Arizona steps into it again

[catcul]

Apparently, not everyone agrees with the law.

[mikoyan29]

It is a stupid law. But still, I'd rather have my discriminators out in the open rather than being able to cloak behind a law or whatever.

[Sleepwalker]

I just have to say, I frackin' LOVE Madame Vastra and Jenny.

That is all.

Sorry, ma'am, so sorry. So sorry, so sorry.

[evilfarmer]

http://www.eeoc.gov/federal/otherprotections.cfm

This law is gonna get shut down when the courts get a hold of it. As of the beginning of 2012 Sexual Orientation and gender identity are protected class.

You would think legislative leaders would know how to google. This is the first link after I searched.

[Kara_CS]

http://www.eeoc.gov/federal/otherprotections.cfm

This law is gonna get shut down when the courts get a hold of it. As of the beginning of 2012 Sexual Orientation and gender identity are protected class.

You would think legislative leaders would know how to google. This is the first link after I searched.

The Federal EEOC only applies to government employees. The LGBT community is still assigned to second-class citizenship. The closest thing we have to a law that would provide protections from discrimination for all LGBT Americans is the revised ENDA bill, which includes sexual orientation and gender identity as protected classes in regards to employment. It passed last year in the Senate, House Speaker Boehner has already stated his complete refusal to open it for a vote in the House. So it's dead in the water until there's a regime change. And that's why they think they can get away with this bullshit, because we are not a "protected" class under the law.

The silver lining to these LGBT Jim Crow laws that states are trying to pass is that they are being attempted in states where same sex marriage is still banned. Bigoted, hateful, asshole lawmakers know that same sex marriage will be recognized under the law in all 50 states, so they are trying to find ways to legally mistreat us after the fact. They know they've lost the battle against marriage equality, so they are scrambling for alternate tactics.

It's also amusing to me how we keep hearing marriage equality opponents scream about SCOTUS overturning state bans, because the states should be allowed to vote and "let the people decide." But when it comes to these vile and oppressive bills, they put them before the state legislatures despite the outrage from their voters.

[ebonyknight]

It is a stupid law. But still, I'd rather have my discriminators out in the open rather than being able to cloak behind a law or whatever.

I am torn on this. I am all for "let the market dictate what happens" if the law passes, but at the same time this is very underhanded (but currently legal) discrimination.

I have been hearing about a similar incident in Minnesota (2007) about Muslim cab drivers wanting to refuse service on religious grounds for passengers transporting dogs or alcohol. It was defeated, but I wonder how (if Muslims were a significant population in Arizona), how this would have played out, in light of this law.

Anecdote. My (now) ex-wife and I went to Gettysburg about 10 years ago. We walked into a large, but empty, store that had a lot of Confederate items for sale near a battle site. We walked around and looked at stuff. There was a woman tending the shop, working on crochet. She never looked up, asked us if she could help and literally ignored us the whole time, even though she had clear line of sight to us. I even approached the merch case, she was sitting behind. No reaction. We left. I wasn't offended personally (there were other stores more than happy to take our money), and I felt no obligation from her that she had to "help" us. I was actually going to buy stuff, but just decided to take my money elsewhere, without fanfare. My view, it's her business and her opportunity to make or lose money.

I am not sure I would want someone forced to give me a service, knowing "they don't like me". Goes against my Libertarian values, even if it's not in my favor. I am quite torn on this.

[LewisLegion]

One off's like that are no big deal, it's true. Now imagine every single store or restaurant you went into did that.

That's the problem. People say 'it's no big deal, why would you want to shop where you aren't wanted?' Well, in some cases, that is the only shopping option. In other cases, what happens when you aren't wanted in the majority of places? Why should I, as a taxpaying member of the public, have to travel potentially a hundred miles out of my way and spend a lot more in order to obtain a public service? And what happens if that store that serves me a hundred miles away gets a new owner, one that decides he's not going to? Where does that leave me and millions like me?

It's the same thing we saw during the Jim Crow laws. You allow even a little of that and soon you end up with 'straights only' signs or 'no gays allowed' signs in nearly every window, especially in already highly prejudicial states. It also validates not only treating gay people like second class citizens, but treating them like a THREAT. Jim Crow laws increased violence against blacks because the message was sent that it was ok to treat them less than the rest of humanity. That's the message these things send.

It goes beyond the surface. Store owners, who have a public license, use public services, and who make a voluntary agreement to serve the public in cooperation with state and federal law, do not get to pick and choose which laws they will follow. They don't get special consideration to be above and beyond what the rest of the public are required to do. If even one is allowed to turn away gay people based on aniums of those people alone, that sends the message that doing so is ok and valid, and it isn't...on any level.

[Andara Bledin]

I am torn on this. I am all for "let the market dictate what happens" if the law passes, but at the same time this is very underhanded (but currently legal) discrimination.

"The Market" is sociopathic.

Nobody but those at the top of the food chain really want the market to determine anything relating to people, and those who think otherwise are generally operating with too little information.

The Market is what gives us toxic paint, medicine that causes birth defects, and food that makes us sick. By the time Consumers can react, the damage has already been done.

Plus, everything LL said. You can't allow any group to be treated as a second class citizens for this type of reason. It can be incredibly difficult to find where the line is between "right to refuse service" and "right to be treated equally" lies, but this is not one of those cases.

It's just like the rules for debate: You don't attack people for who or what they are; you attack what they do.

[Kheldarson]

Plus, everything LL said. You can't allow any group to be treated as a second class citizens for this type of reason. It can be incredibly difficult to find where the line is between "right to refuse service" and "right to be treated equally" lies, but this is not one of those cases.

It's just like the rules for debate: You don't attack people for who or what they are; you attack what they do.

I actually wrote a blog post talking about that point (here if anybody's interested: http://catholicamericanlife.wordpres...edom-of-being/ ) in response to another blog that was trying to say it was right of the legislature to pass this law.

I thought America was supposed to be the land of freedom from oppression.

[HYHYBT]

It's just like the rules for debate: You don't attack people for who or what they are; you attack what they do.

Of course, when dealing with gay-related issues, they *do* frame it as "what they do."

[Kheldarson]

And it's dead.

Governor Jan Brewer just vetoed it.

[Greenday]

And it's dead.

Governor Jan Brewer just vetoed it.

The fact that she waited so long is bothersome.

[Kheldarson]

The fact that she waited so long is bothersome.

Article seemed to indicate she was out of town for a conference. That would make it hard to sign things in an official capacity.

[Kara_CS]

She was weighing her options, doing everything she could to justify it. But the looming threat of potentially losing BILLIONS in revenue from tourism and potential jobs from major companies reconsidering their plans to build sites in Arizona, plus the NFL being willing to move the Super Bowl to another state forced her hand. The trick to dealing with conservatives is to hit them where it hurts: money.

[Kheldarson]

Maybe. I'd like to see articles to support that though, before condemning though.