New discrimination law likely to pass in Kansas legislature

[icydawgfish]

http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/13/us/kan...-sex-services/

http://kslegislature.org/li/b2013_14...53_01_0000.pdf

The bill states that religious organizations, profit or non-profit, are not required by law to offer services to people if doing so would run contrary to their "sincerely held religious beliefs of the individual or religious entity regarding sex or gender".

It further goes on to state that in these circumstances the religious person or organization is to be protected from lawsuits under state or local law. It further defines a religious entity as follows:

"Religious entity" means an organization, regardless of its non-profit or for-profit status, and regardless of whether its activities are
deemed wholly or partly religious, that is:
(1) A religious corporation, association, educational institution or
society;
(2) an entity operated, supervised or controlled by, or connected with,
a religious corporation, association, educational institution or society; or
(3) a privately-held business operating consistently with its sincerely
held religious beliefs, with regard to any activity described in section l,
and amendments thereto.

So essentially it's giving the ok for any business owners to deny service to members of the LGBT community as long as they claim it violates their religious beliefs to serve them. Good job Kansas. You're making me real ashamed to call you home right now.

UPDATE

Fortunately, the Kansas State Senate, Republican as well, decided to kill the bill. It scares me though that a measure such as this could even get as far as it did. I hope it serves as a lesson to future lawmakers.

http://www.kansas.com/2014/02/16/329...likely-to.html

http://www.kwch.com/news/local-news/...-dead/24548186

[athanaric]

The discriminating part is that denying service to "LGBT" people (or any other group of society) only seems to be possible on the grounds of religious-based objection. Meaning atheists who disapprove of other people's lifestyle are discriminated against when compared to religious people.
Also, private enterprises are called private for a reason.

[snuggans]

this is what happens when republican moderates are replaced by tea party wackos.

aside from the religious organizations, only some small businesses will actually care about this, fewer will actually support it. any private companies or closed corporations that actually support this 19th century garbage will have to deal with the negative PR that will follow, provided that they care more about " " "religious liberty" " " over profits. the governor seemed ecstatic, what are the chances of this turning into a law and being struck down by a federal judge or SCOTUS?

[Slaytaninc]

this is what happens when republican moderates are replaced by tea party wackos.

Talking Points, aren't they great!

[B. W.]

this is what happens when republican moderates are replaced by tea party wackos.

The "TEA" in tea party stands for "Taxed Enough Already". What is wacko is relating this to taxes. There are some "tea party" advocates that are in favor of this law I'm sure. I'm also sure that there are plenty of Moslem, Jewish, and other people of different faiths that would feel offended if the government forced them to do something that was against their religious beliefs. So the next question is: When am I going to read about a gay couple going into a Moslem bakery and demanding they make them a wedding cake?

[IronBrig4]

The "TEA" in tea party stands for "Taxed Enough Already". What is wacko is relating this to taxes. There are some "tea party" advocates that are in favor of this law I'm sure.

I think he's talking about how the membership in self-described Tea Party groups tends to be evangelical Christian. Lawmakers who propose discriminatory laws based on sexual orientation seem to mostly be evangelicals. Ergo, people who approve of such legislation are Tea Party types.

[Sphere]

This state law is pre-empted by federal law.

Scotus has had a string of cases on the subject. One was a math teacher in a Lutheran school. Can't remember how it turned out, but in general Scotus has drown a line where by you can fire a priest for not believing in he trinity, but you cannot fire the church janitor for the same reason.

[Slaytaninc]

This is a good law. It will give help churches from being forced to conduct same-sex marriages. If a "liberal church" wants to do so they certainly aren't being prevented from doing so by this law.

[knight of meh]

This is a good law. It will give help churches from being forced to conduct same-sex marriages. If a "liberal church" wants to do so they certainly aren't being prevented from doing so by this law.

small picture mate... now read the OP again and think big , a corner shop ,a clothes shop , food outlet , hotels etc etc etc can all claim that last definition ...

[athanaric]

small picture mate... now read the OP again and think big , a corner shop ,a clothes shop , food outlet , hotels etc etc etc can all claim that last definition ...

So? They're all private businesses, not state institutions. And it's not like they are like "we no serve gays". They just object to very specific things like gay marriage, and they have the right to do so, and should have it in every civilized country. I presume you wouldn't want to force a Pakistani kebab vendor to sell pork sandwiches, or an American fast food restaurant to serve dog meat. It's the same, and I'm sure there are other examples that could be made.

[Lord Thesaurian]

This state law is pre-empted by federal law.

Scotus has had a string of cases on the subject. One was a math teacher in a Lutheran school. Can't remember how it turned out, but in general Scotus has drown a line where by you can fire a priest for not believing in he trinity, but you cannot fire the church janitor for the same reason.

/thread

[SLN445]

Public outrage tends to keep most places from being discriminatory with or without laws protecting such things.

[Veliky Kaiser Theos]

If bigotted businesses wish to give customers to more civilised businesses, then it's a win-win. Unless the whole town is backwards.

[Elemental]

I hope this is all they ever talk about during the next olympics held in the US whenever that is.

[Condottiere 40K]

[sabaku_no_gaara]

Is Kansas a backwards place? They where also the guys that wanted to put the bible in science classes right?

[icydawgfish]

Is Kansas a backwards place? They where also the guys that wanted to put the bible in science classes right?

The Kansas state legislature has been trying to do this indirectly for a few years by trying to pass bills to remove the standardized state curriculum and leave it up to the local districts, schools, and teachers to decide curriculum. The problem is that the elites in Kansas are very conservative. The cities of Kansas City, Wichita, and Topeka are a bit more liberal but most cities are. The elites in the cities are generally the fiscal conservative type but the influence and aftershocks of the tea party movement is definitely felt. The rural areas are almost exclusively the stereotypical bible belt type.

So while some school districts might opt to continue teaching evolution, the vast majority would likely revert to creationism.

[MasterOfNone]

There is always such contention on these issues. The answer is to get the government out of all of this and let businesses, churches, and individuals (be they of whatsoever religion or of no religion) exercise their right to free association and the right to contract about their own affairs as they please. AD laws violate people's rights. When someone turns you away from their business, they are not violating any right and you are free to go elsewhere. In a civil society we should deal with disagreements by persuasion, by boycotting, and even by shunning - not use the law to force others to comply with our values.

This short blog video by the clear-minded Julie Borowski, Token Libertarian Girl, gets to the heart of the matter in her own zany style

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[Earl Dibbles Jr]

If I run a business and don't like fat people, it's my right to deny their applications and not allow them into my establishment.

The same applies to anyone else, be it a gay person, midget, etc. The only exception I know of is race.

[Slydessertfox]

If I run a business and don't like fat people, it's my right to deny their applications and not allow them into my establishment.

The same applies to anyone else, be it a gay person, midget, etc. The only exception I know of is race.

Your rights end where others begin.