Incremental progress, how does it work?
Unintended Consequences!!

No gays allowed law set to pass in Virginia:

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/01...s-in-virginia/

So when it passes do bigots put up gay detectors in their hardware stores? How do they know for sure if your gay or not? Im super metrosexual so I'm not sure if they will sell to me.

One of these is not like the others...

You could argue there is insufficient benefit to make a law worth doing even if it's good in principle. That's not the same as saying that because law isn't as effective as popular culture we don't need laws. Also I'd say in this case they compliment each other extremely well.

Cost/benefit - it's minor legislation and it's good in principle. I'm defaulting to believing it's worth doing in practice without some strong argument to the contrary. I get some people don't think its's a good thing but for those that do it's hard to see the argument against working unless it's the general argument against government.

States' rights tho

There is not much to discuss. We don't allow Muslims to marry children even though the Koran clearly permits it. Your religious beliefs must first meet the requirement of being legal. Discriminating against gays should be illegal just the same as discriminating against blacks and these laws override your 2000 year old holy books.

Biogtry as a religious right/angle shoot is not going to happen.

Nice try huckabee.

Giz had a great convo with religious folk on FB. They said "gays are bad cuz Jesus," she replied "what about stoning womens and slavery," they replied "Old Testament tho, Jesus brought new covenant, old rules no longer apply," to which she responded "gayz hating is Leviticus, amirite?"

No response after that.

Should companies be able to discriminate against customers?

The problem is, the answer is sometimes. Yes, society is more free if the answer is always, but it's a better society if the answer is sometimes.

imo, when is decided by things like voting.

imo, LGBT should be protected along with race. I would put LGBT ahead of religion in terms of what should be protected, but religion too - with some caveats as just about anything could count as a religion.

Agree.
Does this mean that when "is currently" decided by things like voting, or when "should be, ideally" decided by things like voting? The first is mostly true, the second I strongly disagree with.
Ok.

Not sure what the big diff is or that I care much about the distinction. Maybe anti-discrimination laws will be the result of referendums (direct voting), legislature (indirect voting) or courts.

http://jezebel.com/bakery-that-refus...mus-1715747809
"The owners of Sweet Cakes by Melissa, the Oregon bakery that refused to bake a wedding cake for a lesbian couple, has been ordered to pay $135,000 in damages. According to the Associated Press, the damages were ordered by Oregon’s bureau of labor and industries for the “emotional suffering” caused by the bakeries actions."

"Oregon’s bureau of labor and industries ruled, however, that the couples violated the state’s 2007 discrimination law. The AP reports that the law, “provides an exemption for religious organizations, but the agency ruled that exemption does not allow private businesses to discriminate against potential customers.”"

Unenforceable because how can we ever know the reason in their heart of hearts?!

The same happened in the much talked about gay wedding cake case. The judge explained her reasoning for determining the bakers reasons for refusing to make the cake.

135k in emotional suffering for not getting a cake. I can understand someone being for these laws, but anyone who goes, 'yeah seems reasonable' to this has completely lost it.

I know the bible better than the Jesus freaks?

Romans 1:26.

It would make more sense if it was supposed to include punitive damages.

Compare:

It's still a ****ing wedding cake that they ended up getting for free. Someone told them that they wouldn't make a cake bro. That's all.

The award has nothing at all to do with what they didn't produce.

Why are you raging when I agree with you? Jesus.

Lol phill what? Of course it does, they wouldn't be sued otherwise.

Read "award" as "dollars amount" ffs, as in "the dollar amount isn't supposed to be equal to the price of a cake"

The dollar amount still has something to do with what they didn't produce.

Well you and phill can both produce cites as to why each of you think the way you do, and we'll all wait for both of your evidence

Seriously we're bringing the "treat anti-discrimination laws as a brand new concept" thing over to this thread?

And we're coupling that with "Jim Crow was actually the government, the fine people of Alabama loved the Negro and would gladly have served them"??!??!?!?


Renton, Love Sosa... try reading books. Real books, published by reputable houses. Your "classic liberalism", which you seem to think makes you seem logical and principled, is actually coming across as hilariously ignorant.