Showing posts with label freedom of religion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label freedom of religion. Show all posts

Thursday, December 10, 2015

Trump Jumps the Shark with Facist Ideas

photo ec3939eb-5694-4fae-b2d7-76bd09aa6d4c.png


Trump has gone full-Facist now, calling for the ban of "All Muslims" in the United States based on their religion. I. just. can't. even.


































Dan Rather: "Trump and Cruz are confusing the Bully Pulpit with the BS Pulpit"

GOP: "Doesn't know whether to howl at the moon or check their emails" - Rather
















Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Friday, April 17, 2015

Hallelujah ~ Tennessee Tries (And Fails) To Make the Bible the State Book

photo Bible09.jpg

At least once a year, someone in the Tennessee Legislature writes a bill to make the Holy Bible (King James Version Only) the State Book, and they will literally swear on a Bible that this is Constitutional because they are protecting their own religious freedom.

I mean, why not? It's not like Tennessee has anything else on the agenda, like passing Medicaid for the poor, or solving school funding problems. Oh, wait ...

There are people in the TN Legislature who have apparently never read the Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments to the Constitution. Amendment I states unequivocally:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

From Nashville Public Radio
. . . the state's attorney general, Herbert Slatery, released an opinion Tuesday that stated the proposal violates both the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and the Tennessee Constitution. In fact, Slatery said, the state prohibition on government involvement in religion is actually stronger than at the federal level, barring not only the establishment of a church, but also preference for any "mode of worship."
Several lawmakers warned of legal challenges if the proposal passes.

But support for the proposal has come from across the political aisle. The most passionate on Tuesday was a Democrat, Rep. John DeBerry of Memphis. He said Christians have become "too accommodating" toward people of other faiths, and the bill represents a chance for them to stick up for their beliefs.
"Won't you stand for something? Stand for something, and stop falling for everything."
DeBerry's speech drew a standing ovation. But even some religiously conservative lawmakers are opposing the proposal.

Rep. Jeremy Faison (R-Cosby) says it demeans the Bible and goes against the principles laid out by the nation and state's founders.
"They knew better than to enter in the personal relationship with God with the portion of the laws that govern us."

Tennessee has another sacred book anyway - the Tennessee Blue Book, which is handed out to visitors to the Capitol and school children across the state. It lists the current members of State Government, but also fun stuff like pictures of the state flag, the state flower (iris), the state wildflower (passiong flower), the state animal (salamander), and the state bird (mockingbird). Luckily for our state, even some Republicans think it is silly or even disrespectful to list the Holy Bible alongside the state salamander.

We could just make the Tennessee Blue Book the State Book.

photo 203cd5a0-52e3-48b4-854d-a86a7caaebc7.jpg

My own feeling is that the Bible wasn't written in Tennessee, so why should it be the state book? Obviously our red-state Legislature isn't going to choose Al Gore's book on global warming, but how about the famous All the President's Men by Robert Penn Warren? Nope - too cerebral for Tennessee, where most wouldn't know the author's name. But there's the blockbuster Roots by Alex Haley - everyone's heard of Roots, right? Never mind - that's a black experience book, and any bill that puts forth a black writer is going to be tabled anyway. The beloved Christie by Catherine Marshall might work because it's so religious, but then, the author was Presbyterian and not Evengelical enough. How 'bout something by Cormac McCarthy, James Agee, or Wilma Dykeman? Oh wait - some of those books have ideas that might not jive with the Holy Word of God. Cormac McCarthy has some bad words and sex, and Wilma Dykeman wrote an early book about family planning - can't have that. And James Agee went to Hollywood and wrote "The African Queen" - no Africans, please - they might be related to that Kenyan in the White House. Don't remind us.

Anyway, Governor Haslam was probably going to veto the Bible Bill anyway, but luckily for him the state Senate killed it yesterday. A blessing for everyone. Amen. At least until next year when they bring it up again, because they always do.



































Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, March 29, 2015

Indiana Doesn't Want You ~ State Faces Business Backlash to Bigotry Law

photo Indiana-Pence2.png

Previous Related Post:
Indiana Gov. Pence Signs Law Permitting Gay Discrimination

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Governor Pence of Indiana continues to muddle along inside his Bigoted Bubble, defending the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, or RFRA, which he signed into law last week. And the mockery continues on Twitter and really everywhere, with Saturday Night Live mentioning the state during Weekend Update, and another group creating a faux Tourism video promising that Bigots are always welcome in Indiana.













After promising to "clarify" the law in order to stop a nationwide boycott, Pence immediately rolled that back on a Sunday talk show.



From ABC News
Pence described the media coverage and opposition to the law as "shameless rhetoric," saying it strengthens the foundation of First Amendment rights rather than discriminates.
“We're not going to change the law," he said, "but if the general assembly in Indiana sends me a bill that adds a section that reiterates and amplifies and clarifies what the law really is and what it has been for the last 20 years, than I'm open to that."
When ABC's George Stephanopoulos asked Pence if the law allowed businesses like florists to refuse to work with gay or lesbian weddings, as critics have said, the governor said the situation has more to do with whether the government is involved.

Actually, during the interview Stephanopoulos asked Pence at least 6 times to answer yes or no if the law allowed discrimination against the LGBT community by business owners, and the governor either didn't answer or waffled, avoiding the fact that the Indiana law provides no protection for gay citizens. See transcript further down the page here.

The mumbling answers amused members of the Indiana press who cover the statehouse there.











From the ABC Transcript:


STEPHANOPOULOS: But I think one of the problems that people have pointed out is that in Indiana, your civil rights laws don't include sexual orientation as a protected class. And even some of the supporters of the bill who were -- who appeared with you when you signed the bill, Eric Miller of Advanced America wrote that, "It will protect those who oppose gay marriage."

He put up this example. He said, "Christian bakers, florists and photographers should not be punished for refusing to participate in a homosexual marriage."

(1) So this is a yes or no question.

Is Advance America right when they say a florist in Indiana can now refuse to serve a gay couple without fear of punishment?

 PENCE: Well, let -- let me explain to you, the purpose of this bill is to empower and has been for more than 20 years, George. This is not speculative. The purpose of this legislation, which is the law in all 50 states in our federal courts and it's the law by either statute or court decisions in some 30 other states, is very simply to empower individual when they believe that actions of government impinge on their constitutional First Amendment freedom of religion.

And, frankly, George, there's a lot of people across this country who -- you're looking at ObamaCare and the Hobby Lobby decision, looking at other cases, who feel that their religious liberty is being infringed upon and -- and The Religious Freedom Restoration Act at the federal level and all the states now, including Indiana, who have it, are simply about addressing that.

This is not about discrimination, this is about...

STEPHANOPOULOS: But...

STEPHANOPOULOS: ...
(2) And so yes or no, if a florist in Indiana refuses to serve a gay couple at their wedding, is that legal now in Indiana?

PENCE: George, this is -- this is where this debate has gone, with -- with misinformation and frankly...

 STEPHANOPOULOS: It's just a question, sir. Question, sir.

 (3) Yes or no?

PENCE: Well -- well, this -- there's been shameless rhetoric about my state and about this law and about its intention all over the Internet. People are trying to make it about one particular issue. And now you're doing that, as well.

The issue here -- The Religious Freedom Restoration Act has been on the books for more than 20 years. It does not apply, George, to disputes between individuals unless government action is involved. And in point of fact, in more than two decades, The Religious Freedom Restoration Act has never been used to undermine anti-discrimination laws in this country.


STEPHANOPOULOS: . . . (4) Is that true or not?

 PENCE: George, look, the issue here is, you know, is tolerance a two way street or not?

I mean, you know, there's a lot of talk about tolerance in this country today having to do with people on the left. And a -- but here Indiana steps forward to protect the constitutional rights and privileges of freedom of religion for people of faith and families of faith in our state and this avalanche of intolerance that's been poured on our state is just outrageous.
You've been to Indiana a bunch of times. You know it. There are no kinder, more generous, more welcoming, more hospitable people in America than in the 92 counties of Indiana.

And yet because we simply stepped forward for the purpose of recognizing the religious liberty rights of all the people of Indiana, of every faith, we at -- we have suffered under this avalanche for the last several days of condemnation and it's completely baseless.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Governor -- Governor, I...

PENCE: It's not based in any...

STEPHANOPOULOS: -- I completely...

PENCE: -- fact whatsoever.

STEPHANOPOULOS: -- I completely agree with you about the good people...

PENCE: And I think people...

STEPHANOPOULOS: -- (INAUDIBLE).

PENCE: -- are getting tired of it, George. I really do.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Perhaps...

PENCE: Tolerance is a two way street.

STEPHANOPOULOS: So when you say tolerance is a two way street, does that mean that Christians who want to refuse service or people of any other faith who want to refuse service to gays and lesbians, that it's now legal in the state of Indiana?

(5) That's the simple yes or no question.

 PENCE: George, the -- the question here is if the -- if there is a government action or a law that an individual believes impinges on their religious liberty, they have the opportunity to go to court, just as The Religious Freedom Restoration Act that Bill Clinton signed allowed them, go to court and the court would evaluate the circumstance under the standards articulated in this Act.

STEPHANOPOULOS: I'm trying to get that same clarity. And it sounds to me like what you're saying is that someone could use their religious faith as a defense against any kind of a suit brought there.

But let's try to get to that clarification you're talking about.

(6) One fix that people have talked about is simply adding sexual orientation as a protected class under the state's civil rights laws.
Will you push for that?

 PENCE: I will not push for that. That's a -- that's not on my agenda and that's not been the -- that's not been an objective of the people of the state of Indiana. And it doesn't have anything to do with this law.











Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Friday, March 27, 2015

Indiana Gov. Pence Signs Law Permitting Gay Discrimination

photo wanna-hear-what-jesus-says-about-ho.jpg

Governor Pence, R-Indiana, has signed RFRA, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, a bill into law that allows so-called "religious" business owners to discriminate against gay people in the name of Free-Dumb. This is causing an uproar, with widespread calls on Twitter to #BoycottIndiana. And how can this be legal anyway? Let the lawsuits begin!

From the Indy Star
"This bill is not about discrimination," Pence said, "and if I thought it legalized discrimination I would have vetoed it."
Senate Bill 101 prohibits state or local governments from substantially burdening a person's ability to exercise their religion — unless the government can show that it has a compelling interest and that the action is the least-restrictive means of achieving it. It takes effect July 1.
Although the bill does not mention sexual orientation, opponents fear it could allow business owners to deny services to gays and lesbians for religious reasons.
Pence signed the bill during a private ceremony in his Statehouse office just before 10 a.m. Thursday. He was joined by supportive lawmakers, Franciscan monks and nuns, orthodox Jews, and some of the state's most powerful lobbyists on conservative social issues.
The event was closed to the public and the press.

Many celebrities and politicians immediately slammed the law:

From George Takei on Facebook
I am outraged that Gov. Pence would sign such a divisive measure into law. He has made it clear that LGBT couples, like Brad and me, are now unwelcome in his state. The notion that this bill was not driven by animus against our community is belied by the record and frankly insulting. I will join many in demanding that socially responsible companies withdraw their business, conferences and support from his state and that LGBTs and our friends and supporters refuse to visit or do business with Indiana. It is a sad day for the Hoosier state, and indeed for the many good people of Indiana, for whom this law now stands as a terrible blight upon that state's reputation.



















Business and Sports owners are also considering a boycott of Indiana:

From the CEO of Apple:



From Fortune Magazine
Mark Benioff, CEO of cloud computing company Salesforce, told Re/code that his company is reconsidering the investments it’s made in Indiana.
“We’re a major source of income and revenue to the state of Indiana, but we simply cannot support this kind of legislation,” said Benioff. He added that Salesforce has already canceled all programs requiring customers or employees to travel to Indiana.


From Think Progress
. . . the NCAA took a strong stance against the law in a statement from president Mark Emmert.
With the men’s college basketball Final Four coming to Indianapolis next weekend, Emmert said he was “especially concerned” about the impact the law might have.
“The NCAA national office and our members are deeply committed to providing an inclusive environment for all our events,” NCAA president Mark Emmert said in the statement. “We are especially concerned about how this legislation could affect our student-athletes and employees. We will work diligently to assure student-athletes competing in, and visitors attending, next week’s Men’s Final Four in Indianapolis are not impacted negatively by this bill.”
The NCAA, based in Indianapolis, had already faced calls from organizations like Freedom To Marry to condemn the law. Jason Collins, the NBA’s first openly gay player, had already tweeted at Pence earlier this week about the law. An openly gay college rowing coach wrote at OutSports that it should immediately move the men’s Final Four somewhere else.

ESPN's Keith Olbermann urged all sports teams to boycott the state:







Charles Barkley:



~~~~~~~~~~


















Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, June 30, 2014

Emotional Reactions to SCOTUS Hobby Lobby Verdict

photo Supreme-Court-Fail.png

Previous Related Post:
SCOTUS Rules in Favor of Hobby Lobby on ACA Birth Control Mandate


The Supreme Court ruled in the Hobby Lobby case that Corporations are allowed to be called religious entities, and therefore are exempt from laws concerning birth control. The Right Wing is rejoicing, because they think this is the next step in overturning Roe v. Wade and making Abortion illegal. Somehow their small minds have morphed birth control into abortion, even if no eggs are ever fertilized. Somewhere Rick Santorum is popping bottles and waving a Bible in the air. The stupid injustice of this ruling burns our country.

If health care is for everyone thanks to ACA, and birth control is supposed to be free for all women, then why should it matter where you work or what your boss thinks about your private choices?

SCOTUS and Hobby Lobby should beware the wrath of women. There are more of us in this country than religious fanatics. People will boycott Hobby Lobby in the short term, but hopefully women will line up to vote in both 2014 and 2016 so that a Supreme change can happen in the future.

Other companies will use this ruling to cut costs by suddenly finding religion, which is a shame for all their female employees. The slippery slope is that these companies will keep trying to push the envelope further and further with their hope of a forced-pregnancy white-male-authoritarian all-Christian America.


From Think Progress
If you’re one of the estimated 14,000 individuals who work at Hobby Lobby or Conestoga Wood — the companies who represented the two plaintiffs in the case — then you’re most immediately affected by Monday’s decision. Your employers no longer have to cover several types of birth control that they’re opposed to.

Both companies object to covering emergency contraception, which they falsely claim is a type of abortion despite all scientific evidence to the contrary. Hobby Lobby’s owners also take issue with two forms of intrauterine devices (IUDs), long lasting forms of birth control inserted in the uterus, for the same unscientific reason. So the workers employed by those businesses won’t be able to use their insurance coverage for those types of birth control anymore. They’ll presumably be able to continue using their health plans for other methods, like hormonal birth control pills, that their bosses don’t have a problem with.

But even if you don’t work at Hobby Lobby or Conestoga Wood, there’s a chance that your birth control coverage may be put into question. More than 70 other companies also sued for the right to stop following Obamacare’s contraceptive provision. According to the National Women’s Law Center, 48 of those cases are still pending. Now that the Court has sided with Hobby Lobby, it will be much easier for some of those companies to win their suits and opt out of covering certain types of contraception.

On Hardball last night, the Attorney for Hobby Lobby's Green family wouldn't say if they are satisfied with Justice Alito's "remedy" of letting the government cover female employees with the types of objectionable birth control. Watch attorney Lori Windham waffle on the question at about 8:07:



Rachel Maddow talked about the so-called "narrow scope" of the ruling. Alito says that groups such as Jehovah Witnesses can't use it to limit blood transfusions, or vaccines, or mental health, etc. But some other corporations wish to object to ALL birth control, so in the future the ruling will probably allow almost any restriction by employers based on THEIR religious beliefs, regardless of the "burden" on the employees.


















































































Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

SCOTUS Rules in Favor of Hobby Lobby on Birth Control Mandate

photo hobby-lobby-500.jpg

The country sitting on pins and needles waiting for the Hobby Lobby case to be announced at the Supreme Court. Today is the last day of the session, and people are still reeling from the smackdown of Buffer Zones around abortion clinics.

Breaking - They've ruled in favor of Hobby Lobby - "closely held" corportations don't have to provide birth control if it is against their religion. Therefore, a corporation is now identical to a person with religious beliefs. Not to mention that this is a sexist verdict because it only applies to women, and puts their health care in jeopardy. Idiots!!!!!!











~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~








































Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)