son of the isolated blurts thread!

Huh, I didn't notice a stench from the flat weasel, but now I will have to run the car through the carwash just to be sure. It still made me sad. He had such a long fluffy red tail (it was red before I hit him).

And it could have been worse Yank. At least you didn't mention bacon or beggin strips.

True. Of course, I lucked out because Beggin strips hadn't been invented yet. Bacon, sure, but not that other stuff, whatever it is.
 
I'm a murderer. I ran over a weasel on my way home from taking Maleminx to school this morning. He ran right in front of my tires (the weasel, not Maleminx). I couldn't even swerve to miss him. I didn't even know there were weasels in Pa. I've never seen one before.

I feel awful. :(


http://40.media.tumblr.com/dfa57a2d72b8852830f1592e3e55b9af/tumblr_nc3w5yvzRD1tmsuuro1_500.jpg




i could bring bacon-flavored bacon for people to the party. even ugly piggy-looking ones! :eek:


http://28.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lla2pjIv9G1qf3vsto1_500.jpg ???
 
i know there's perfectly reasonable, intelligent people in the state of indiana.

such a shame not a one of them are state legislators.

ed
 
Exactly. I cannot imagine how reasonable, responsible business owners in Indiana must feel right now. They are likely going to feel the pain from something they'd never, ever do.

Voters need to clean house in IN. ASAP.
I can't wait until the Satanists start trolling Indiana. And just wait until a Muslim business refuses to serve women who aren't wearing hijab.
 
And what's up with the idiots who want "Girl Crush" taken off the radio? Have they actually listened to the lyrics? Of course they haven't.
 
Exactly. I cannot imagine how reasonable, responsible business owners in Indiana must feel right now. They are likely going to feel the pain from something they'd never, ever do.

Voters need to clean house in IN. ASAP.

The problem is that a majority of the voters in many areas feel that they HAVE cleaned house and that they have what they want.

At least one major business greoup has already pulled its conference from Indiana. Others will follow and the legislature will eventually get it that they screwed up and will quietly make things right.
 
And what's up with the idiots who want "Girl Crush" taken off the radio? Have they actually listened to the lyrics? Of course they haven't.

:mad: you're kidding?

if it's good enough for Buck Owens' radio station, I should think it'd be good enough for the rest of the country. :rolleyes:
 
I'm curious about this bill in Indiana. Is it only about gay issues? I mean, I actually support a business and their right to refuse service to someone. I think it's a foolish and bad business model overall. But let's take the flip side of the scenario. Let's say you're a black guy running a print shop and a klan leader wants you to make 10,000 posters for this week's lynching. Should he be required to do it? Hell no.

I'm curious to what this bill includes. Is it just against gay people? If so, that's bullshit.
 
I'm curious about this bill in Indiana. Is it only about gay issues? I mean, I actually support a business and their right to refuse service to someone. I think it's a foolish and bad business model overall. But let's take the flip side of the scenario. Let's say you're a black guy running a print shop and a klan leader wants you to make 10,000 posters for this week's lynching. Should he be required to do it? Hell no.

I'm curious to what this bill includes. Is it just against gay people? If so, that's bullshit.

Here's a quick summary (from Huffington Post):

The Religious Freedom Restoration Act would allow any individual or corporation to cite its religious beliefs as a defense when sued by a private party. But many opponents of the bill, which included business leaders, argued that it could open the door to widespread discrimination. Business owners who don't want to serve same-sex couples, for example, could now have legal protections to discriminate.​

Presently, any business owner can refuse to work with individual clients for ethical reasons growing out of the service requested (i.e., your Klan poster request) without fear of legal recourse. No business owner can discriminate against an entire class of clients simply because they don't like what that class represents.
 
Here's a quick summary (from Huffington Post):

The Religious Freedom Restoration Act would allow any individual or corporation to cite its religious beliefs as a defense when sued by a private party. But many opponents of the bill, which included business leaders, argued that it could open the door to widespread discrimination. Business owners who don't want to serve same-sex couples, for example, could now have legal protections to discriminate.​

Presently, any business owner can refuse to work with individual clients for ethical reasons growing out of the service requested (i.e., your Klan poster request) without fear of legal recourse. No business owner can discriminate against an entire class of clients simply because they don't like what that class represents.

Thanks for the information.

I guess I don't quite understand the difference then. What's the difference between a black person refusing service to a Klan member versus a Muslim baker refusing to make a cake for a gay wedding?

I guess it's the bigger picture type thing? I mean, and this is just my thoughts on the subject, I see someone serving food to a same sex couple in a restaurant as something that shouldn't be cause for refusal of service. Same as a black restaurant owner serving a klan member. But preparing a cake for their wedding, performing the ceremony or setting up parade floats for a klan rally, I think people should be able to refuse service for things like that.

I guess I fail to see how the law is distinguishing between the two, as I said.
 
Thanks for the information.

I guess I don't quite understand the difference then. What's the difference between a black person refusing service to a Klan member versus a Muslim baker refusing to make a cake for a gay wedding?

I guess it's the bigger picture type thing? I mean, and this is just my thoughts on the subject, I see someone serving food to a same sex couple in a restaurant as something that shouldn't be cause for refusal of service. Same as a black restaurant owner serving a klan member. But preparing a cake for their wedding, performing the ceremony or setting up parade floats for a klan rally, I think people should be able to refuse service for things like that.

I guess I fail to see how the law is distinguishing between the two, as I said.

First off, the law requires that the refusal of service is based on a religious conviction. Second, it paves the way for people to deny service to whole classes of people and not just individuals. Let's consider the days when it was impossible for all African Americans to dine at a dime-store lunch counter. That's discrimination against an entire class of people, and under the new law in Indiana bigots would find a way to justify it on religious grounds and get away with it. Is that so hard to see?
 
First off, the law requires that the refusal of service is based on a religious conviction. Second, it paves the way for people to deny service to whole classes of people and not just individuals. Let's consider the days when it was impossible for all African Americans to dine at a dime-store lunch counter. That's discrimination against an entire class of people, and under the new law in Indiana bigots would find a way to justify it on religious grounds and get away with it. Is that so hard to see?
What's gonna happen is that the lawmakers will eventually realize that "religious freedom" applies not just to Christianity but to other religions as well. When that day arrives, it's gonna be awesome.

It's like when Valarie Hodges in Louisiana withdrew her support of Bobby Jindal's school voucher program once she realized that it would also fund Islamic schools.
 
Back
Top