Even Walmart is repudiating the “Crazy Baker Bill”:
And Pence was stumbling and mumbling over his own bill yesterday, looking like a scared toddler.
Now that this battle has so obviously been won, it would be great to see citizens show up for higher ed in the same strong way. We could chase those useless Rauners back to the caves that they came from in just a few days of concerted pressure.
Clarissa's Blog 
AHAHAHAHA.
Translation: We don’t want to deal with the class action suit that would result and that we would lose if this passed (in many towns we’re the only store around, and we combine pharmacies and banking together). We also really don’t want the scrutiny into our efforts to gut worker’s compensation. that would result from a campaign like this. We’re interested in crushing our workers and suppliers into submission, not our customers! FFS we just had to give our workers a raise! A raise!
LikeLike
Clarissa:
It’s not appropriate to call this the ‘crazy baker bill’. The original federal RFRA (which has the EXACT same language as the Indiana RFRA) was signed into law under Bill Clinton in response to some Native Americans wanted to smoke their peyote for religious rites. There are also 19 other states besides Indiana with similar bills (passed over a period of 22 years since 1993), and the progressives response is crickets?
Frankly I find the progressive outrage over RFRA is so hypocritical (and ignorant):
1) Democratic Governor O’Malley (CT) doesn’t understand his own state’s law. CT’s RFRA is even more demanding in the level of proof needed by the government than Indiana quote: ‘shall not burden a person’s exercise of religion’ (http://rfraperils.com/connecticut/) as opposed to Indiana’s ‘substantially burden’.
2) Governor Cuomo bans state-funded travel to Indiana while traveling to Cuba, (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/02/26/cuomo-cuba-visit/24064261/) which actively persecutes and imprisons LGBTs (among others).
3) Apple CEO Tim Cook denounces RFRA, but sells Iphones in Saudi Arabia and wants to sell them in Iran (both countries kill their LGBTs).
4) Barack Obama helped pass Illnois’ RFRA; he actually voted for it! (http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs3.asp?ActID=2272&ChapAct=775%A0ILCS%A035/&ChapterID=64&ChapterName=HUMAN%20RIGHTS&ActName=Religious%20Freedom%20Restoration%20Act)
5) Representative Chuck Schumer (D-NY) (now Senator [D-NY]) advocates for 1993 RFRA (http://www.c-span.org/video/?c4532943/chuck-schumer-rfra). It passed the Senate 97-3. Fun quote: ““The parade of horribles [religious liberty cases lost between a Supreme Court ruling and the Congress passing RFRA] has already begun. The American people today know that religious freedom is not a luxury. I believe this legislation is essential.”
Sounds like a bunch of fanatics, right?
Of course, a pizza shop in Indiana is getting death threats, but that’s okay.
(http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/237686-indiana-pizzeria-closes-after-threats#.VRx0_bvsGMg.twitter)
LikeLike
Look, I’m not these guys O’Malley, Cook, Schumer, etc. I don’t even know who they are, to be honest. So whether they are progressives or not, fanatics or not, hypocrites or not, sell phones or don’t is really not something that should be laid at my door.
What I am bothered by as a devout Christian is that the name of my God is being taken in vain to engage in vicious and disgusting activities based on hating and judging one’s neighbor. It also bugs me to no end that Jesus’s very explicit insistence that the separation between religion and state should be honored is dismissed. I believe I am as entitled to practice my religion as the next person, so I reserve the right to qualify the people who blaspheme in such an outrageous way in any manner that I like.
LikeLike
“….Jesus’s very explicit insistence that the separation between religion and state should be honored…”
Mark 12:16-17 And He said to them, “Whose likeness and inscription is this?” And they said to Him, “Caesar’s.”And Jesus said to them, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.”
I’m pretty certain that marriage existed before the state (read Genesis for that).
And for the record, Jesus and Paul both obeyed the state and got killed for it.
“…judging your neighbor…”
(Matthew 7:2) 2″For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you.
So what then does the Bible say (the standard that Christian should use), then?
Ezekiel 18:23: (“Do I have any pleasure in the death of the wicked,” declares the Lord GOD, “rather than that he should turn from his ways and live? )
Rev 21:7-8: “He who overcomes will inherit these things, and I will be his God and he will be My son. 8″But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and sexually immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.”
So God doesn’t want people to die, wants them to live, but will judge them in the end anyway? And hence Christians will be the same (the Westboro Baptists are out by this measure). Funny, I don’t see my name in those Scriptures. Examine my comments, and I have never said I hate LGBTs. I don’t like or approve of their lifestyle, but God will judge everyone in the end for their deeds.
What does God say about homosexuality? Well….
1 Cor 6:9-10 “Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.…
This list shows that God condemns certain lifestyles: choosing to covet, choosing to indulge in too much liquor, choosing to steal, choosing to sleep around with people to whom you are not married, choosing to indulge homosexual urges (doesn’t matter if people are ‘born that way’; the choice to indulge the urge remains with you). If you have a problem with, take it up with the Almighty, as he makes the rules, not shadowofashade (or any human for that matter).
“….name of God is being taken in vain to engage in vicious and disgusting activities based on hating….”
What ‘vicious and disgusting activities”?
Full Definition of VICIOUS
1
having the nature or quality of vice or immorality : depraved — (see vice)
2
defective, faulty; also : invalid
3
impure, noxious
4
a : dangerously aggressive : savage
b : marked by violence or ferocity : fierce
5
malicious, spiteful
6
worsened by internal causes that reciprocally augment each other
Now which definition are you using? I could see 1 or 2, but given my earlier Scriptural explanation (and assuming you are truly a devout Christian), I’ll strike them out. Six is out, which leaves 3, 4 and 5.
Three may work if you consider it ‘noxious’, but that’s an opinion. Five implies a judgement (can’t judge now, can we?) on the motivation of the person, and four just doesn’t make sense (I’ll give you the Westboro Baptists for 3 and 5), unless the refusal of services was accompanied by a 12-gauge.
This is vicious:
http://www.negroartist.com/civil%20rights%20imagery/pages/Black%20civil%20rights%20demonstrator%20attacked%20by%20a%20dog%20in%20Birmingham,%20Alabama%201963_jpg.htm
http://www.negroartist.com/civil%20rights%20imagery/pages/Black%20civil%20rights%20demonstrators%20attacked%20by%20police%20water%20hose_%20Birmingham,%20Alabama%20May%201963_jpg.htm
So politely refusing to bake a cake / engrave a ring / take a photo is ‘vicious and disgusting” and requires death threats? What would you consider the following?
http://www.businessinsider.com/report-the-indiana-pizza-joint-that-vowed-to-never-deliver-a-pizza-to-a-gay-wedding-forced-to-close-2015-4?op=1
Problem with the LGBT activists is that, according to them, refusing to service them for a pizza / cake / ring for their perverse (according to God) ceremony, and not voicing total approval and whole-hearted acceptance of their lifestyle is somehow equivalent to physical violence ( e.g. fire hoses and police dogs). I cannot simply disagree; I have to accept that their lifestyle is morally correct, or I am ‘vicious and disgusting’ and worthy of death/driven out of business. So to sum up:
LGBT activists: Violate your religious conscience and service our ceremony that you find morally objectionable or we make death threats / run you out of business / sic the government on you / ruin your life.
Reminds me of Emperor Trajan:
Trajan: Violate your religious conscience and worship me, or I throw you to the lions.
So Clarissa, based on the Bible (that is the universal) I only conclude that you either don’t read the Bible, or you’re lying about your faith. I really don’t know which one, frankly.
LikeLike
“I’m pretty certain that marriage existed before the state (read Genesis for that).”
“And for the record, Jesus and Paul both obeyed the state and got killed for it.”
“″For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you.
So what then does the Bible say (the standard that Christian should use), then?”
“This list shows that God condemns certain lifestyles”
“Problem with the LGBT activists is that, according to them, refusing to service them for a pizza / cake / ring for their perverse (according to God) ceremony”
“So politely refusing to bake a cake / engrave a ring / take a photo is ‘vicious and disgusting” and requires death threats?”
“I have to accept that their lifestyle is morally correct, or I am ‘vicious and disgusting’ and worthy of death/driven out of business.”
LikeLike
judge:
1) to form an opinion about through careful weighing of evidence and testing of premises
2) to sit in judgment (defined below)
i) a formal utterance of an authoritative opinion
ii) an opinion so pronounced
iii) a formal decision given by a court
iv) the final judging of humankind by God
v) a divine sentence or decision; a calamity held to be sent by God
vi) the process of forming an opinion or evaluation by discerning and comparing
vii) an opinion or estimate so formed by vi)
viii) the capacity for judging : discernment
ix) an opinion or estimate so formed by viii)
x) a proposition stating something believed or asserted
3) to determine or pronounce after inquiry and deliberation
4) govern, rule —used of a Hebrew tribal leader
5) to form an estimate or evaluation of; especially : to form a negative opinion about
6) to hold as an opinion : guess, think
Now 4) and all references to God are out (since God is not a commenter on this thread). So I form a judgment from the definitions presented that everyone judges in some form or another (that is, everybody forms an opinion by one method or another).
Everybody judges. EVERYBODY.
You judge what to wear in the morning.
You judge what to eat.
You judge not to go down that dark alley
You form judgments about the ‘crazy baker bill’, Putin/Russia, and ‘Europe’s Angry Muslims’.
Where did I equate myself with God? I’m simply quoting an authoritative source (that is the Bible for Christians), and I have made great pains to make certain in my comments that ‘God said this and that’. At no point have I said I am perfect, or flawless, or I have divine authority. I simply point that out.
Now, it may not make Clarissa FEEL good (there’s plenty of stuff in the Bible that makes me uncomfortable), but your feelings are not my problem, nor my responsibility. That’s between you and God.
LikeLike
All of the disagreement with the Bible should be laid at the door of its creator. And that’s not me. 🙂
LikeLike
Shadowofashade, why is it that you only think actual violence/assault or a threat of such is a reason for using the courts? This is all civil charges.
If the business owners had said something to the effect of “Get the f*** out of my shop before I smite you with the hammer of God and send you straight to h***” while grabbing a shotgun, I could honestly see a reason for filing charges.
I’m also confused as to why you think citing a bunch of bible verses at someone is “polite” when you’re the exact type of person who is thrown into agita when someone says “Happy Holidays.” Also, one can be polite and vicious at the same time — haven’t you been anywhere?
Also you keep referring to civil rights demonstrations and sit ins in the 1960s as a contrast. Why do you think that no gay people could ever be any other type of minority?
Alas, I’m fresh out of fainting couches and smelling salts.
LikeLike
In the end, this is not about just Christianity.
Take Howard Roark. He’s an architect who wants to design only modernist buildings. Not Baroque. Not Renaissance. Modernist.
He takes several jobs and gets fired because he will not bend his standards to that of his employers. Does he deserve it? Yes? He starts his own business, and takes clients who want modernist buildings. Lots of people want him to design something other a modernist building, but he refuses.
I support the right of Howard Roark to build only modernist buildings.
I support the right of Shop-Rite to refuse a Hitler cake. I also support the right of Walmart to make a Hitler birthday cake.
(this actually happened: http://www.foxnews.com/story/2008/12/17/little-adolf-hitler-denied-birthday-cake-at-new-jersey-grocery-store/)
I support the right of Walmart to fire someone because they won’t ring up condoms.
I support the right of a Christian business to refuse abortion prescriptions.
No one is ‘entitled’ to buy my product, and I am not ‘entitled’ to sell my product
to any yahoo who can afford it. The government has no right to tell or force me to tell me to whom I can sell my product.
For example, I was refused an oil change at a Walmart for an unknown reason. I politely asked the supervisor why, and he told me to go to hell (this was a through a subordinate). I think that the reason was because my car was more complicated to oil change. Now, I could have made a scene, gone to the media, made a death threat, etc. But what did I do? I went to Big O’s (who gladly took my money), told my parents about the incident (and everybody I know when the topic comes up), and now my local Walmart is deprived of a unknown amount of business. Can’t the LBGTs react in the same manner?
LikeLike
“I support the right of a Christian business to refuse abortion prescriptions.”
LikeLike
Public accommodation laws in all 50 states prohibit discrimination based on race, sex, ancestry/national origin and religion. That’s it. Businesses can legally refuse service for other reason at all, whether it’s wise is another question. Not all states include LGBT, and in fact, before this law in Indiana was passed, it was legal to say to a gay person in Indiana, “No, I will not serve you because you are gay,” so I don’t get what you think this law is doing for anti-gay businesses, and I do not buy your implied slippery slope argument.
LikeLike
The idea that someone’s religious values are being violated by being forced to bake a cake for a gay wedding is too ludicrous to debate for the very simple reason that wedding cakes are a non-essential service.
The real issue for me is essential services, can medical personnel refuse to attend gay patients because treating them would be enabling them to continue their sinful lifestyle which is against the doctor’s or nurse’s principles?
Forget gay people, segregation and anti-miscegenation were both justified (at least partly) by scripture. Would not-crazy-according-to-you bakers be allowed to not provide services for an interracial couple? (tip o’ the iceberg)
What about new immigrants still carrying grudges from their homelands? Could an Indian turn away a customer of the ‘wrong’ caste?
Don’t say those couldn’t happen, who would guess that a law passed to let Native Americans use hallucinogens would be used to allow bakers (and you) to obsess about other people’s sex lives? Yet here we are…..
LikeLiked by 1 person
“The real issue for me is essential services, can medical personnel refuse to attend gay patients because treating them would be enabling them to continue their sinful lifestyle which is against the doctor’s or nurse’s principles?”
My sister went to the unemployment center to help the long-term unemployed. Obviously, she’s volunteering just because she’s kind. The very first unemployed sees her extend her hand to him and says, “I don’t shake hands, I’m Muslim.” And in a truly Christian spirit of kindness, my sister did not refuse to help him after that. And in the same spirit, I do hope that he finds a job. However, when he does, we might find ourselves in a situation where he refuses to serve me or her because we are “unclean” or whatever. And there is a million and one situations where that can prove not only inconvenient but actually dangerous.
LikeLike
\ “I don’t shake hands, I’m Muslim.” And in a truly Christian spirit of kindness, my sister did not refuse to help him after that.
Religious male Jews in Israel (all Haredi/ Orthodox and many of National-Religious too) don’t shake hands with women either. He didn’t refuse the handshake to insult your sister, as the word “kindness” implies.
I don’t know about the situation in Canada (?), but in Israel there are very many men like that. Wanting them employed is not kindness, but a need for Israel.
“shomer negiah” = “observant of touch”, the term refers to someone who refrains from physical contact with members of the opposite sex.
LikeLike
A student came by the other day asking me to change his grade because he “didn’t mean to plagiarize.” He was stunned to discover that I didn’t find this argument to be of great interest. “I didn’t mean to do it” is an excuse that works in a kindergarten. People over the age of 6, however, are old enough to know that the result carries a lot more weight than their intent.
The fellow at the unemployment center freely chose to move here. Now it is his responsibility to learn and respect the cultural codes. He chooses not to do that and people still treat him with the kindness and respect that he’s choosing not to reciprocate.
LikeLike
The idea that someone’s religious values are being violated by being forced to bake a cake for a gay wedding is too ludicrous to debate for the very simple reason that wedding cakes are a non-essential service.
No, it’s ludicrous because if your religious values are so fragile that they get injured by serving members of the general public, you should not have a business or you should avoid professions in which those values would be routinely violated. Instead you expect else to carve out a special snowflake de jure exemption (which you get many times) for your precious sensibilities. Arguing about essential and non-essential services can be defined down to ridiculousness, and is a fool’s errand in a capitalist society.
LikeLike
that was supposed to be a reply to the very non-christian shadowofashade
LikeLike
I have to marvel at the irony of you talking down to someone for discriminating against gay people, when you have, in this very post, said that your idea of utopia is a world where businesses are free to discriminate against black/gay people.
‘Not serving black folks is fine with me, but your ideology behind it differs from mine, so shame on you!’
LikeLike
Oh, I’m sorry. It wasn’t this post, it was the other baker-bill post where you revealed your notion of an ideal world.
“I HAVE A DREAM, THAT ONE DAY, BUSINESSES WILL BE FREE TO NOT SERVE BLACK PEOPLE, OR GAY PEOPLE, OR BROWN IMMIGRANTS WHO DO NOTHING BUT WEAKEN THE SOCIAL FABRIC OF OUR WONDERFULLY WHITE SOCIETIES. ‘
LikeLike
You’re projecting sick things I’ve never said onto what I have said. Please dont’ do that.
LikeLike
Ideally (in a world we clearly don’t live in) a business owner providing non-essential services should be allowed to turn away any customer they desire for any reason (and be mocked and despised for doing so).
To be honest if a cake baker said they didn’t want to make my cake because they thought my lifestyle was immoral or I belonged to the wrong blood group I’d be happy to go somewhere else because that baker is clearly deeply disturbed and I would not trust them to prepare something I or anyone I care about would eat.
But the law in this case also is apparently sloppily written and there are fears that providers of essential services could hop onto its shameful bandwagon (and increase the size of the tent of immorality to things like miscegenation or interfaith marriage). I don’t know how probable that is, but since people are that way they are I wouldn’t be surprised.
LikeLike
Since you clearly know so much about Christianity, you would know what the Bible commands:
“If you meet your enemy’s ox or his donkey wandering away, you shall surely return it to him. If you see the donkey of one who hates you lying helpless under its load, you shall refrain from leaving it to him, you shall surely release it with him.” Exodus 23:4-5
Now if God commands us to help ease our enemies’ donkey suffering, what of our enemy? Ever read the story of the Good Samaritian? I’ll assume ignorance guides your comments as opposed to spite.
LikeLike
I’m not sure who you are supposed to be in this analogy, the suffering donkey or the enemy of the suffering donkey. 🙂
Man, seriously, stop fretting so much about people’s marriages, weddings, sex lives, donkeys, etc. Concentrate on yourself, enjoy life, make sure that your life is as filled with joy and happiness as you can, and I promise that the donkey, the enemy of the donkey, and everybody around you plus their donkeys will only gain from that.
Happy holidays!
LikeLike
I’m not a Christian (I’m agnostic and completely incapable of religious faith).
The anti-gay branch of Christianity seems very ….. harsh and small minded to me. What do they have to offer gay people that’s more attractive than marriage?
And the idea that an omniscient all powerful being that professes to love humanity would care how consenting adults order their emotional and sexual lives is equal parts ludicrous and obscene.
LikeLike
See my response to shakti, but in short, I support the rights of those businesses to serve whomever they want.
The media (and leftists and LGBTs in general) single out ‘those evil, bigoted’ Christians. So I have to suspect this is an excuse for anti-Christians.
LikeLike
“The media (and leftists and LGBTs in general) single out ‘those evil, bigoted’ Christians. So I have to suspect this is an excuse for anti-Christians.”
LikeLike
Did you see this?
http://louderwithcrowder.com/hidden-camera-gay-wedding-cake-at-muslim-bakery/
Interestingly apparently some of the bakeries were okay with the idea. Practically muslim societies tend to turn a blind idea to a lot of homosexual activity (if you practice strict sex segregation you pretty much have to be).
LikeLike
http://www.ibtimes.com/indiana-anti-gay-law-firms-criticizing-pence-funded-him-he-fought-lgbt-rights-1867874
It’s not like Mike Pence’s views on gay marriage were any secret.
LikeLike