Replies

“The Governor of Indiana supports a bill that will give business owners the freedom to turn away LGBT customers.”

The question’s premise is a lie.

Anyone, even celibates would be turned away for trying to buy the product used as an example. No one would be turned away for buying another product, one that the business offered.

Similarly, a customer looking to buy pork at a kosher or halal butcher shop would be turned away, but not of they were buying a meat product the shop offers.

Is that violating the Civil Rights of pork eaters?

RE :”The Governor of Indiana supports a bill that will give business owners the freedom to turn away LGBT customers.”

Well its got legs because Pence was asked 3X by George Stephanopolus on ABC Sunday if it does allows a flowerist to discriminate against gay couples, and he refused to answer,\

He must think it does,

Next Job for you Governor is to end the HIGH Crime rates in your home town of Indianapolis and Gary as a start.

It’s OK to kill people in Indianapolis but it’s not OK for some to keep CAKE from Queers?

IMHO, the big reason that "gay marriage" proponents have been as successful as they have been is that they have baited many conservatives into treating marriage as a "religious issue", thus allowing leftists to paint those who don't acknowledge it as "foisting their religion on others". The proper rebuttal would be to suggest that any two (or more) individuals who want to consider themselves "married" are free to do so, but that does obligate anyone else to recognize them as such. It is common for people, including business owners, to voluntarily extend certain benefits and privileges to some people that they do not wish to extend to others. In a free country, such behavior is their right as individuals.

To declare by fiat that X is required to provide a service to Y which X has not voluntarily agreed to provide and does not wish to, is to make X a slave of either Y or the entity that is mandating such service. The issue isn't merely one of religion. It's about whether people should be compelled to serve others against their will.