Sen. Donna Campbell, a Tea Party affiliated Republican in Texas introduces bill to allow ‘religious’ discrimination against gays

  • metta

    Posts: 39134

    Nov 13, 2014 7:02 AM GMT
    Texas lawmaker introduces bill to allow ‘religious’ discrimination against gays

    http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2014/11/texas-lawmaker-introduces-bill-to-allow-religious-discrimination-against-gays/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 13, 2014 7:38 AM GMT
    dicks.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 13, 2014 4:33 PM GMT
    metta8 saidTexas lawmaker introduces bill to allow ‘religious’ discrimination against gays

    http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2014/11/texas-lawmaker-introduces-bill-to-allow-religious-discrimination-against-gays/


    Legislators are notorious for introducing bills to appease their constituents w/o considering the legal consequences, even though many are lawyers and should know better. See, e.g., the several anti-flag burning bills that have surfaced over the years. This bill ain't goin' nowhere.

    The larger question, though, is how to properly address the religious concerns some legitimately have re: homosexuality alongside gay rights. So far, it's been a case of court-imposed Diktats. I think we can do better, but I don't know what the solution is. Anyone?
  • HndsmKansan

    Posts: 16311

    Nov 13, 2014 4:36 PM GMT
    In the end, this sort of behavior (like some of the other nutty, right wing behavior) will haunt them....

    icon_mad.gif
  • HottJoe

    Posts: 21366

    Nov 13, 2014 4:58 PM GMT
    MGINSD said
    metta8 saidTexas lawmaker introduces bill to allow ‘religious’ discrimination against gays

    http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2014/11/texas-lawmaker-introduces-bill-to-allow-religious-discrimination-against-gays/


    Legislators are notorious for introducing bills to appease their constituents w/o considering the legal consequences, even though many are lawyers and should know better. See, e.g., the several anti-flag burning bills that have surfaced over the years. This bill ain't goin' nowhere.

    The larger question, though, is how to properly address the religious concerns some legitimately have re: homosexuality alongside gay rights. So far, it's been a case of court-imposed Diktats. I think we can do better, but I don't know what the solution is. Anyone?

    And gay republicans are notorious for placating them and making excuses for their bigotry.

    If they wanted to do human sacrifices for religious reasons they would not be permitted, but inciting violence against lgbt people, calling us evil and saying to cast us from society is cool with you because they're republican.

    icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 13, 2014 6:53 PM GMT
    HottJoe said
    MGINSD said
    metta8 saidTexas lawmaker introduces bill to allow ‘religious’ discrimination against gays

    http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2014/11/texas-lawmaker-introduces-bill-to-allow-religious-discrimination-against-gays/


    Legislators are notorious for introducing bills to appease their constituents w/o considering the legal consequences, even though many are lawyers and should know better. See, e.g., the several anti-flag burning bills that have surfaced over the years. This bill ain't goin' nowhere.

    The larger question, though, is how to properly address the religious concerns some legitimately have re: homosexuality alongside gay rights. So far, it's been a case of court-imposed Diktats. I think we can do better, but I don't know what the solution is. Anyone?

    And gay republicans are notorious for placating them and making excuses for their bigotry.

    If they wanted to do human sacrifices for religious reasons they would not be permitted, but inciting violence against lgbt people, calling us evil and saying to cast us from society is cool with you because they're republican.

    icon_rolleyes.gif


    Yes, you're so right. Everything you say is always a reasonable inference from what others say, and you never resort to hyperbole or ad hominem attacks to make your point. You truly are the most intelligent writer on this board! icon_rolleyes.gif
  • tazzari

    Posts: 2937

    Nov 13, 2014 7:26 PM GMT
    "Religious discrimination" invalidates the religion in question, and it is certainly anti-Christian.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 13, 2014 10:46 PM GMT
    MGINSD said
    metta8 saidTexas lawmaker introduces bill to allow ‘religious’ discrimination against gays

    http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2014/11/texas-lawmaker-introduces-bill-to-allow-religious-discrimination-against-gays/


    Legislators are notorious for introducing bills to appease their constituents w/o considering the legal consequences, even though many are lawyers and should know better. See, e.g., the several anti-flag burning bills that have surfaced over the years. This bill ain't goin' nowhere.

    The larger question, though, is how to properly address the religious concerns some legitimately have re: homosexuality alongside gay rights. So far, it's been a case of court-imposed Diktats. I think we can do better, but I don't know what the solution is. Anyone?


    Yes, the solution (in my horrifically red state) is to get the vast majority of Texans, who agree that hateful people like this tea bagger should have no place in the legislative process, to ACTUALLY vote. I know that the repub's have used voter suppression laws and gerrymandered redistricting to make it more difficult, but remember that they must resort to cheating because they know they don't have the numbers.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 13, 2014 11:00 PM GMT
    Polo Rodriguez How ironic, I am a veteran of the United States Air Force and I am gay - so you bless me on one hand and then submit a proposal to discriminate against me on the other. You do not honor me!!!

    https://www.facebook.com/DonnaCampbellTX
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 13, 2014 11:08 PM GMT
    "My choice early in life was either to be a piano player in a whorehouse or a politician. And to tell the truth, there's hardly any difference." However, the follow-up line, "I, for one, believe the piano player job to be much more honorable than current politicians..."

    --Harry S Truman
  • HottJoe

    Posts: 21366

    Nov 13, 2014 11:20 PM GMT
    MGINSD said
    HottJoe said
    MGINSD said
    metta8 saidTexas lawmaker introduces bill to allow ‘religious’ discrimination against gays

    http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2014/11/texas-lawmaker-introduces-bill-to-allow-religious-discrimination-against-gays/


    Legislators are notorious for introducing bills to appease their constituents w/o considering the legal consequences, even though many are lawyers and should know better. See, e.g., the several anti-flag burning bills that have surfaced over the years. This bill ain't goin' nowhere.

    The larger question, though, is how to properly address the religious concerns some legitimately have re: homosexuality alongside gay rights. So far, it's been a case of court-imposed Diktats. I think we can do better, but I don't know what the solution is. Anyone?

    And gay republicans are notorious for placating them and making excuses for their bigotry.

    If they wanted to do human sacrifices for religious reasons they would not be permitted, but inciting violence against lgbt people, calling us evil and saying to cast us from society is cool with you because they're republican.

    icon_rolleyes.gif


    Yes, you're so right. Everything you say is always a reasonable inference from what others say, and you never resort to hyperbole or ad hominem attacks to make your point. You truly are the most intelligent writer on this board! icon_rolleyes.gif

    Lol that you think it's reasonable to go on a gay site and push anti-gay republicans down everyone's throats.

    You seem more concerned for a church's "legitimate right" to pass hate into law, than for the people who are actually facing real discrimination.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 14, 2014 12:28 AM GMT
    Koastal said
    MGINSD said
    metta8 saidTexas lawmaker introduces bill to allow ‘religious’ discrimination against gays

    http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2014/11/texas-lawmaker-introduces-bill-to-allow-religious-discrimination-against-gays/


    Legislators are notorious for introducing bills to appease their constituents w/o considering the legal consequences, even though many are lawyers and should know better. See, e.g., the several anti-flag burning bills that have surfaced over the years. This bill ain't goin' nowhere.

    The larger question, though, is how to properly address the religious concerns some legitimately have re: homosexuality alongside gay rights. So far, it's been a case of court-imposed Diktats. I think we can do better, but I don't know what the solution is. Anyone?


    Yes, the solution (in my horrifically red state) is to get the vast majority of Texans, who agree that hateful people like this tea bagger should have no place in the legislative process, to ACTUALLY vote. I know that the repub's have used voter suppression laws and gerrymandered redistricting to make it more difficult, but remember that they must resort to cheating because they know they don't have the numbers.


    1. Voter ID laws =/= voter "suppression" laws.

    2. For the best examples of gerrymandered districts, see the ones carved out by Democrats to cater to their so-called "minority" constituencies - and, incidentally, of course, get them reelected.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 14, 2014 1:58 AM GMT
    Where's the liberal outrage when Obama tells Deval Patrick to redistrict gay Barney Frank into retirement.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 14, 2014 2:03 AM GMT
    mx5guynj saidWhere's the liberal outrage when Obama tells Deval Patrick to redistrict gay Barney Frank into retirement.

    Why would a liberal care what Deval Patrick does to Barney Frank? Liberals and Democrats aren't synonymous.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 14, 2014 2:12 AM GMT
    mickeytopogigio said
    mx5guynj saidWhere's the liberal outrage when Obama tells Deval Patrick to redistrict gay Barney Frank into retirement.

    Why would a liberal care what Deval Patrick does to Barney Frank? Liberals and Democrats aren't synonymous.


    Darn, you just had to point out a fact he was missing. Now what will I read for fun and giggles?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 14, 2014 2:14 AM GMT


    Dear Ms Lawmaker. If this law passes you will lose your job, courtesy of Timothy 2:12 new testament. Anyone know what it is? *looks at Right leaning posters here*
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 14, 2014 2:15 AM GMT
    MGINSD said
    1. Voter ID laws =/= voter "suppression" laws.

    2. For the best examples of gerrymandered districts, see the ones carved out by Democrats to cater to their so-called "minority" constituencies - and, incidentally, of course, get them reelected.


    Hey, I HATE gerrymandering. By any political party. All districts should be drawn by non-partisan committees.

    However, the Voter ID thing: it's an expensive solution to a non-existent problem; i.e., big government; i.e., hypocritical of YOU to support it. Also, the drafters of the laws CERTAINLY had voter suppression in mind when they wrote the law (which were passed overwhelmingly in nearly every state with Republican legislatures). To suggest it's some innocent attempt to curb voter fraud is willful ignorance on your part.

    What the laws have done in Texas is disenfranchise 600,000 eligible voters. Six-hundred thousand. We've had elections much closer than that. A federal judge ruled that the law that required the IDs was unconstitutional, but the U.S. Supreme Court kept the law in place BEFORE the election anyway. An unconstitutional, in-force law.

    Oh, here's a link: http://www.texastribune.org/2014/10/24/analysis-missing-piece-voter-id-debate/

    So, my Rush-Limbaugh-informed forum participant, you're dead wrong.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 14, 2014 2:41 AM GMT
    meninlove said

    Dear Ms Lawmaker. If this law passes you will lose your job, courtesy of Timothy 2:12 new testament. Anyone know what it is? *looks at Right leaning posters here*
    +1
  • FRE0

    Posts: 4865

    Nov 14, 2014 9:14 AM GMT
    MGINSD said
    metta8 saidTexas lawmaker introduces bill to allow ‘religious’ discrimination against gays

    http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2014/11/texas-lawmaker-introduces-bill-to-allow-religious-discrimination-against-gays/


    Legislators are notorious for introducing bills to appease their constituents w/o considering the legal consequences, even though many are lawyers and should know better. See, e.g., the several anti-flag burning bills that have surfaced over the years. This bill ain't goin' nowhere.

    The larger question, though, is how to properly address the religious concerns some legitimately have re: homosexuality alongside gay rights. So far, it's been a case of court-imposed Diktats. I think we can do better, but I don't know what the solution is. Anyone?


    The ultimate solution would be for attitudes to change so that civil rights laws would not be needed. Unfortunately, that would take far too long.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14360

    Nov 15, 2014 5:34 PM GMT
    Koastal said
    MGINSD said
    metta8 saidTexas lawmaker introduces bill to allow ‘religious’ discrimination against gays

    http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2014/11/texas-lawmaker-introduces-bill-to-allow-religious-discrimination-against-gays/


    Legislators are notorious for introducing bills to appease their constituents w/o considering the legal consequences, even though many are lawyers and should know better. See, e.g., the several anti-flag burning bills that have surfaced over the years. This bill ain't goin' nowhere.

    The larger question, though, is how to properly address the religious concerns some legitimately have re: homosexuality alongside gay rights. So far, it's been a case of court-imposed Diktats. I think we can do better, but I don't know what the solution is. Anyone?


    Yes, the solution (in my horrifically red state) is to get the vast majority of Texans, who agree that hateful people like this tea bagger should have no place in the legislative process, to ACTUALLY vote. I know that the repub's have used voter suppression laws and gerrymandered redistricting to make it more difficult, but remember that they must resort to cheating because they know they don't have the numbers.
    Yeah, you keep dreaming my friend. That so called vast majority of Texans does not exist. Most Texans strongly support these tea party nut jobs. That is why your beloved lone star shithole is horrifically red and extremely religious and always will be that way well into the future.