Author Topic: Jan Brewer Likely to Veto AZ Bill Protecting Religious Freedom  (Read 720 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline truth_seeker

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 15,527
  • Common sense results oriented conservatism
Jan Brewer Likely to Veto AZ Bill Protecting Religious Freedom
« on: February 25, 2014, 02:41:29 PM »
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/02/25/Brewer-Likely-to-Veto-Bill-Protecting-Religious-Freedom

Jan Brewer Likely to Veto AZ Bill Protecting Religious Freedom

by Tony Lee  25 Feb 2014, 9:56 AM PDT

Republican Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer is expected to veto a religious freedom bill that would allow the state's business owners to refuse service to gays and lesbians based on religious grounds.

Brewer has until Saturday to sign or veto Senate Bill 1062, and her closest advisers said on Tuesday that Brewer would most likely veto it after being pressured by business interests afraid of potential boycotts of the state.

Chuck Coughlin, a longtime Brewer adviser, told NBC News: “It’s been her proclivity in the past to focus on the priorities she wants them [the legislature] to accomplish, and this was clearly not part of her agenda.” Another adviser close to Brewer said, “She doesn’t want to take any actions that could jeopardize the economic momentum we’ve seen here in Arizona."

According to NBC, Brewer is likely to make her decision on Wednesday or Thursday after flying back to Arizona on Tuesday. Brewer had been in Washington, D.C. attending National Governors Association meetings.

 Though Brewer is facing pressure to sign the bill from the state's Republican legislators and social conservative groups, business groups and businesses like Apple and American Airlines have urged her to veto the bill. According to reports, Apple, which announced intentions to build a plant in Mesa, Arizona, has pressured Brewer to veto the bill in addition to both of Arizona's Republican Senators--John McCain and Jeff Flake.

In addition, Arizona will also host the Super Bowl next year, and after the NFL said that it was "following the issue in Arizona and will continue to do so should the bill be signed into law," the Arizona Super Bowl Committee also urged Brewer to veto the bill. In 1993, the NFL pulled the Super Bowl from the state after Arizona's governor rescinded Martin Luther King, Jr. Day as a state holiday, and Arizonans have been afraid that the NFL could do the same next year if Brewer signed the bill.

Brewer has already vetoed similar legislation last year.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sarcasm. Proponents cite glorious times of olde, when businesses could seat blacks at the back of the bus or the restaurant, or not at all. And also cite muslims who should be free to mutilate their women's genitals, if they so desire.

All in the name of religious freedom.

The political right is letting the religious right drag them to positions which are sure to lose elections.

#NeverHillary

Online Oceander

  • Technical
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 42,690
  • #NeverTrumpForever
Re: Jan Brewer Likely to Veto AZ Bill Protecting Religious Freedom
« Reply #1 on: February 25, 2014, 02:52:42 PM »
Too true.

Offline sinkspur

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 28,599
Re: Jan Brewer Likely to Veto AZ Bill Protecting Religious Freedom
« Reply #2 on: February 25, 2014, 03:03:00 PM »
Way too much pressure from the business community, and rightly so.

She'll veto it.

What some on the far right don't get is that this law (clearly unconstitutional) could also be used to discriminate against Christians as well.
From  "A Shining City on a Hill"

To "A global laughingstock"

Online Oceander

  • Technical
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 42,690
  • #NeverTrumpForever
Re: Jan Brewer Likely to Veto AZ Bill Protecting Religious Freedom
« Reply #3 on: February 25, 2014, 03:06:13 PM »
*  *  *

What some on the far right don't get is that this law (clearly unconstitutional) could also be used to discriminate against Christians as well.

good point.  I suspect that the better position lies somewhere in the middle, but this bill goes too far.

Offline AbaraXas

  • Just a nobody
  • Social Media Advisor
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 9,206
  • Just a nobody
Re: Jan Brewer Likely to Veto AZ Bill Protecting Religious Freedom
« Reply #4 on: February 25, 2014, 03:12:32 PM »
Way too much pressure from the business community, and rightly so.

She'll veto it.

What some on the far right don't get is that this law (clearly unconstitutional) could also be used to discriminate against Christians as well.

I agree.
Never delude yourself into thinking you're "influencing" or making a difference on the internet. It is an ephemeral pleasure.

Offline AbaraXas

  • Just a nobody
  • Social Media Advisor
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 9,206
  • Just a nobody
Re: Jan Brewer Likely to Veto AZ Bill Protecting Religious Freedom
« Reply #5 on: February 25, 2014, 03:16:39 PM »
good point.  I suspect that the better position lies somewhere in the middle, but this bill goes too far.

Somehow I think we need to have circles of privacy in our culture where we stop getting in each other's business over religion, sexual orientation, or other personal matters.
Never delude yourself into thinking you're "influencing" or making a difference on the internet. It is an ephemeral pleasure.

Offline Gazoo

  • Inactive Members
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3,968
Re: Jan Brewer Likely to Veto AZ Bill Protecting Religious Freedom
« Reply #6 on: February 25, 2014, 03:37:19 PM »

Quote
In addition, Arizona will also host the Super Bowl next year, and after the NFL said that it was "following the issue in Arizona and will continue to do so should the bill be signed into law,"


She'll veto it but since when does the NFL dictate social issues?  Since when does anybody dictate this? I think it's a states right issue if it has to be an issue.
"The Tea Party has a right to feel cheated.

When does the Republican Party, put in the majority by the Tea Party, plan to honor its commitment to halt the growth of the Federal monolith and bring the budget back into balance"?

Online Oceander

  • Technical
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 42,690
  • #NeverTrumpForever
Re: Jan Brewer Likely to Veto AZ Bill Protecting Religious Freedom
« Reply #7 on: February 25, 2014, 03:39:30 PM »
Somehow I think we need to have circles of privacy in our culture where we stop getting in each other's business over religion, sexual orientation, or other personal matters.

We absolutely do, and for a long time we did; those circles have been seriously eroded and by now precious little is left.  The blame for that, however, is more bipartisan than I think a lot of people would like to admit.  And that is one of my main beefs with how the right has responded to the move for so-called "gay marriage" - rather than attempting to protect the right to hold one's private religious views, and in particular, trying to make sure that the private affairs of religious institutions, the sine qua non being churches, are not invaded and those institutions forced to march in lockstep with the current majority's views on what they should believe.  As a simple example:  instead of stubbornly resisting any sort of legal recognition for gay couples, the right should have spent its energies trying to deflect that movement away from any potential encroachment on the prerogatives of religious institutions to define for themselves what sorts of unions they will sanctify; such an effort would have included everything from the substantive to the rhetorical, such as resisting the drive to term gay unions "marriages" rather than something like civil unions.  Heck, even the term "civil marriage" would have been preferable to the unadorned term "marriage" because  civil marriage has a long history of being understood to mean marriages that have been sanctioned only by the state and not by any religious organization.  Instead, we now have the situation where the right has denied itself the ability to have any sort of real say in how so-called "gay marriage" laws are written, and where there is a very real threat that religious organizations may be forced to recognize as a "marriage" for their own internal purposes any "marriage" eo nomine that has been sanctioned by the state (i.e., all "civil marriages").  More broadly, had the right fought for the right of the individual, and private associations of individuals, to regulate their own private, internal affairs as they saw fit, rather than fighting to deny any legal recognition whatsoever to gay couples, then we might have had much firmer footing for overcoming the mandate in Obamacare that religious institutions provide coverage to their employees for contraception under their insurance policies.

And, finally, what makes this now lost fight so ridiculous, so quixotic, is that civil law already recognizes all manner of other types of relationships to which the right seems to have no objection.  For example, the owner of an animal has certain legal obligations to that animal and can be prosecuted for violating those obligations - that is, the animal effectively has recognized legal rights as against its owner - so it makes no sense at all to me that a gay couple should receive less recognition under civil law than a pet and its owner receive.

While that is the obvious, and rhetorically punchy, example, more serious examples abound, such as the legally recognized relationship between the partners in a partnership.  Under the partnership law of most states, the partners in a partnership have a so-called "fiduciary duty" to each other which obligates each partner to act in the best interests of the partnership and the other partners rather than solely for their own individual interests.  For example, if a partner comes across a business opportunity that could reasonably fit within the type(s) of business carried on by the partnership, then that partner has a duty to bring that business opportunity to the attention of the other partners so they can decide as a group whether the partnership should pursue that opportunity; a partner who simply pursues the opportunity for himself - even if it doesn't take any of his time or effort away from the partnership's ongoing activities - can be sued by the partners and the partnership and forced to turn the business over to the partnership and disgorge any profits he's earned from it.*

* These duties can be reduced to a significant degree in any written partnership agreement the partners enter into, but to the extent that the partners haven't addressed some aspect of this duty, they will be bound by it.

It strikes me as ludicrous that two businessmen, otherwise rivals, who enter into a joint venture for a limited purpose have greater recognition, and greater obligations to each other, under the law than do a gay couple who happen to care very much about each other.

But that's just my two cents' worth.  Let the attacks begin.

Online Oceander

  • Technical
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 42,690
  • #NeverTrumpForever
Re: Jan Brewer Likely to Veto AZ Bill Protecting Religious Freedom
« Reply #8 on: February 25, 2014, 03:41:48 PM »

She'll veto it but since when does the NFL dictate social issues?  Since when does anybody dictate this? I think it's a states right issue if it has to be an issue.

Since when?  Since the time the first large business began operating in the first society.  Why should the NFL be forced to accommodate itself to laws regulating social conduct that it disagrees with?  The issue of states' rights has no bearing here because this isn't a matter of a conflict between the federal government and Arizona, it's a matter between Arizona and private businesses affected by this law.

Offline Gazoo

  • Inactive Members
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3,968
Re: Jan Brewer Likely to Veto AZ Bill Protecting Religious Freedom
« Reply #9 on: February 25, 2014, 03:53:52 PM »
Since when?  Since the time the first large business began operating in the first society.  Why should the NFL be forced to accommodate itself to laws regulating social conduct that it disagrees with?  The issue of states' rights has no bearing here because this isn't a matter of a conflict between the federal government and Arizona, it's a matter between Arizona and private businesses affected by this law.

I must have missed the huge memo that the NFL takes political/social issues into account in their organization to this extent. If they want to have a new pink flag on the field 888limpwrist that is their business but what AZ does is not their business, whether the super bowl is there or not. They will succeed in their pressure, most likely but it is just strange to me that the NFL has grown a political wing.
"The Tea Party has a right to feel cheated.

When does the Republican Party, put in the majority by the Tea Party, plan to honor its commitment to halt the growth of the Federal monolith and bring the budget back into balance"?

Offline Lando Lincoln

  • Member
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 11,105
Re: Jan Brewer Likely to Veto AZ Bill Protecting Religious Freedom
« Reply #10 on: February 25, 2014, 04:08:38 PM »
Way too much pressure from the business community, and rightly so.

She'll veto it.

What some on the far right don't get is that this law (clearly unconstitutional) could also be used to discriminate against Christians as well.

Good to see you sink...
For the progressive, there is very little to love about the United States. Washington, Jefferson, Madison? A bunch of rotten slaveholders, hypocrites, and cowards even when their hearts were in the right places. The Declaration of Independence? A manifesto for the propertied classes. The Constitution? An artifact of sexism and white supremacy. The sacrifices in the great wars of the 20th century? Feeding the poor and the disenfranchised into the meat-grinder of imperialism. The gifts of Carnegie, Rockefeller, Vanderbilt, Morgan, Astor? Blood money from self-aggrandizing robber barons. Nat Rev

Offline katzenjammer

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2,513
Re: Jan Brewer Likely to Veto AZ Bill Protecting Religious Freedom
« Reply #11 on: February 25, 2014, 05:33:21 PM »
I must have missed the huge memo that the NFL takes political/social issues into account in their organization to this extent. If they want to have a new pink flag on the field 888limpwrist that is their business but what AZ does is not their business, whether the super bowl is there or not. They will succeed in their pressure, most likely but it is just strange to me that the NFL has grown a political wing.

There are two things in force with how the NFL currently conducts its business, and how that business appears at times to bleed into "political" or societal issues.

The first is what we should all have come to expect from most large business, they will pander to whatever segment of society that they feel will contribute to the health and sustainability of their business.  So we all suffer though the month of "pink crap" each October not because the NFL has this incredibly deep concern about breast cancer, but because it is viewed as a smart marketing tool to make the game more appealing to women.  Because it is pretty much common sense that if women become more interested in the NFL, then they will provide more opportunities for men to sustain their interest, rather than draw them away from it.  (This of course excludes the women that have a natural interest in the actual game itself, they don't need to be pandered to!!)  They do this on other fronts as well, but at a smaller scale: think of the focus on Hispanic Heritage Month in which they try to highlight the accomplishments of Hispanic players/staff.  Hispanics in the US are a growing demographic, the NFL would love to collect as many of their dollars as possible!!

The second factor, while not unique to the NFL, is a little bit less widespread than the first; and it is also a relatively new concern.  And that is the fact that there are many forces being marshaled across our society that have placed the game in their targets for extinction.  (I understand that there are varying opinions as to how intense this targeting is, some say it is a definite that they wish to close the game down for all intents and purposes.  Others say that it is just a passing concern that will likely fade away over time.)  Of course the reason all of the attention is focused on the game now is the fact that so many players have sustained serious injury from concussions over the years.  And there appears to be a reasonable amount of evidence that the individual teams and the league have been purposefully downplaying (hiding) this situation for many years.  So yes, the NFL is under attack.  And as a result I believe that we will see them pandering more and more to what we would have thought were totally non-consequential (at least in terms of a football league) societal forces in attempt to raise and uphold their "image" in the face of our current national culture.

So I am certainly not surprised that the NFL is speaking about this situation in Arizona.
« Last Edit: February 25, 2014, 05:34:02 PM by katzenjammer »

Offline Gazoo

  • Inactive Members
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3,968
Re: Jan Brewer Likely to Veto AZ Bill Protecting Religious Freedom
« Reply #12 on: February 25, 2014, 05:39:05 PM »
There are two things in force with how the NFL currently conducts its business, and how that business appears at times to bleed into "political" or societal issues.

The first is what we should all have come to expect from most large business, they will pander to whatever segment of society that they feel will contribute to the health and sustainability of their business.  So we all suffer though the month of "pink crap" each October not because the NFL has this incredibly deep concern about breast cancer, but because it is viewed as a smart marketing tool to make the game more appealing to women.  Because it is pretty much common sense that if women become more interested in the NFL, then they will provide more opportunities for men to sustain their interest, rather than draw them away from it.  (This of course excludes the women that have a natural interest in the actual game itself, they don't need to be pandered to!!)  They do this on other fronts as well, but at a smaller scale: think of the focus on Hispanic Heritage Month in which they try to highlight the accomplishments of Hispanic players/staff.  Hispanics in the US are a growing demographic, the NFL would love to collect as many of their dollars as possible!!

The second factor, while not unique to the NFL, is a little bit less widespread than the first; and it is also a relatively new concern.  And that is the fact that there are many forces being marshaled across our society that have placed the game in their targets for extinction.  (I understand that there are varying opinions as to how intense this targeting is, some say it is a definite that they wish to close the game down for all intents and purposes.  Others say that it is just a passing concern that will likely fade away over time.)  Of course the reason all of the attention is focused on the game now is the fact that so many players have sustained serious injury from concussions over the years.  And there appears to be a reasonable amount of evidence that the individual teams and the league have been purposefully downplaying (hiding) this situation for many years.  So yes, the NFL is under attack.  And as a result I believe that we will see them pandering more and more to what we would have thought were totally non-consequential (at least in terms of a football league) societal forces in attempt to raise and uphold their "image" in the face of our current national culture.

So I am certainly not surprised that the NFL is speaking about this situation in Arizona.

Good thoughts.

Possibly you are not aware of the NFL's recent announcement: that a literal flag can be thrown during the game if any of the players use the words- gay or the N word? I am guessing it has to do with the first player to come out?

If it is not a new rule yet, they announced they are thinking about it.

« Last Edit: February 25, 2014, 05:40:40 PM by Gazoo »
"The Tea Party has a right to feel cheated.

When does the Republican Party, put in the majority by the Tea Party, plan to honor its commitment to halt the growth of the Federal monolith and bring the budget back into balance"?

Offline katzenjammer

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2,513
Re: Jan Brewer Likely to Veto AZ Bill Protecting Religious Freedom
« Reply #13 on: February 25, 2014, 06:00:43 PM »
Good thoughts.

Possibly you are not aware of the NFL's recent announcement: that a literal flag can be thrown during the game if any of the players use the words- gay or the N word? I am guessing it has to do with the first player to come out?

If it is not a new rule yet, they announced they are thinking about it.


Yes, I've heard a bit about it.  In fact, I believe that such a rule (see Rule 12, Section 3, Article 1b here) is already on the books, apparently it will now become an enforcement issue.  (And it has certainly stirred up a hornets nest both within and outside the game!!)

Offline Fishrrman

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 8,960
Re: Jan Brewer Likely to Veto AZ Bill Protecting Religious Freedom
« Reply #14 on: February 25, 2014, 08:56:36 PM »
If she vetos the bill -- it's going to come back to haunt her if she has any plans to run for "higher office". The same folks who sat on their hands for Mitt Romney will do the same for Ms. Brewer.

There were some rumblings above that the bill as written might be unconstitutional.
Very well.
Let it be taken to the courts for that.

But you don't win, if you won't fight.

This was an attempt to "fight back" in the cultural war that is now engulfing the nation, and which the left is largely winning.

Again, you don't win if you won't fight.

And almost nobody in the Pubbie party has any fight in them.
Nobody.
« Last Edit: February 25, 2014, 08:59:20 PM by Fishrrman »

Offline LambChop

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 245
Re: Jan Brewer Likely to Veto AZ Bill Protecting Religious Freedom
« Reply #15 on: February 25, 2014, 09:18:42 PM »

But that's just my two cents' worth.  Let the attacks begin.

You've got a lot of nerve being logical and judicious.  Let's just hope it doesn't become contagious.

Offline Right_in_Virginia

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 16,301
Re: Jan Brewer Likely to Veto AZ Bill Protecting Religious Freedom
« Reply #16 on: February 25, 2014, 09:24:44 PM »

What some on the far right don't get is that this law (clearly unconstitutional) could also be used to discriminate against Christians as well.

I don't know if I'm "far right" and I certainly don't know enough about this law to comment on its merits.  But you raised the caution that this law could be used to discriminate against Christians.  And, okay, fair warning.  But it raises a question for me.

Isn't discrimination against Christians and their beliefs already in play and taking over?  Think about December 25th now being a "holiday" without mention of Christ; the anti-prayer "choir" so strong in all public forums;  "marriage" laws that trample on privately held Biblical doctrine;  birth control/abortion mandates in Obamacare?

Your caution is clever.  But what would you suggest Christians do about the existing and escalating discrimination?

Assuming, of course, that such discrimination matter to you.

Thx.

Offline LambChop

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 245
Re: Jan Brewer Likely to Veto AZ Bill Protecting Religious Freedom
« Reply #17 on: February 25, 2014, 09:25:13 PM »
Way too much pressure from the business community, and rightly so.

She'll veto it.

What some on the far right don't get is that this law (clearly unconstitutional) could also be used to discriminate against Christians as well.

If this goes through, I can see how Muslims can use this to their advantage.

I travel quite a bit by car.  Getting gas at all times of the night.  I'd hate to not get served somewhere in the middle of nowhere, almost on E, because I don't have a head cover, or burqa

Online jmyrlefuller

  • J. Myrle Fuller
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 11,460
  • ^^ Actual picture of me.
    • Fullervision
Re: Jan Brewer Likely to Veto AZ Bill Protecting Religious Freedom
« Reply #18 on: February 25, 2014, 09:38:49 PM »
Way too much pressure from the business community, and rightly so.

She'll veto it.

What some on the far right don't get is that this law (clearly unconstitutional) could also be used to discriminate against Christians as well.

"Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction."
--Amendment 13, U.S. Constitution

Involuntary servitude shall not exist within the United States.

No entity in this country can force anyone to serve another against their will-- ESPECIALLY if it is in violation of the free exercise of religion as stated in Amendment 1-- unless it is punishment for a crime. The language is plain.

Now, as far as I am concerned, if there is a company that does not want to serve Christians-- fine. So be it. The fact is, there are plenty of others that will, and with today's interconnected economy, it won't be hard to find one.

The same goes for the LGBT community. The majority of this country is now solidly pro-gay. There is no point in trying to force the increasingly few people who are not to do their bidding.
Proud supporter of the Free Conservative Resistance

"Just because people in positions of authority are stupid, it doesn’t mean you have to go along with it." —Arlo Guthrie

The enemy of my enemies may not be my friend, but it's still fun watching him make my enemies squirm.

Online DCPatriot

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 29,650
Re: Jan Brewer Likely to Veto AZ Bill Protecting Religious Freedom
« Reply #19 on: February 25, 2014, 09:40:31 PM »
Uh......who would eat a wedding cake that was made at the point of a gun?      :whistle: 
« Last Edit: February 25, 2014, 09:41:06 PM by DCPatriot »
"It aint what you don't know that kills you.  It's what you know that aint so!" ...Theodore Sturgeon

"If you want to change the world, go home and love your family".    ...Mother Teresa

"It's not the mountain before you, but the pebble in your shoe"      ....or something like that


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf