RE: Indiana's Govenor Signs 'Religious Freedom' Bill
April 5, 2015 at 2:02 am
(This post was last modified: April 5, 2015 at 2:05 am by Heywood.)
(April 4, 2015 at 10:31 pm)Desert Diva Wrote: Considering that this has already manifested itself in a pediatrician refusing to treat the child of two lesbians, I think we are going down that slippery slope like it has been coated with goose grease. Fuck every single person who thinks this is okay. With a rusty spork.
What is the big deal? Another doctor at the clinic was more than happy to see the child. There is no evidence to suggest this baby was denied healthcare because of her parents sexual orientation. Why then is it necessary in your mind that this doctor be forced to do something she doesn't want to do?
(April 4, 2015 at 4:07 pm)Chas Wrote:(April 4, 2015 at 2:58 pm)Heywood Wrote: I agree that if a baker backs out at the last minute there is a cause to sue. The problem is bakers and photographers are being told to either bake cakes/shoot photos for gay weddings or face fines by the state. That is wrong. Oregon Labor Commissioner Brad Avikian claimed the "the goal is never to shut down a business, the goal is to rehabilitate"
http://www.oregonlive.com/gresham/index....dding.html
This Indiana law is in response to actions described by the article above.
Now I ask you this, when the state decides you need to be "rehabilitated"....are you going to be happy about it? You should be glad there is some push back against these state actions. If you aren't, its too late for you.....your already a brainwashed drone.
The law is not limited to bakers and photographers, so your disingenuous attempt to minimize the potential for damage is contemptible.
Disingenuous is claiming this law was implemented so people can back out of weddings at the last moment. The truth is this law is push back against states action to force people to do things they don't need to do(either for their own good or the good of others) or want to do.
