General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsTotal clarification of the "we hate the gays" law, for Gov. Mike Pence of Indiana:
[font color="blue" size="12" face="face"]"Democrats in the General Assembly tried several times to add language to the measure that would have provided explicit protections from discrimination based on sexual orientation, but those efforts were rebuffed."[/font]
http://www.indystar.com/story/news/politics/2015/03/25/gov-mike-pence-sign-religious-freedom-bill-thursday/70448858/
Now we get to be entertained by watching you try to lie your way out of this, guvna.
Looks like your best hope now is
"Golly gee, I didn't even know!"
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Warpy
(111,443 posts)His "Right to Bully" law is going to bite the whole state back. Hard.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)The governor, although not ready to provide details on what the new bill will say, said he expects the legislation to be introduced into the General Assembly this coming week.
Asked if that legislation might include making gay and lesbian Hoosiers a protected legal class, Pence said, “That’s not on my agenda.”
Amid the deepest crisis of his political career, Pence said repeatedly that the intense blowback against the new law is the result of a “misunderstanding driven by misinformation.”
http://www.indystar.com/story/opinion/columnists/tim-swarens/2015/03/28/swarens-gov-mike-pence-push-clarification-religious-freedom-law/70611906/
[font color="blue" size="12" face="face"]"Democrats in the General Assembly tried several times to add language to the measure that would have provided explicit protections from discrimination based on sexual orientation, but those efforts were rebuffed."[/font]
http://www.indystar.com/story/news/politics/2015/03/25/gov-mike-pence-sign-religious-freedom-bill-thursday/70448858/
We might say, "So, guvna, why did these Democrats try, several times, to add explicit protections from discrimination based on sexual orientation? And why wait to concoct a story? If you wanted to tell the truth, you'd tell it right now: The law was designed for christifascists to be able to discriminate against LGBT persons anytime they wished to discriminate against them, anywhere they wanted to discriminate against them, licensed and sanctioned by simply by saying 'my religion says LGBT people are bad'."
stone space
(6,498 posts)
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)"Mike Griffin of the Georgia Baptist Convention brought the point up again during his testimony but was challenged by Rep. Roger Bruce (D-Atlanta).
“You keep making reference to these other states and the truth of the matter is this is Georgia,” Rep. Bruce said, citing a less tolerant history in the state concerning minorities. He then questioned why proponents aren't allowing protections against discrimination in the bill.
“Right now what you are asking us to do is allow state-sponsored discrimination, and if this is not what you are doing, then let us put in the bill to make sure there's no question about that,” he said."
And this was funny:
"Ears perked up throughout the Capitol after a group of Georgia convention bureaus sent a letter to members of the judiciary committee late Wednesday saying that $15 million of convention business will be lost if the bill passes."
sub.theory
(652 posts)What a revelation. I've had it with the wholesale demonization of absolutely everyone in Indiana. As if everyone here is in lockstep agreement about everything. As if there's absolutely no liberals in Indiana and there's no Democrats in the whole state. I'm not at all directing this to you personally, Zorra - this is to DU at large.
It's just beyond belief how absolutely nothing in this country can be discussed in a civil and rational manner today. Everything has to immediately go to total demonization of the other side and all out total war over EVERYTHING. And it's on BOTH the left and the right. Civility and reason are dead. Everything is take-no-prisoners, gutter politics. This degree of hatred and irreconcilable partisanship is going to destroy this country. I am convinced of that.
The degree of naked hatred here on DU of Christians, and on the left in general, is alarming - every bit as alarming as the discrimination towards homosexuals. And it seems to get further out of control year by year. I'm a proud liberal in a rather red state, but I'm also a Christian. There are many like me here and elsewhere in this country. There are also many people here that could be reached on this issue, and others, if the left wasn't so busy demonizing them and pushing them even further into the hands of the Republican party. Clearly a show of disapproval and opposition to this law is warranted on a national level, but the rabid demonization and calls for blood has to stop.
AllyCat
(16,262 posts)Most of the state supported our asswipe gov, but large swaths of people did not.
I like your state's "We serve everyone" program.
sub.theory
(652 posts)Exactly. This isn't a discrete red and blue country - it's purple. There are liberals, conservatives, moderates, and everything in between all over this country living side by side. This collective state punishment is just insane.
Sure, Pence is a jackass and he thought that this would burnish his conservative credentials so he could run for president and it blew up in his face. That doesn't mean that the whole state should be boycotted and everyone here condemned. This sort of stuff has to stop.
It is Tuesday
(93 posts)before it was struck down on Romer vs Evans...
mountain grammy
(26,668 posts)and no wholesale demonization of absolutely everyone in Indiana. Disgust, dismay, but demonizing? come on.
Christians feeling oppressed brought on this bill, and Christians are not the least bit oppressed. In fact, they are in charge! Personally, I'm tired of having to pay the price for poor oppressed Christians who are running literally everything without paying a dime in taxes.
sub.theory
(652 posts)There most definitely are Christians who do feel oppressed and under siege. I don't agree with them, but I can at least understand their state of mind. I know some of these people. I have some of these people in my own family. They feel that they are being forced to accept and condone something they believe to be immoral and sinful. They feel that this is being forced upon them, and they are watching as their ideas about marriage and morality are being challenged by the rest of society. They feel that their beliefs are under attack, and to be honest they are. Society is changing and they are on the losing side. I can have compassion and understanding for that, even as I support gay rights. There are many people here that are very much like me. Members of my church, people in the community. All supporting gay rights and all believing Christians. Even my own father at 82 years of age has come around and he used to be absolutely opposed to homosexuality.
I have no idea what you mean about not paying a dime in taxes. Christians pay the exact same taxes as everyone else. Are you talking about the Churches themselves? That's true of all non-profits.
mountain grammy
(26,668 posts)and the tax exempt donations. There is nothing in our Constitution to exempt churches from paying taxes.
I feel oppressed and under siege. I am completely against war. It offends me and I believe it is immoral and sinful and my tax money is paying for it. I think it's immoral for legislators to rule over the lives and decisions of women and to use my tax money to do it. I think it's immoral to use my tax dollars to pay for school vouchers that go to religious schools, or, for that matter, to pay for a prison system that I know is brutal and inhumane. So, please, spare me the woes of the poor Christians who are "forced" to bake a cake for a gay couple and, even though paid for their services, feel somehow violated. My values are violated every day in America.
When people are locked up or prevented from practicing their faith, I'll be screaming about religious freedom. But no one's freedom to worship as they please is being interrupted here. This is completely false outrage spurred on by media and right wing preachers. No one's freedom of religion is being threatened.
sub.theory
(652 posts)...then you should just accept that this is the way that things are today and you have to support war and religious schools and other things that offend your conscious because you aren't the majority. Can you see that line of reasoning doesn't go anywhere? You're simply dismissing the legitimacy of their beliefs while maintaining the legitimacy of your own.
Many of the people that support these types of laws aren't bad people and many of them don't hate gay people. They feel, however, that they are being made to condone something that they don't believe in. And they are. They are being made to participate in gay weddings, for instance. They are being made to recognize same sex marriages as valid. They aren't being allowed to say "I don't want to be a part of this". This isn't really any different than being forced to financially support religious schools which you object to doing. The only way to resolve these issues is to start talking to each other and trying to understand and respond to each other. We might find that the other side isn't really so different from us after all. Isn't that what LGBT people want from those that are are against their marrying?
LiberalAndProud
(12,799 posts)But to equate this with supporting religious schools with public funds is a bit backwards. Seems to me legalization of gay hatred in the name of religion (and don't tell me discrimination isn't hate) and demanding public funds for religious education are on the same side of the same coin.
sub.theory
(652 posts)Like much of life, this is a shade of gray and I'm not going to accept that it's a black and white argument. It is quite possible for someone to not support gay marriage and not hate gay people. I know this for a fact, because I know some of these people, as I've said. They wish no malice on gay people and they don't think that they are some sort of monsters. They don't condone their lifestyle and they do believe that they are engaging in sin, but they don't hate them.
It's human nature to think that our beliefs are the correct beliefs and those in conflict are wrong. We live in a very heterogeneous society, and we are going to have to accept that there are people who have beliefs different from our own. This is a bad law, and I think it will at some point in the near future be repealed. I do think that we need to pay more attention to what those who support this law are saying, however, and I think that their concerns are not to be simply dismissed. Remember how you feel when you are being required to act against your own conscience.
LiberalAndProud
(12,799 posts)As for your hate isn't hate, you're not at the receiving end. I wish you no ill, but "go to hell" just doesn't feel particularly loving to me.
If ever my conscience advises me it's alright to put some people in the second class tier for any reason whatsoever, I'll be deserving of exactly how that feels. and more.
sub.theory
(652 posts)I didn't say it was love. I didn't say that at all. I said it's not necessarily hate. There's a big difference there.
I get what you are saying and I understand that for you this is very hurtful. It is for many people. I know it seems like the worst of discrimination to you, but perhaps I see things differently because I know many people that are on the other side of this debate. As I know many people who are gay. I have both in my own family.
These are the issues that are going to occur in a society that is as diverse as ours. We are going to have to tackle them head on and deal with each other honestly, or I am truly afraid we are not going to make it as a nation. I'm not picking on the left. This is just as true, probably even more, for conservatives who can be incredibly self righteous and furiously hostile to differing beliefs.
stone space
(6,498 posts)sub.theory
(652 posts)Well, the whole reason this law came around was because there are some in the state that want nothing to do with gay marriage. At all. They don't want to have to sell flowers for gay weddings. They don't want to have to bake for gay wedding. They don't want to have to host gay weddings.
You are right that no one is being forced to be part of the marriage ceremony itself, but there are those in this state that don't want to be part of it in any way. That's why this whole sad affair came about.
stone space
(6,498 posts)
People who don't want to sell wedding cakes and flowers should probably get out of the wedding cake and flower business.
Why would anybody who doesn't like weddings be in a wedding business in the first place?
That's a voluntary decision, isn't it?
Nobody is forcing them.
sub.theory
(652 posts)Yep, this kind of does come down to cakes and flowers. That sounds silly, but it really is much of what this is about.
stone space
(6,498 posts)
sub.theory
(652 posts)But that, of course, isn't how they see it. I'm not saying that they are right at all, but that's basically what is driving all of this here.
stone space
(6,498 posts)
tblue37
(65,538 posts)point of the Civil Rights lunch counter sit-ins was that a business open to serve the general public has to serve the general public rather than discriminating against certain groups.
It is possible to run a cake or flowers business privately and be allowed to discriminate. One bakery (Sweet Cakes Bakeery, in Oregon) that was sued for antigay discrimination did just that. They closed down their public storefront, but still sell cakes as a home-based, by referral/word-of-mouth enterprise.
ThoughtCriminal
(14,052 posts)about inter-racial marriage. They had to get over it over find a new line of work.
Lars39
(26,117 posts)The public includes everyone.
stone space
(6,498 posts)In 1961, The Rev Martin Luther King, Jr. delivered a lecture for an ethics class at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. You can listen to the entire 47 minute audio at the link, but here's a short exerpt:
Author: King, Martin Luther Jr
Abstract: Lecture delivered for Ethics class.
Description: Recorded in Alumni Memorial Chapel, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Louisville, Ky., on Apr. 19, 1961.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10392/2761
Date: 1961-04-19
snip-------------
I would say there is a distinction between private property that is purely private and private property that is privately owned but publicly used, publicly supported, publicly sustained. I think there is a great difference between the two…I don’t think anybody should have the right to just come in my house that I may privately own and not leave if I wanted them to leave. I think that that is a private right that we should certainly protect on the basis of the first amendment of the Constitution.
But now if I turn my house into a store—if I turn it into a department store, if I turn it into a lunch counter, or anything like that—then I have certain obligations to the public beyond my particular whims….If a business is in the public market, then it cannot deny access, if it is in the public market, it cannot deny access to this public market. And I think the same thing applies here. It is one thing to say that an individual owns a private piece of property and another thing to say that this property is now a private enterprise where it is actually dependent on the public for its very survival.
And this is why we feel very strong about this, that a man should not have the right to say that on the basis of color or religion one cannot use a lunch counter that is open to everybody else in other racial groups but not to these particular people. He has an obligation to the public….I don’t think America will ever rise to its full maturity until all over this country we say that anybody who’s in a public business cannot deny anybody on the basis of race or color access to that business. He should not have the freedom to choose his customers on the basis of race or religion.
snip---------------
http://jonathanmerritt.religionnews.com/2014/02/20/mlk-agree-kirsten-powers-serving-sex-couples/
Liberalynn
(7,549 posts)on what some perceives to be their right. There have been religions that have believed in any number of things that have been outlawed in this country. These are extreme examples of course but say someone claimed his religion believed in ritual sacrifice would he be exempt from laws against homicide? Or how about those religions that said a woman engaged in adultery should be stoned? Should we allow them to do so based on their religious freedoms and exempt them from legal punishment?
Even though we are basically a "free" country there by necessity has to be some laws that protect citizens from other citizens.
It has been established by the Supreme Court of the U.S. that any business that engages in interstate commerce is subject to Federal Law under the inner state commerce clause. So even if they get deliveries of goods from other states, they have to abide by the Constitution which prohibits against discrimination.
In closing I'm sorry but I believe that religious rights aren't really threatened. It's more like the one's crying foul are just mad because they can't force everyone else to live by their particular interpretation of Christianity.
I'd rather see us continued to be governed by the Constitution since it's a much less self contradictory and confusing document than any religious text such as the bible, and there isn't even agreement between Christians on which edition of the bible to follow.
mountain grammy
(26,668 posts)The Constitution defends "the free exercise of religion" but prohibits "the establishment" of a religion. When religious beliefs are made into laws that discriminate against those outside the religion, the religion is "established" and becomes the ruling order. The Christians who fee persecuted feel that way because they want our laws to reflect all of their beliefs, which are religious beliefs and, by law, cannot become the law of the land.
Sorry pal, the Constitution protects me from religion, or at least it's written to do so.
In my opinion, anyone who believes some citizens should be denied the rights other citizens enjoy IS a bad person. It's the very definition of a bad person. Christian or not, that is a bad person.
smirkymonkey
(63,221 posts)
anotojefiremnesuka
(198 posts)Yeah right they feel oppressed because they are being called out for their racism and bigotry.
EVERY GROUP in America except for White Christians has been or currently is demonized or oppressed by White Christians in America and this has been occurring since the Puritans showed up here.
calimary
(81,594 posts)But we liberals HAVE been on the receiving end of hatred FROM quite a few so-called "Christians." Talk about being demonized? We liberals have had to deal with that for YEARS.
Watching the very word "liberal" being spoken aloud, on national television, with a visibly curled lip. I first noticed that when I watched george herbert walker bush speak at some republi-CON convention back during the reagan nightmare - and last, sadly, witnessed it coming out of my best friend's mouth that way, when she got into a rant based on something she saw on Pox Noise - just a few months ago.
Being called a "Saddam lover" and "al Qaeda sympathizer" because we dared to try to stop an illegal, immoral, unethical, irrational, and deceitful war.
Hey, you haven't lived til you've been called a "baby-killer" merely because you support a woman's right to choose. And this from the so-called small-government/get-the-goverment-off-yer-back crowd, who never seem to mind giving themselves the authority to forcibly insert the government inside every woman's vagina. I've never killed a baby in my life!
Whoever claims liberals are doing all the demonization and persecution these days - better think again.
sub.theory
(652 posts)Nowhere did I say that liberals are doing all the demonizing and persecution. In fact, I quite explicitly said that this is a problem on BOTH the left and the right.
I think you see the problem very clearly, however. This demonization, demeaning, and dehumanizing of each other has to stop.
I protested against the Iraq War. In Indiana. I think you can imagine some of the things I was called. Just for the record.
calimary
(81,594 posts)Most of our protests here in L.A. were met with supportive reaction from the public, though. But I had debates about this with people who just wouldn't see. They would NOT see. Willfully.
sub.theory
(652 posts)It was not at all the popular choice to be against the war here in Indiana. Today, most people here realize it was a terrible mistake. But, that wasn't the case at all back in 2003. There were some really solid people here that showed up time and time again for protests.
And I know what you mean about those that are in their reality bubble. It's maddening trying to reason with those that are impervious to reason.
calimary
(81,594 posts)THIS:
"The degree of naked hatred here on DU of Christians, and on the left in general, is alarming - every bit as alarming as the discrimination towards homosexuals. And it seems to get further out of control year by year. I'm a proud liberal in a rather red state, but I'm also a Christian. There are many like me here and elsewhere in this country. There are also many people here that could be reached on this issue, and others, if the left wasn't so busy demonizing them and pushing them even further into the hands of the Republican party."
Actually, YES, let us acknowledge this kind of hatred that LIBERALS face, instead of just some blanket statement that both sides do it. I find myself wondering how a law like this could even get off the ground if it weren't spawned by hatred of the left. We see quite literally a cascade of this across the country. There are, what, TWENTY states pushing this kind of "MY religion trumps your rights" business now? This is NO "one bad apple" phenomenon metastasizing here. There are also MULTIPLE states (I've lost count at the moment) where there's a similar frickin' PILE-ON to take away what truly is the right to be master of one's own body from us women - to deny us perhaps the most basic right of ALL - to own and have the last word over one's very BODY. Do men EVER face that? Is anybody trying to forcibly shove something up inside the penis? By force of LAW? Is anybody trying to bedroom-busybody the MEN of America? Oh no, that's just for the little woman - somehow STILL a possession of men and subject to the dictates and rules and mastery of and subjugation by men.
And AS a woman who has a daughter of child-bearing age (and that's HER choice, too, DAMMIT! NOBODY else's frickin' business!), I resent that with a burning passion down as deep within me as it's possible to go. And as the onslaught keeps coming, and the intrusions keep smacking us in the face, and the invasions continue, YES you're damn right I feel like demonizing them! Because to me they have become, in fact, demons. Body-snatchers even. You cannot tell me both sides are the same here. It's entirely on THEM. They need to keep their damn grubby paws OFF. PERIOD!!!!! And they won't. And they don't! And until THEY stop, I can't. Show me, for example, where pro-choicers have vandalized churches or GOP offices or extremists' headquarters where they plot this shit. Show me where OUR side is threatening and shooting and murdering THEIR doctors. And I'm sorry, but on other issues as well, it's NOT an equivalent statement. Both sides are NOT equal, or behaving equally toward the other side. It's EXTREMELY one-sided. And the so-called "right" is FAR more at fault in all these cases than the left will EVER be. As with the other issues, we have so far to go even to catch up with that side of it, we're literally DECADES behind their head-start on these things.
Besides, we've tried reason. We've tried discussion. We've tried science. We've tried fighting with facts. We've tried "working with them." THEY won't have ANY of it. When reason doesn't work - what is left? Sometimes militance takes over. I'm one of those here who readily advocates "taste of their own medicine. See how they like it." BECAUSE EVERYTHING ELSE WE'VE TRIED HERE ON THE LEFT FOR DECADES HAS NOT WORKED!!!! I wonder if perhaps Barack Obama finally came to a similar realization at Year Six of his second term - "I have TRIED, and TRIED, and TRIED, reached out to them, compromised with them, listened to them, attempted to negotiate with them, was generous with them, was considerate of them, was inclusive of them, tried to find common ground with them, AND THEY WON'T HAVE ANY OF IT. They just WON'T. So fuck it, then. I'm done. No more nice guy. I'm going ahead with executive orders, because there's just some shit that needs to get done - and since it won't get done as long as this situation continues, and my approach has worked not at all, then fuck it. I'm gonna go ahead ANYWAY and screw it if they don't like it. And I'm enough of a realist to know they're NOT gonna like it. And that's just too damn bad."
I feel the same way. And frankly, when I hear over and over and over and over and over the slams and lies and attacks and demonization coming from the so-called "right," it DOES make me angry. It OUTRAGES me. And going through years of this, YES I want to hit back. Roe v Wade was HOW long ago? And we are STILL fighting to protect or salvage what's left of it, now that the termites on the other side have eaten through the rafters and the walls and the very pilings underneath, on which that right was built!
I give this example because as a heterosexual white woman, THIS issue enables me to understand the discrimination and hatred and wish to dominate and subjugate the gay community, and the black community, and the Latino community. THIS issue, the choice issue, allows me, in effect, and in a VERY minimal way, to walk in the shoes of those in the other communities listed above. The choice issue allows me to feel that sense of being under siege, of being preyed upon, of being victimized and demonized, of being a target ALL THE FUCKING TIME.
I also have a very low tolerance for the argument - "both sides do it!" In this particular case, "liberals demonize just as bad as CONs do" - WRONG WRONG WRONG. Sorry, but I HARDLY think "both sides" equate in this argument, this thread, or these issues. Any more than both sides are trying to take voting rights away, both sides denying the reality of climate change, both sides not wanting gays to have rights or be protected from discrimination, both sides trying to keep the minimum wage down below the poverty line, both sides trying to deny the needy the social safety net that helps them survive, both sides saying government is bad and needs to be dismantled, both sides anxious to take that ultimate right of personal, physical sovereignty over one's own body away from women across America. The "Both Sides Do It" argument is as bogus as is the claim that a brick and a grain of aquarium gravel are exactly equal and the same thing, because they both happen to have a hard surface.
Sorry to get up in your face like this, sub.theory - but this just triggered something in me, upon further thought (and this is the next morning, so I literally slept on it).
Honest-to-Pete, my friend, I'm gonna be 62 this year and I have had a BELLY-FULL of this shit for too many years that I've spent on this planet. It's just rained down on us year after year after year after year here on the left. Whether it was the war we tried to stop (Iraq? Try Vietnam!), the rights we tried to secure (not just for us women, but for blacks and Latinos, workers and union members, the poor and the 99% - remember Occupy? And how we were sneered at? And laughed at, and how little legitimate coverage that movement got? Whereas, you get 13 teabaggers, some lawn chairs and a port-a-potty and you have the lead story on all the nightly newscasts for several days running! We were even accused of crimes we didn't commit!).
And the irony is, in every last one of those movements - WE, the LIBERALS, the LEFT, WE were the ones who turned out to be right. It's OUR side that proved correct. It's OUR side that called it. It's OUR side that had the facts and the reason, not the hysteria, hypocrisy, and outright lies and distortions. And we STILL ended up getting the least attention, the least credibility, taken the least seriously of all, while the nutcases on the so-called "right" got all the coverage, all the face time on the Sunday talk shows, all the ink and all the real estate on the front pages and the opinion pages of all the major newspapers, and ABSOLUTELY all the time on talk radio. Shit - that schmuck bill kristol, who's been wrong about everything he's ever opened his yap about, is STILL a semi-regular on every frickin' show from "Meet the Press" to Bill Maher's! What tiny fraction of that exposure has Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders been given, by comparison? And he's been around in the public arena a lot longer than she has, and he, too, has been MIA from the spotlight THROUGHOUT all that time. NOBODY's ever invited him on, until very very recently. Show me where the left-leaning talkers are NOW - with Air America gone and liberal talk phased out in city after city, market after market. Hell, KTLK here in L.A, a very liberal, Democratic Party-led and dominated, true-blue city, was switched over to limbaugh and company a year ago, and WE on the left have NO voice now, except for a single non-commercial Pacifica station that doesn't always focus on our issues anyway. Imagine that, in a city like Los Angeles. OUR voice was cancelled. But not limbaugh's.
I won't stand in silence and, in effect, confirm anyone's argument that liberals are at fault for demonizing the other side! Or that we are more at fault than the other side is. Hell, all we're doing now is just answering back for a change. It's been EXPONENTIALLY worse and bigger and more lopsided and more extensive coming from the so-called "right" than it EVER has been coming from the left. OVER DECADES, okay? If ANYBODY can claim victimization, it's US. US Liberals. US on the LEFT.
After years and years and years of being fiercely and ferociously demonized ourselves, some of us just don't feel like taking that shit anymore. I certainly don't. THIS TOO is something that just simply has to STOP. FAR more coming from the so-called right than ever was or ever could be, here on the left. PLEASE! DO NOT equate them. Not just you, sub.theory. That goes for EVERYBODY here. DO NOT equate them or try to posit that both sides are equally guilty. Please don't even try.
mountain grammy
(26,668 posts)It's an exaggerated outrage. No one's freedom to worship as they please is being denied, they are just faced with having to deal with real people that their right wing preacher has convinced them are lesser than they are. What a scam!
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)
vlyons
(10,252 posts)Stand-up against stupidity and hatred spewing from those calling themselves "Christians," who never bother to actually practice compassion and tolerance.
valerief
(53,235 posts)
Don't respond. You're on my Ignore list now.
sub.theory
(652 posts)Thanks, you proved my point perfectly.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)them to discriminate against LGBT at will. There is no other reason for this law.
Nobody is calling for blood. Nobody is attacking liberals in Indiana, I have not seen a single incidence of any DUer attacking liberals in Indiana during recent DU discussions of this law
If you have, please provide a link.
I live in Arizona. I like it when liberals call out the RW lunatics in my state. I never feel like they are directing their criticism or hostility at me. The state government in Arizona is wacko. The state government in Indiana is wacko. It's just simply true.
There may be a very few people who despise Christians here. Mostly, people here despise RW christofascists who use their religion as a justification for hating and oppressing others. I want to live and let live, and do no harm. Christofascists want to be able to prevent me from doing that. They want to make it so that they can dictate what I can or cannot do because I'm LGBT. They have no right to do that, even though they ignorantly believe that they have the God given right to do so.
Here's the bottom line: I don't care what you believe. Good for you, whatever it is. I believe in Love. But if you and/or your religion attempt to restrict the rights of others because of your religious beliefs, you fully deserve immediate, vehement, aggressive condemnation and action to contain your fascist undemocratic tendencies at every level.
If you feel that there are people who support this law, who can be "reached" on this issue, then by all means, please reach them. Good luck with that.
But if you think that I'm going to reach them by being nicey nice with the very same people who are pushing "kill the gays" petitions, and legalized discrimination against LGBT, then you are living in a dream world that is very far from my real world. You can sit back comfortably observing the situation, lalala, no one is actively quashing your rights. We're fighting for our rights, against ignorant, RW, unreasonable people who believe that God sanctions and dictates their superiority over us.
They will not listen to reason. Just like they did not listen to the Democrats who tried to stop them from passing the hate bill before we got to this point. And then they lie about it, and tell us it's not a hate bill. These people cannot be trusted, they know as much about Christ as Attila the Hun, maybe even less.
What is causing them to reconsider now? Immediate, aggressive action and outrage on the part of the good people of this country, and their own abject horror that they may actually lose revenue because they got caught in their blatant perfidy.
sub.theory
(652 posts)First of all, let me clarify: when I said "calling for blood" I did not meaning in a literal sense of calling for anyone to be killed. I meant that there are calls for there to be dire penalties, particularly financially, for the entire state. I'm sorry for the confusion - sometimes it's easy for things to be taken literally in text and I should have chosen better words.
That said, I am not sure how to respond to you. Your post is exactly the sort of mindset that I originally called out and I believe is incredibly damaging to this country. "I don't care what you think". Well, then there isn't really any possible way to have a dialog is there? If you aren't even going to listen, there can't be a debate. It's impossible. And you say the opposition can't be reasoned with?
I understand that as someone who is gay this is a very loaded and emotional topic for you. I think I can understand that, and I want you to know that I support you and everyone like you. I know it must hurt like hell to have people that don't want you to be able to marry and who don't want to have anything to do with your wedding if you do. I'm sorry for that. I imagine that must really sting. Please know that there are many in Indiana that support gay rights.
I would ask that you not use terms like "Christofascist" just as I would not use "faggot" or other slurs. This is what I mean about there being serious discrimination against Christians, which many in this thread claim doesn't exist on DU. And yet terms like this are thrown around with abandon. Why is it OK to use Christian as a slur? If you think they are fascists - fine. But why are you trying to draw Christ into it? Do you really think that the 2 billion Christians on Earth are all supporting discrimination against gays? You do know that there are Christians that support gay rights, don't you?
The original reason I posted in this thread was to point out exactly that there are many liberals, moderates, and others in the state that in no way support this legislation. My point is that the collective shaming and punishment of the state is wrong. I chose this thread to say something because your OP showed that point very clearly. My secondary point, and something of a tangent, is that we have to end this bitter partisanship and demonization of each other in this country. I know that the right is very, very guilty of this. I know. But I also worry about how common it has become on the left too. This is something that I have become increasingly concerned about, and I worry about the long term consequences of this fanatical partisanship.
You may feel that your response was justified, but I hope that you can see that boycotts to the state hurt everyone - not just the people that you want to hurt. There are many here that are actually on your side and they are going to be hurt too.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)to see right through you. I can't waste my time responding to this insincere hogwash.
Have a nice life.
randome
(34,845 posts)It's necessary to break a few eggs to make an omelet, especially when that omelet is for the greater good.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Precision and concision. That's the game.[/center][/font][hr]
smirkymonkey
(63,221 posts)Bravo! 
ScreamingMeemie
(68,918 posts)a comment like this if it was Florida or Texas? Alabama? Mississippi? Yeah, it doesn't feel good, but this is not new.
Skittles
(153,298 posts)GET WITH THE PROGRAM ZORRA
Zorra
(27,670 posts)
shenmue
(38,506 posts)Thank you.
SoapBox
(18,791 posts)Scrabbleddie
(67 posts)Hate media is ubiquitous. They've been radicalized against us.
foo_bar
(4,193 posts)Local officials and government-sponsored radio incited ordinary citizens to kill their neighbors, and those who refused to kill were often murdered on the spot. <...>
The U.S. refused to jam extremist radio broadcasts inciting the killing, citing costs and concern with international law;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rwandan_Genocide#Preparation_for_genocide
http://www.idrc.ca/EN/Resources/Publications/openebooks/338-0/index.html
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/rick-wiles-islam-must-be-eliminated-face-earth-stomped-out-cockroaches
ScreamingMeemie
(68,918 posts)Dude in a bar, over Gabby Giffords. "Good." He was educated rather quickly. I'm glad my experience has been wholly different than yours.
Scrabbleddie
(67 posts)In the other instance, when he learned I was a damned liberal,
he immediately apologized. (he was somewhat obligated)
