriminating everywhere.

Your position is far from clear. Are you now saying you no longer oppose marriage equality?

I see marriage equality as settled law. I don't like it, but there's no point in fighting it anymore. I don't think clerks should be forced to hand out ssm licenses against their religious beliefs though, and that is worth legislating.

Quick followup: How does your position that you would vote in favor of banning construction of all mosques fit into your newfound religious liberty + nondiscrimination framework?

[Heisenberg]

I see marriage equality as settled law. I don't like it, but there's no point in fighting it anymore. I don't think clerks should be forced to hand out ssm licenses against their religious beliefs though, and that is worth legislating.

Government is supposed to be independent of specific religions. If they don't want to hand out SSM marriage licenses, they should stop complaining and get another job.

If one clerk doesn't want to issue SSM licenses, just let another clerk sign them.

It's their job. Look I work at a fro-yo place, and I said that I had a religious objection to giving out toppings, my boss would say suck it up, the same thing I say to these clerks. It's the law, so either let the gays be happy and do your job, or leave your job.

Okay.  I do believe, personally, that people have a right to have their own opinion.  My preference would have been that states define marriage, but what makes this country great is that we have freedom.  We can believe what we want to.  I will not try to convert anyone to my views, nor do I want people to try to convert me to theirs.  We should tolerate everyone's opinion, religion, beliefs, etc.  I do not think you made a valid (or logical) comparison, but okay.

[MaxQue]

I see marriage equality as settled law. I don't like it, but there's no point in fighting it anymore. I don't think clerks should be forced to hand out ssm licenses against their religious beliefs though, and that is worth legislating.

Government is supposed to be independent of specific religions. If they don't want to hand out SSM marriage licenses, they should stop complaining and get another job.

If one clerk doesn't want to issue SSM licenses, just let another clerk sign them.

It's their job. Look I work at a fro-yo place, and I said that I had a religious objection to giving out toppings, my boss would say suck it up, the same thing I say to these clerks. It's the law, so either let the gays be happy and do your job, or leave your job.

Okay.  I do believe, personally, that people have a right to have their own opinion.  My preference would have been that states define marriage, but what makes this country great is that we have freedom.  We can believe what we want to.  I will not try to convert anyone to my views, nor do I want people to try to convert me to theirs.  We should tolerate everyone's opinion, religion, beliefs, etc.  I do not think you made a valid (or logical) comparison, but okay.

The issue is that they are paid to emit marriage licenses. If they refuse to emit them, they are just not doing their job.

I respect their opinion, but, as such, they refuse to do part of the work they agreed to do. If you are unwilling to emit marriage licenses, you should ask to be transferred in another position or department, since you are unwilling to do the totality of your job description.

Do you really think you can go to your boss and "I object to doing that" and than he will just smile and say okay? I know I would be said "You're paid for that, so go do it or go find work elsewhere".

[Zioneer]

Elections matter, my fellow lefties. No way on earth Vitter would have done this.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

The issue is that they are paid to emit marriage licenses. If they refuse to emit them, they are just not doing their job.

I respect their opinion, but, as such, they refuse to do part of the work they agreed to do. If you are unwilling to emit marriage licenses, you should ask to be transferred in another position or department, since you are unwilling to do the totality of your job description.

Do you really think you can go to your boss and "I object to doing that" and than he will just smile and say okay? I know I would be said "You're paid for that, so go do it or go find work elsewhere".

This hits the nail on the head. No-one is forced to be a county clerk against their will. If you have a personal moral objection to doing part of that job, you shouldn't be a county clerk.

This goes for people of all ideologies. My state recently passed an religious freedom bill that, in my opinion, is regressive and unjust. Were I to become a state official tomorrow, however, I would be bound to uphold that law: it would be absolutely unacceptable for me to say, "Actually, I don't support RFRA, so I'm going to ignore the law and do whatever the heck I want." That's not how constitutional democracy works. Public servants must uphold the law, and if you're not comfortable with that, you have no business being a public servant.