Started By
Message
Indiana Religious Freedom Bill
Posted on 3/26/15 at 4:13 pm
Posted on 3/26/15 at 4:13 pm
Gov. Pence signed into law a bill that would allow business' to reject people due to "religious reasons"...most attention has been put towards gays on the issue. Your Thoughts?
Indiana New Law
Indiana New Law
This post was edited on 3/26/15 at 4:14 pm
10
Posted on 3/26/15 at 4:20 pm to 5thTiger
Works for me.
Private business is just that.
Private business is just that.
Posted on 3/26/15 at 4:20 pm to 5thTiger
I'm not watching a video on it.
Posted on 3/26/15 at 4:26 pm to 5thTiger
That's fine, as long as certain industries are excluded and their exclusionary practice must also be displayed on the front door alerting their customers
Posted on 3/26/15 at 4:27 pm to CheeseburgerEddie
quote:
That's fine, as long as certain industries are excluded and their exclusionary practice must also be displayed on the front door alerting their customers
This. Though I don't understand why someone would take the stance, the gays are an extremely tidy, friendly and generous people. I imagine they tip very well
Posted on 3/26/15 at 4:31 pm to ShaneTheLegLechler
My gay clients are some of my best ones. Pay on time, rarely complain, etc. Not sure why a business wouldn't want to do business with them.
Posted on 3/26/15 at 4:35 pm to The Spleen
quote:The issues I tend to read about are related to businesses in weddings. Bakers who don't want to make a cake for a gay wedding. Other examples are out there.
Not sure why a business wouldn't want to do business with them.
As for the OP: I agree with the bill. A man/woman shouldn't have to do something against their faith. There are other businesses that will cater to the gay community.
This post was edited on 3/26/15 at 4:37 pm
Posted on 3/26/15 at 4:40 pm to 5thTiger
Private businesses are private businesses. That said, I really don't want to hear folks in Indiana bitch if they start losing business over it. I've already seen some people complain about them potentially losing GenCon (which puts a decent amount of tourist money into the Indy area) and it's basically you wanted it, you got it. 
This post was edited on 3/26/15 at 4:41 pm
Posted on 3/26/15 at 4:42 pm to Kodar
Just a hypothetical. Say a gay couple is injured by a vehicle and they are brought to a private hospital. If the doctor is whatever religion, he can decide that he will not treat the couple and they die from wounds.
Now, I know doctors have an oath or whatever, but it isn't legally binding (so far as I know in a private practice).
Is this ok?
Now, I know doctors have an oath or whatever, but it isn't legally binding (so far as I know in a private practice).
Is this ok?
Posted on 3/26/15 at 4:42 pm to 5thTiger
ThIs is egregiously unconstitutional and will be struck down by the Supreme Court. There can be no such thing as private business in a country that has democratic principles.
If a business is allowed to serve only some segments of the population then it is practicing discrimination. A Pandora's Box of discrimination towards many (any?) groups will have been opened. Chaos and division will result.
If a business is allowed to serve only some segments of the population then it is practicing discrimination. A Pandora's Box of discrimination towards many (any?) groups will have been opened. Chaos and division will result.
Posted on 3/26/15 at 4:45 pm to 5thTiger
Without looking at the specifics of the bill, I presume that if they're receiving federal public dollars (as most major hospitals do) they cannot discriminate. Even with this bill. At least not without risking losing federal money.
And I say that knowing that the UofL's hospital here was going to merge with St. Mary and Joseph's but would've lost significant research funding and such if they did because St. Mary and Joseph's adhered to Catholic doctrine and would not perform "birth control" surgeries such as hysterectomies.
And I say that knowing that the UofL's hospital here was going to merge with St. Mary and Joseph's but would've lost significant research funding and such if they did because St. Mary and Joseph's adhered to Catholic doctrine and would not perform "birth control" surgeries such as hysterectomies.
Posted on 3/26/15 at 4:47 pm to BluegrassBelle
But for the sake of the scenario, lets say it is a private hospital with private funding, not tied to the government. Strictly a "private business"
Posted on 3/26/15 at 4:51 pm to 5thTiger
If there are no exclusionary clauses it doesn't have a chance in hell of passing. Otherwise it wouldn't have a chance in heck
Posted on 3/26/15 at 4:51 pm to CheeseburgerEddie
Was passed by both houses and signed by Gov. Pence.
Posted on 3/26/15 at 4:53 pm to 5thTiger
Sorry, meant remaining/not struck down whatever legal mumbo jumbo.
Posted on 3/26/15 at 5:29 pm to 5thTiger
quote:This is a silly hypothetical. Jesus strictly taught to love and care for others. He also taught not to enable and encourage sin. An injury being treated by a doctor =\= a wedding caterer having to tend to a gay wedding. As for Muslims or w/e religion, I can't speak for them.
Just a hypothetical. Say a gay couple is injured by a vehicle and they are brought to a private hospital. If the doctor is whatever religion, he can decide that he will not treat the couple and they die from wounds.
Posted on 3/26/15 at 5:30 pm to Kentucker
quote:We have a serious problem however. A # of Christians have found themselves in compromising positions, and they're not the only ones. What is the solution though?
If a business is allowed to serve only some segments of the population then it is practicing discrimination. A Pandora's Box of discrimination towards many (any?) groups will have been opened. Chaos and division will result.
Posted on 3/26/15 at 5:37 pm to 5thTiger
quote:
Just a hypothetical. Say a gay couple is injured by a vehicle and they are brought to a private hospital. If the doctor is whatever religion, he can decide that he will not treat the couple and they die from wounds.
The Hippocratic oath would take care of that, no?
Posted on 3/26/15 at 5:40 pm to AUbagman
Not only that.. but Gov't intervention in the Healthcare industry and payments from Medicaid, etc..
Let the free market dictate whether those companies thrive or disappear. As a business owner.. I personally feel it's bad business. But if another business owner feels they don't need money from certain people.. let them send business elsewhere.
Let the free market dictate whether those companies thrive or disappear. As a business owner.. I personally feel it's bad business. But if another business owner feels they don't need money from certain people.. let them send business elsewhere.
Posted on 3/26/15 at 5:40 pm to Kentucker
quote:
If a business is allowed to serve only some segments of the population then it is practicing discrimination. A Pandora's Box of discrimination towards many (any?) groups will have been opened. Chaos and division will result.
No it won't. You'll have a small segment of ignorant/principled to a fault business owners, but the vast majority will always side with more money and customers. Quite frankly, most business owners do not care about the personal life of a customer.
Page 1 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News