Religion

Warren Stupidity

(48,181 posts) Sun Feb 2, 2014, 09:18 AM Feb 2014

Idaho bill would protect businesses refusing service on religious grounds

An Idaho state representative introduced a bill to the legislature this week that would protect businesses from having their licenses revoked if they refuse service to customers or deny employment to applicants based on the religious beliefs of those who own or run the business.

Republican Rep. Lynn Luker introduced the legislation, and said the bill is meant to "protect persons holding occupational licenses in the exercise of their religious freedom." The Idaho Bureau of Occupational Licenses manages certifications for professional boards from social workers to doctors. The bill does not apply to emergency responders and will not prevent Idahoans from being fired if they choose to deny service based on religious reasons. Additionally, it does not authorize the "intentional infliction of emotional or physical injury."

Luker explained the motivation for introducing the legislation in a blog post:

lynnmluker.com
With government mandates of all types forcing religiously faithful people to violate the tenants of their faith, including the forced subsidizing of contraceptives and termination of life, interference with faith based counseling, and compelled participation in same gender weddings, concern about refusing such mandates prompted the bill to protect the right to earn a living while staying true to a person’s faith.

http://america.aljazeera.com/watch/shows/the-stream/the-stream-officialblog/2014/1/29/idaho-bill-wouldprotectbusinessesrefusingserviceonreligiousgroun.html

5 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Idaho bill would protect businesses refusing service on religious grounds (Original Post) Warren Stupidity Feb 2014 OP

OMFG. This actually makes my stomach churn. catbyte Feb 2014 #1

Not sure this is legal Moliere Feb 2014 #2

So is it "tolerance" or "intolerance" skepticscott Feb 2014 #3

So... you can be a bigot, but you just have to be nice about it. gtar100 Feb 2014 #4

We settled the issue of public businesses and civil rights 50 years ago. Warren Stupidity Feb 2014 #5

catbyte

(34,454 posts)

1. OMFG. This actually makes my stomach churn.

Reply to Warren Stupidity (Original post)

Sun Feb 2, 2014, 10:02 AM

Feb 2014

Moliere

(285 posts)

2. Not sure this is legal

Reply to Warren Stupidity (Original post)

Sun Feb 2, 2014, 10:27 AM

Feb 2014

As it would codify discrimination. What's next skin color?

skepticscott

(13,029 posts)

3. So is it "tolerance" or "intolerance"

Reply to Warren Stupidity (Original post)

Sun Feb 2, 2014, 11:23 AM

Feb 2014

to compel people to act in ways that violate their deeply held religious beliefs?

gtar100

(4,192 posts)

4. So... you can be a bigot, but you just have to be nice about it.

Reply to Warren Stupidity (Original post)

Sun Feb 2, 2014, 02:10 PM

Feb 2014

I'm sure that will work out well.

I guess what these "nice" people fail to realize is that these "government mandates" are there to protect our rights from people who would refuse to respect them and force their own beliefs on those who do not share them. These mandates don't force anyone to do the things he listed - use contraceptives, get abortions, marry same-sex couples... (that counseling one no doubt has to do with forcing children into anti-gay programs, which is just sick all around ). But that isn't what they "believe", which is to also stop everyone else from having those options.

And that feeling of persecution they have... it's not persecution. It's people dismissing their beliefs as wrong and having a differing opinion. It's not pleasant having your core beliefs questioned, but it's not persecution.

Warren Stupidity

(48,181 posts)

5. We settled the issue of public businesses and civil rights 50 years ago.

Reply to gtar100 (Reply #4)

Sun Feb 2, 2014, 02:34 PM

Feb 2014

The goddamn horrible southern (white) baptists used the same goddamn horrible arguments to justify apartheid laws in the south and the alleged "rights" of good christian bigots to refuse to serve non-whites. We have a court sitting in washington that has already overturned the voting rights act, they could very well turn the 1st amendment on its head and overturn 50 years of civil rights legislation as well.

Reply to this discussion