Posts by DJS

274

Indiana "Religious Freedom" (right to discriminate)

by Simon in

sickening to see the photo of the religious zealots all stood around the governor signing into law the right for people to discriminate against others (gay, lesbian, trans-gender) based purely on religious dogma.. if religious people want those freedoms then the can't have it both ways - they cannot complain if *they* are discriminated against.. "sorry, we don't like zionists, get out".

"oh, it's some special mass and you can't work your shift?

you're fired!"..

DJS

Onward X-Tian Haters (to extinction ASAP):

1. Indiana-based tech company Angie's List halts $40 million HQ expansion in Indianapolis.

2. GA house cancels religious freedom law meeting: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2015/03/29/ga-house-cancels-religious-freedom-bill-meeting/70652168/

3. Montana religious "freedom" bill dies in a 50-50 vote. March 27, 2015, 12:18pm EDT

4. Blowback to anti-gay law hits Indiana as tech leaders, politicians, entertainers heap condemnation on state

6. Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff relocates the company's conference.

7. Mike Pence, scorched by a fast-spreading political firestorm, told The Star on Saturday that he will support the introduction of legislation to “clarify” that Indiana’s controversial Religious Freedom Restoration Act does not promote discrimination against gays and lesbians...

Asked if that legislation might include making gay and lesbian Hoosiers a protected legal class, Pence said, “That’s not on my agenda.”

274

Indiana "Religious Freedom" (right to discriminate)

by Simon in

sickening to see the photo of the religious zealots all stood around the governor signing into law the right for people to discriminate against others (gay, lesbian, trans-gender) based purely on religious dogma.. if religious people want those freedoms then the can't have it both ways - they cannot complain if *they* are discriminated against.. "sorry, we don't like zionists, get out".

"oh, it's some special mass and you can't work your shift?

you're fired!"..

DJS

One thing I am certain of, and it is a day I will see if I live another 20 or 30 years. When the Millennials and the following generation take over, these types of hateful issues will be a thing of the past. I am ashamed of my generation.Hide behind your hateful wall and call it Libertarian, Religious Freedom, Conservative, Fundamentalist, God-Fearing, Jesus-Loving. Matters not. The wall is comprised of hate, and those of you who continue to support hate are haters.

But one day in the not too distant future you will be gone and those coming after you don't give a rat's ass about sexual persuasion. And the world will be a better place for it.

Your hate, as I have pointed out before, isn't confined in a sterile vacuum. It lives and breathes and has contributed to the death of Matthew Shepard and others and in the suicide of Jamie Hubley and others. But by all means, continue to cloak it in sweet words. Call it Religious Freedom. Name it Libertarian. Feel good about it.

VIola, do some research. We have addressed your points many times.

274

Indiana "Religious Freedom" (right to discriminate)

by Simon in

sickening to see the photo of the religious zealots all stood around the governor signing into law the right for people to discriminate against others (gay, lesbian, trans-gender) based purely on religious dogma.. if religious people want those freedoms then the can't have it both ways - they cannot complain if *they* are discriminated against.. "sorry, we don't like zionists, get out".

"oh, it's some special mass and you can't work your shift?

you're fired!"..

DJS

Marvin,

"What is so different about Indiana's recent legislation compared with other state laws (plus federal)?"

I do not know.

As for the woman whose business is suffering, I'm sorry, I have no sympathy or empathy for her. Using your analogy blacks should have kept their place in the back of the bus and never filed any types of lawsuits. The disabled should have known their place and never sued for access. Women should have stayed in the kitchen where they belong and not sued for the right to vote. I don't mean to be mean but that is one of the worst arguments I've ever heard.

As i see it, hate has a price. She is paying it, and that is most excellent.

274

Indiana "Religious Freedom" (right to discriminate)

by Simon in

sickening to see the photo of the religious zealots all stood around the governor signing into law the right for people to discriminate against others (gay, lesbian, trans-gender) based purely on religious dogma.. if religious people want those freedoms then the can't have it both ways - they cannot complain if *they* are discriminated against.. "sorry, we don't like zionists, get out".

"oh, it's some special mass and you can't work your shift?

you're fired!"..

DJS

Viv,

Here we go again. Each time this topic comes up we get the same comments from the Libertarians and those who haven't realized that for decades the SCOTUS has interpreted laws based on the US Constitution, which is predicated on the common good for all, not special interest groups and with a clear delineation between church and state. And we say the same things. It may be grand in the Libertarian or Laissez faire utopian world some want to live in, but it isn't the reality of a constitutional democracy.

It's like wishing that Santa and the Easter Bunny were real instead of make believe. Wouldn't it be nice? Laws protecting minorities, women, the disabled, religious people and the LGBT community from discrimination make us better humans, give us better communities, a better country and a better planet. But the right wing, the X-tian fundies and the Libertarians will cloak their beliefs behind a fence made of hate.

274

Indiana "Religious Freedom" (right to discriminate)

by Simon in

sickening to see the photo of the religious zealots all stood around the governor signing into law the right for people to discriminate against others (gay, lesbian, trans-gender) based purely on religious dogma.. if religious people want those freedoms then the can't have it both ways - they cannot complain if *they* are discriminated against.. "sorry, we don't like zionists, get out".

"oh, it's some special mass and you can't work your shift?

you're fired!"..

DJS

Arguing the intelligence of anyone supporting either the original 1993 law or the present state laws is an exercise in futility, because it assumes there was any intelligence involved. Politics, votes, and placating constituents is what those laws were and are about. Politics is rarely about ethics and doing the right thing.

Lawsuits will determine the manner in which these laws are applied, as they already have. The free market is free to the degree it does not violate the Constitution. When it appears to do so, people sue. And to this point, the SCOTUS and the regional courts have almost universally determined that commercial for profit businesses do not have a right to discriminate. The protected groups have evolved over the decades, and it includes blacks and other minorities, women, religion, the disabled and now sexual persuasion. These laws were not necessary; they are political in nature and will ultimately accomplish nothing but allowing narrow minded people to attempt to impose their own specific religious beliefs on others, which to this point in time has thankfully failed.

The free market will eventually rule out because large national and multi-national corporations will ultimately avoid the states supporting such hatred. To this end the Indiana governor is already feeling the heat. Good for him. But that is a result of people driven by secular humanistic objectives who think discriminating against the LGBT community is hate, which it is. That is not what Adam Smith had in mind when he originally talked about free markets, but it is a 21st Century version of how those markets can be controlled.

274

Indiana "Religious Freedom" (right to discriminate)

by Simon in

sickening to see the photo of the religious zealots all stood around the governor signing into law the right for people to discriminate against others (gay, lesbian, trans-gender) based purely on religious dogma.. if religious people want those freedoms then the can't have it both ways - they cannot complain if *they* are discriminated against.. "sorry, we don't like zionists, get out".

"oh, it's some special mass and you can't work your shift?

you're fired!"..

DJS

The 1993 law was also a useless and unnecessary piece of legislation. It was also politically motivated; few if any of the Clinton era team would support such a law now, and many of them have publicly stated that the law has evolved in a manner unintended. Bad legislation following bad legislation is what this topic is about.

Since the 1993 law was passed, the SCOTUS and other regional US courts have consistently defended gays, lesbians, etc. from being discriminated by commercial enterprises based on their orientation. So the 1993 law has not resulted in supporting discrimination based on the manner in which the courts have ruled, with some potential exceptions resulting in ObamaCare, but these issues are about such things as birth control. But that's for another OP.

The Indiana law, similar to other state laws passed recently on the same topic, is nothing but right wing politically motivated laws to push the X-tian agenda and to support discrimination against primarily the LGBT community. The right wing fundies have lost a few cases around the country the past few years, notably the florist, bakery, wedding chapel cases, and this is their nasty, hate filled manner of responding.

These laws are not necessary; the courts have continued to state that for profit/commercial business or enterprises discriminating based on sexual orientation is illegal, and the sanctity of the insides of churches, including how they operate and whom they serve, has never seriously been threatened in this country and there is nothing that has occurred recently that would insinuate otherwise.

To line up the rabbis, nuns, priests and preachers for a photo-op to suggest otherwise sickens me.

274

Indiana "Religious Freedom" (right to discriminate)

by Simon in

sickening to see the photo of the religious zealots all stood around the governor signing into law the right for people to discriminate against others (gay, lesbian, trans-gender) based purely on religious dogma.. if religious people want those freedoms then the can't have it both ways - they cannot complain if *they* are discriminated against.. "sorry, we don't like zionists, get out".

"oh, it's some special mass and you can't work your shift?

you're fired!"..

DJS

The religious freedom law says the government cannot intrude on a person's religious liberty unless it can prove a compelling interest in imposing that burden and do so in the least restrictive way. This law simply was not necessary. The US Constitution already does that admirably. The state law can trump local non-discrimination laws, and sooner or later - likely sooner - some florist shop or for profit wedding chapel will refuse service to gays and lesbians for religious reasons.

There will almost certainly be a state legal case to determine if the action is covered under the new law. Then there will be an appeal, regardless of the ruling - either from the religious or those they discriminated against - to the SCOTUS if necessary, which is where the state law will almost certainly be ruled unconstitutional. Legal eagles amongst us, please weigh in with your insight.

As I stated, this is a political move by a right wing fundie GOP politician trying to set himself up for a national office run in the near future. This stuff disgusts me. Lawyers in love.

274

Indiana "Religious Freedom" (right to discriminate)

by Simon in

sickening to see the photo of the religious zealots all stood around the governor signing into law the right for people to discriminate against others (gay, lesbian, trans-gender) based purely on religious dogma.. if religious people want those freedoms then the can't have it both ways - they cannot complain if *they* are discriminated against.. "sorry, we don't like zionists, get out".

"oh, it's some special mass and you can't work your shift?

you're fired!"..

DJS

Simon,

It made me want to hurl. This is a political move by a dumbass (can I use that for this guy, p-p-p--pleeeeze Simon?) hoping to maneuver his GOP future for national elections.

I hope he chokes on it. The reverberations have just begun. This idiot hopefully will get exactly what he deserves.

17

What would happen if all or most of the Governing Body died in some kind of accident?

by Esse quam videri in

with the organization controlled, totally and completely by the governing body, what would the watchtower society do to hold it all together if all or most of the governing body were to die?.

would the legal department step in and issue orders?

would the rest of the gb quickly appoint new members?

DJS

It's called a Continuity of Operations Plan, and most if not all large organizations have them. It is a certainty the Dark Lords have one. They likely have policies that keep all of them from flying or traveling together to mitigate such possibility.

It is also almost a certainty that they have contingency operations locations for the HQ, where the remaining GB members would flee to if there was a GT type attack against them, etc. I've helped develop several Crisis Management and Continuity Plans.

29

I'm bemused - Vladimir Putin as a Christian Warrior - Do Russians see him as a fighter for Jesus?

by fulltimestudent in

i accidentally came across this youtube video, "why the west fears putin.

" curious, i watched it.

you may find it interesting also.

DJS

Not Ukrainians in that several of the weapons' systems being used in the Ukraine by the 'insurgents' where supplied, staffed, trained and operated by Vlad and the Impalers (Soviet military). The Guided missile system that brought down the airliner (and other Ukrainian planes) is rarely if ever simply provided by entities like Russian and the US without providing trainers, operators and maintenance for a protracted period of time.

Vlad may have sent in Ukrainian born/bred military experts, but these individuals were Russian soldiers. That's what I meant by 'not Ukrainian."

This is the same reason the US balks at providing the types of weapons' systems the Ukraine wants in fighting Russia. These are complex 'systems' - not an individual point and shoot weapon - that require a lot of sophisticated stuff to make them happen, such as software, hardware, training, support, maintenance, etc. Vlad didn't simply give these things to the Ukrainian insurgents or natives to play with. The US has very good intel as to who staffed and operated these weapons' systems. It is almost a certainty that the US has fixed satellites and other intel gathering systems, including HUMINT, along these borders for the foreseeable future. Vlad can't likely go to the potty without Obama knowing about it.

Orphan Crow - I don't mean to be mean but your question is a 30 second google search.

http://www.thenational.ae/thenationalconversation/comment/a-crisis-of-credibility-for-overconfident-old-guard-in-russia

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/europe/article4028220.ece

http://themoscownews.com/news/20100205/55409476.html

All of these sites, and there are many like them, refer to "Old Guard' in the same manner - they are the older generation who came up through the military, society and especially the KGB/Communist Politburo/Political organizations in the same manner as Vlad, who as I have pointed out is KGB trained and bred. Typically they pine to be back in the USSR. If you are truly a Russophile, you would have known this.