Religious Freedom Bills

[Selene]

And we get to see the circus.

Michael

Wow!

It is a good thing then that clowns are so gay!!!!

[Derek McGowan]

An interesting question

Walmart has been outspoken against such laws but say it was implemented. A Walmart employee refuses to help a customer on the sales floor because of... say a head-wrap. Walmart fires the employee. Should the employee be able to then sue Walmart for trying to force them to go against their religious views (if of course there is no contract explicitly stating that all employees must follow company policy) even if they knew Walmart's implicit views on the matter?

[william.scherk]

I don't have a clear answer to that in my deepest thinking yet, but I do see that this dispute will not resolve until this issue is defined in terms of essentials.

One thing is clear to me, though. Nobody on the extremes wants clarity. They want obedience. They want power over the other. Do I believe the hardcore gay rights advocates are pushing too hard to cover this agenda? Yup. Do I believe the hardcore Christian folks are pushing too hard to cover this agenda? Yup.

And we get to see the circus.

I sympathize with this reading. In the Canadian context, the issue is dead. Those who wanted gays and lesbians to be treated like a 'protected class' won hands down. The Gay Circus won, and what would have been quite extreme fifty years ago is black letter law today. No churches have been forced to perform gay marriage, nor adopt gay practices. There has been no Hobby Lobby and no provincial stabs at defining marriage (which is federal under our constitution).

I was a bit astounded by the Indiana circus, most astonished by the boycotting. I think I agree with the contours of your comment. On one side the proponents of gay marriage (and gay inclusion more largely) and on the other the opponents. In service of their causes, no bar to any non-violent action.

My sympathies can be engaged by some cakemaker deeply steeped in religion, who feels some tear in her interior, her spiritual integrity broken if forced to do up a cake for a homosexual couple.

In the Indiana case, there is then a Randian rationale for complete freedom to discriminate, but that is not what happened, and that is what interests me -- the jumble of news, freakouts, rebounds, swerves and drama accompanying this law's signing. The revision or clarification's explicit mention of sexual orientation and gender identity strips the bill of its intended effect -- to shield discriminatory acts from legal consequence.

Again, we disagree on the original intent of the legislation.

Is it, de facto proof of discrimination within the meaning of other statutes, when:[...] two homosexual Nazis?

And, if they are prosecuted, or, sued, are their rights to offer as proof that their acts were not discriminatory under the letter of the other statutes because that law places an undo burden upon the free exercise of their religion?

Or, should the ability to raise that defence to be denied to them?

I am not a lawyer, I don't know. I am not expert in Indiana statutes. The intent seemed to me quite straightforward. If a person discriminated against another on the basis of sexual orientation, that person was given a statutory protection from consequential legal action if that person invoked a religious basis for the discrimination. It allows someone to "cite religious faith to claim protection from a law or regulation."

All I can ask is that you follow my argument above, and understand my interests. If we disagree on the purported intent, that's fine. I can grasp the Randian stance of no non-discrimination statutes at all. I still don't see an Objectivish argument that this law in Indiana needed to be passed.

My cakebakers would refuse to adorn a cake with Nazi themes, but would invite the Nazi couples to our cake-making workshops.

Now, the Orthodox Jew gaycakebaker refuse the business of a Muslim, a goy, a secular heathen libertine? One objectivish answer would be, no, you fool. The other would be, as you like, dude. In reality, I think the homosexual Nazi couple would not only find a willing baker, but would also get a show on TLC.

All fanciful anologies aside, what do you think oughta be done for the poor abused gaycake-bakers of Indiana, Adam?

Edited April 2, 2015 by william.scherk

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

And we get to see the circus.

Michael

Wow!

It is a good thing then that clowns are so gay!!!!

Adam,

On the religious front, here is what I mean by circus.

I recently watched a news interview (I think it was with Jake Tapper) with a Christian politician sponsor of this kind of law. After going through all the talking points, he was asked if a Muslim baker refused to cater to a Christian wedding on religious freedom grounds because he thought the Christians were practicing evil, what do you think the guy did?

By logic, he should have agreed. But he clammed up and refused to answer.

This is a person who wants power for the Christians, not the same religious rights for everyone like he claims.

(EDIT:) This was Tapper with Republican Arkansas State Senator Bart Hester. See here. And below is the exact quote from the interview:

TAPPER: So you would be totally fine with let's say a conservative Muslim baker saying there is no way we're ever going to provide cakes for Christians or Jews for anything having to do with a Christian or Jewish event because we think that that is forbidden. That's okay with you under this law?

HESTER: Under this law, we have the right to the first amendment, a right to freedom of speech and I believe in the first amendment.

(End EDIT.)

Also, there is another issue: and it starts with a very interesting book I recommend (actually I can't recommend it highly enough) called Trust Me, I'm Lying: Confessions of a Media Manipulator by Ryan Holiday.

Holiday exposes (and consequently teaches) how the most outrageous stories make it to the national press and mainstream culture. It's a process called "trading up the chain."

You can get a pretty good overview of what this process is in Holiday's following article: Trading Up The Chain: Mainstream Media Takes Cues from Blogosphere.

You can see a particularly wicked version of it in a more recent article of his: EXCLUSIVE: How This Left-Wing Activist Manipulates the Media to Spread His Message.

The process is easy. You decide what message you want to get out, including, when relevant, where and why. Then you trace a line from a beginning nothing to a mainstream explosion by leveraging weaknesses in the current media as it exists.

First you come up with something outrageous. It doesn't have to be true, in fact it is better if it is not true (because the controversies and corrections give the same media outlets new runs at monetizing the same viewers over and over again). The only important thing is it has to be more or less hot button and it has to inspire high-valence emotions. (With focus on the high-valence emotions that make people not only act, but share.) The most common one is outrage--the real anger kind, not the playful kind. Then you use a three-step process:

1. You plant your first articles (videos, graphics, etc.) in "entry point" blogs and other online publications that do not have very good truth standards. This can even be your own blog, but it's better if you have several places. Once you get something more or less legitimate-looking, you try to draw attention to it from of sites and publications "higher up the chain."

2. These higher sites are generally legacy news sites like Forbes, CNN, etc. Their blog policies are way more lax than their print and broadcast outlets, so you target those bloggers or even set up a blog yourself and go to town, but once something is referenced on one of their blogs, you can brag about it "as seen on Forbes" and so on. You also try to spread things to as many of the people on this level as possible since they are sources for those higher in the chain.

This gives your garbage a veneer of credibility.

3. Then you try to bring this to the attention of even more higher up news and publicity outlets. One popular way is to simply make a list of links where this issue has been discussed and send it to specific famous reporters. You do their research for them and, as harried journalists with massive content quotas constantly looming, they look, massage and publish. More often than not, they don't verify.

The next thing you know you have a national controversy where everyone is yelling at each other. And the sites and news companies love it because it generates audience. Once again, lack of truth is an asset. If something is true and gets resolved quickly, people move on to the next item. Audience-wise, that issue dies.

But if you get to expose liars, follow counter-accusations, dig up dirt on the participants, and so on, you have an audience "hit" you can milk for a nice run of several days (or even weeks). Don't forget that audience means revenue in a direct relationship. No audience, no revenue. Lots of audience, lots of revenue.

One of Holiday's biggest insights was that this process often allows a lie to turn into reality. Like he says in the book, a nothing-burger politician like Palwenty can actually become a presidential candidate. Sexual misconducts, even false accusations, can destroy careers. Holiday even showed a good side to this where he took a charity from nothing to a well-funded Kickstarter campaign. This is a highly effective nothing-to-something machine.

Now look at the following story and see if it has not been traded up the chain in classic fashion--see if something now exists where essentially nothing was before:

After Indiana Pizzeria Said They Wouldn’t Cater Gay Weddings, the Backlash Was So Extreme It May Not Be Safe to Re-Open

I don't know who started this or what the target was--it will be a great case study after the yelling dies down, but I do know the press is having a field day. The issue is now in the reality phase. Money--lots of real money (in the form of donations)--is pouring into Memorial Pizza along with real death threats. Talk shows are yacking. National press is having a party. There will be soon be hit songs and major comedians doing skits about this.

And the kicker?

Nobody fucking serves pizza at weddings!

Circus.

Michael

[Francisco Ferrer]

Fox's Judge Napolitano makes it clear where he stands:

This is one of the rare times that Andrew Napolitano is wrong. There is nothing unconstitutional about private property owners exercising race/religious/gender bias in deciding whom to trade with. The Constitution of the United States provides no guarantee of access to businesses.

"Making sure government is not our master"? Really, Judge?

[Francisco Ferrer]

I still don't see an Objectivish argument that this law in Indiana needed to be passed.

There isn't one. According to Objectivism, the right to use and dispose of one's property is not subordinate to a belief in God. As I said in Post #1, we need Rand now to point this out because nobody with a prominent voice is saying it, including a certain libertarian judge.

I do think a Ninth Amendment case could be made for freedom from federal ant-discrimination legislation (for example, Title II of the 1964 Civil Rights Act).

[Selene]

After Indiana Pizzeria Said They Wouldn’t Cater Gay Weddings, the Backlash Was So Extreme It May Not Be Safe to Re-Open

I don't know who started this or what the target was--it will be a great case study after the yelling dies down, but I do know the press is having a field day. The issue is now in the reality phase. Money--lots of real money (in the form of donations)--is pouring into Memorial Pizza along with real death threats. Talk shows are yacking. National press is having a party. There will be soon be hit songs and major comedians doing skits about this.

And the kicker?

Nobody fucking serves pizza at weddings!

Circus.

Michael

I saw the Tapper interview with the Arkansas legislator.

He was obviously being very cautious the more "confused" Tapper became.

Tapper is a whore and I was watching him do the "Sandler" stuff on him with the tilt of the head and the weary, weighted "worry eyes" that these "anchors" employ.

I thought he did relatively well being caught between Arkansas and the entire world.

Rush spent a lot of time on the Pizza place in Indiana.

Very interesting story as to how the reporteress "appeared" at that shop.

Rush went into a 20 minute conversation about the ten people that send out these waves of e-mails with an algorithm they developed.

He explained that he had this investigated when they did it to him and some others that he knew.

He stated he had their names and addresses and knew where they lived.

He also dropped what I thought was a bombshell and said that George Soros has and is funding the operation.

Also, a gentleman called in who runs a mobile pizza catering service. He has the pizza ovens mounted in vans trailers ...lol.

http://basickneadspizza.com/index.php/2011/02/wood-fired-pizza-at-your-wedding-we-cater-wedding-receptions-and-parites/

I’ve been thinking a lot about weddings recently. So have many couples planning their summer weddings in Colorado! As I prepare menu ideas for these couples, I thought I’d share some ideas I’ve had for wedding reception menus.

It starts with presentation, sight, smell, sounds. At most weddings, we’ll bring our 5×10 foot trailer-m0unted oven. We can position our cooking and prep area either out of view or showcased as part of your reception’s venue. Our pizziolos love to be out infront of everyone, working dough, topping pizzas, and working the oven. It’s a delicious show, and if it fits your desires, we’re happy to out where everyone can see us.

He said that having pizza at a wedding is very popular amongst young uns...like millennials.

I am going to try and track down that Soros story because he seemed very certain about it.

A...

[Selene]

Here is a truly constructive path for the alphabet movement to take.

 

Send the circus to Dearborn Michigan...

 

I can't even attempt to suppress the chuckles that are escaping my mouth.Let's threaten them and see how it works out...I mean should be easy, it is a religion of peace...A...

[Francisco Ferrer]

Here is another point that should be made. Those that have been unable to obtain the services of discriminating business owners have not had to go without those services at all. The baker and wedding photographer who will not cater to gay couples are not operating a monopoly. There are other bakers, other photographers, and the odds are that most people in the trade will cheerfully do business with gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people.

The goal for progressive busybodies is not to ensure that everybody with an alternative lifestyle has access to products and services. No, the goal is to re-engineer society and root out the vestiges of racism, sexism, homophobia, and all other prejudice. If there is any citizen in 2015 who persists in an ancient bias against same sex couples, he must be exposed, derided, and made to reform.

Forced tolerance for the new ways of loving. No tolerance for those who backwardly cling to tradition.

[Brant Gaede]

Here it is: The Right to Discriminate.

There is also the right to comport oneself so as not to be discriminated against. This is easiest, perhaps, in business dealings, for the right to discriminate against me because I am a white man could be very costly if that includes a decision not to do business with me for that would be discrimination against my money and ability to help you prosper.

The Civil Rights Act was to benefit children who just couldn't make it on their own so they needed this kind of welfare just as children needed Social Security and Medicare and all the other government goodies they could get. As a group the biggest beneficiaries are government employees, local, state and national, for their sheer numbers. It used to be they weren't all that well paid but got compensating benefits, including job security. Ultimately the biggest beneficiaries of these sundry welfares turn into the biggest bigots--bigoted against those truly productive private workers who pay for it all.

The ongoing destruction of the middle class does not include the part composed of government workers. The destruction of the middle class has other causes than the monetary and regulatory costs of government. The whole corpus of society is infected with cancer from existential cultural to the internalizing of culture causing bad psychology. One of the big prices is debt. The victims of debt, who mostly brought it upon themselves, will eventually stop paying off their debts to the banks and federalies and pay off personal debts, maybe, who knows?--and start saving before they buy.

The entire banking system, save for some non-FDIC banks(?), is just the federal government itself. I hope to live and proper long enough to watch it gag and choke to death or maybe mobs with torches and pitchforks will torment the beast.

--Brant

time for more coffee

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

I'm thinking there should be something about bullying in all this talk about rights.

I don't believe anyone has an inherent right to bully others.

Not rights-violating bullying. Not using technicalities in rights to bully.

There is no excuse for bullying within my personal moral code.

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

On a side issue, I'm thinking of starting a new country on an island somewhere and I want to reinstate the practice of human slavery. (It doesn't have to be single-race slaves. This is equal-opportunity slavery.)

I mean that as a formal institution, too, with chattel deeds and all.

What are my chances? Do I have a right to do that if I own the island and can get it legally severed from all countries?

Michael

[Selene]

Interesting idea Michael.

Here is a cogent, amusing and clear example of precisely what the "religious freedom" laws establish in law:

A roomful of gays would say, "Why don't you guys just go to one of the nine out of 10 florists who would be happy to have your business?" (My guess is, if the zealots looked really hard, they might even be able to find a gay florist!)

That is all the religious freedom laws do: Encourage steely-eyed activists to stop requiring every last Christian to celebrate gay marriages.

Right now, in states that don't have religious protection laws, Christians are being compelled, by general non-discrimination laws, either to participate in gay marriages -- or go out of business.

With the law, the Christian gets a legal argument. He might win in court or he might lose, but he'd at least have an argument, thus encouraging the kill-the-survivors nuts to go to another shop for their gay weddings and stop doing their victory dances on top of Christians.

It's utter nonsense that any shopkeeper, least of all a nice Christian, would turn away a customer for any reason other than a deeply held religious belief, such as not wanting to participate in a gay wedding, a Planned Parenthood gala or any event involving Bill Clinton.

Do not assume that because liberals are in an absolute panic over Indiana's law, they must have a point. To the contrary, the more hysterical they are, the more you should assume the whole story is a sham.

And that folks is spot on.

We have a culture of convenience.

Supported by volumes of victims.

And that is unsustainable.

A...

[Brant Gaede]

On a side issue, I'm thinking of starting a new country on an island somewhere and I want to reinstate the practice of human slavery. (It doesn't have to be single-race slaves. This is equal-opportunity slavery.)

I mean that as a formal institution, too, with chattel deeds and all.

What are my chances? Do I have a right to do that if I own the island and can get it legally severed from all countries?

Michael

Build yourself a submarine and live and travel under the seas with your compatriots. For sport you might sink an occasional warship.

--Brant

I always liked that story: let me know when I can sign up (in the meantime I'll start looking for a slave or two)

[BaalChatzaf]

Baal,

If a worker always has the option of leaving a job/industry in which the environment doesn't treat one as they would like - thus their job cannot be considered involuntary servitude (im just using this as an example to make a point because I could argue the other way as well) so too is the option of closing up ones business/going Galt if the law of the land, the environment, doesn't suit them - thus it cannot be considered involuntary servitude.

But even if it was, is that somehow worse or on par with another person being classed as an untouchable for cultural reasons. I see this person as really the one with no choice in the matter- thus "involuntary"

In a sane and just social order people get to choose whom they touch and whom they don't touch.....

The law should not dictate such matters....

[Peter]

Baal wrote:

In a sane and just social order people get to choose whom they touch and whom they don't touch..... The law should not dictate such matters....

end quote

An untouchable class goes gloved hand in gloved hand with . . . I like Adams idea of adding the word Nazi to the description of the class of people being discriminated against, as in . . . A Swastika clad gay and a KKK klad black guy were denied admittance to the to the Hispanic Festival.

Of course people should have religious freedom and/or the freedom to associate or dis-associate from whomever they choose. And someone who does not like their behavior should be free to go somewhere else or to attempt to shame them.

[anthony]

No, the goal is to re-engineer society and root out the vestiges of racism, sexism, homophobia, and all other prejudice. If there is any citizen in 2015 who persists in an ancient bias against same sex couples, he must be exposed, derided, and made to reform.

Forced tolerance for the new ways of loving. No tolerance for those who backwardly cling to tradition.

Dead right, though it all began well before 'social re-engineering' and brainwashing. At the level of each person's thinking there's been long established an 'abstractification' - first of themselves then of others, out of individuality into group consciousness. No longer one on one relations, now it's collective upon collective, and adding gvment legislation - one more dose of poisonous collectivism, the coercive kind.

Left alone, in the long run, individuals will usually work things out with other individuals (or go separate ways). I have a high confidence in individual human nature left alone, which ironically the love-and-accept-by-force progressives obviously don't share.

[Selene]

No, the goal is to re-engineer society and root out the vestiges of racism, sexism, homophobia, and all other prejudice. If there is any citizen in 2015 who persists in an ancient bias against same sex couples, he must be exposed, derided, and made to reform.

Forced tolerance for the new ways of loving. No tolerance for those who backwardly cling to tradition.

Dead right, though it all began well before 'social re-engineering' and brainwashing. At the level of each person's thinking there's been long established an 'abstractification' - first of themselves then of others, out of individuality into group consciousness. No longer one on one relations, now it's collective upon collective, and adding gvment legislation - one more dose of poisonous collectivism, the coercive kind.

Left alone, in the long run, individuals will usually work things out with other individuals (or go separate ways). I have a high confidence in individual human nature left alone, which ironically the love-and-accept-by-force progressives obviously don't share.

Excellent point Tony.

Everyday in America and the world, single individuals interact with other single individuals in an infinite number of ways.

I would estimate that upwards of 95% of those individual interactions are non-violent and "voluntary."

Certainly in this country they are.

The collective does not "exist."

It is a creation.

A...

[william.scherk]

After Indiana Pizzeria Said They Wouldn’t Cater Gay Weddings, the Backlash Was So Extreme It May Not Be Safe to Re-Open

I don't know who started this or what the target was--it will be a great case study after the yelling dies down, but I do know the press is having a field day. The issue is now in the reality phase. Money--lots of real money (in the form of donations)--is pouring into Memorial Pizza along with real death threats. Talk shows are yacking. National press is having a party.

It all started with a local Indiana station that did interviews with 'small-town' Indiana businesses that could possibly be affected by the religious freedom law. The folks at the one pizza joint were picked up in the media churn and made subject to the worst that social media attention can bring -- per the mechanisms you wrote about upthread. The family were slammed, frightened, shocked by the sudden attention.

But, by the magic of a different arm of social media, that family is set to collect (at time of posting) some $750,000 $842,387 in GoFundMe pledges made over the space of one day.

Edited April 4, 2015 by william.scherk

[Brant Gaede]

From productive work to charity.

[Selene]

From productive work to charity.

Actual charity for productive folks is nothing to be ashamed of ...

It was also voluntary and is like any community that will help any good decent productive neighbor without even thinking twice.

I understand your use of the word though and that would have been the sad part of this vicious and psychotic attack on these folks.

A...

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

It all started with a local Indiana station that did interviews with 'small-town' Indiana businesses that could possibly be affected by the religious freedom law.

William,

Interesting.

Do you suppose this was a blind fishing expedition staged by a local Indiana station with a lot of time on its hands, or do you think a media manipulator might have helped it along with a few backstage tips about where to look and a pre-primed media strategy ready to cut loose as soon as it got a bite that looked good?

I would bet money on the second. I would win. This is just too cookie-cutter right out of Holiday's book to be a fluke. Lots of people are studying that thing.

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Another thought.

For the media manipulator and media outlets, they are fine that the family got trashed and run a real risk of physical danger, and they are fine the family got a fortune in donations.

In fact, for them it's better that way.

Both cause traffic to their sites, shows and publications. The ads on their venues get seen.

Kaching!

Michael

[anthony]

No, the goal is to re-engineer society and root out the vestiges of racism, sexism, homophobia, and all other prejudice. If there is any citizen in 2015 who persists in an ancient bias against same sex couples, he must be exposed, derided, and made to reform.

Forced tolerance for the new ways of loving. No tolerance for those who backwardly cling to tradition.

Dead right, though it all began well before 'social re-engineering' and brainwashing. At the level of each person's thinking there's been long established an 'abstractification' - first of themselves then of others, out of individuality into group consciousness. No longer one on one relations, now it's collective upon collective, and adding gvment legislation - one more dose of poisonous collectivism, the coercive kind.

Left alone, in the long run, individuals will usually work things out with other individuals (or go separate ways). I have a high confidence in individual human nature left alone, which ironically the love-and-accept-by-force progressives obviously don't share.

Excellent point Tony.

Everyday in America and the world, single individuals interact with other single individuals in an infinite number of ways.

I would estimate that upwards of 95% of those individual interactions are non-violent and "voluntary."

Certainly in this country they are.

The collective does not "exist."

It is a creation.

A...

It's enough that it "exists" in individuals' minds it's apparent. The reality is as you say and you will know in your experiences with many folk, that each person responds best to being viewed and treated singularly. It is almost a cliche. However, when the going gets a little tougher, one sees the same individual fall back on the identity, safety and comfort - not to forget - power, of his imagined collective. A person has to make a mental break with his 'group identity' to live honestly. A pity most find the idea daunting.

(Then, big government has a vested interest in sustaining and 'solving' the divides, while the Press feeds on competing 'narratives').