I think Gov Jan Brewer fell for the Willard is a Conservative and qualified leader of the TEA Party and Conservatives sham..
Since Willard was for the veto it had to be kosher errr cool...
I mean Willard wouldn’t steer her wrong would he ???
As indicated in related threads, civil rights in our constitutional republic are established by the states amending the Constitution to expressly protect specific rights. This is evidenced by the Bill of Rights. And the states have not amended the Constitution to protect so-called gay rights.
The bottom line is that gay activists, in cahoots with the corrupt media, are taking advantage of the fact that parents have not been making sure that their children are being taught how our constitutional rights work. Consequently, citizens don't understand that civil rights not based on constitutionally enumerated rights, corrupt politicians supporting such rights to win votes, activist judges also wrongly legislating such rights from the bench, are constitutionally indefensible.
So the ability to sue to have a judge compel someone else to provide a service to you against that person's will and in violation of that person's religious belief is now included in the definition of civil rights?
n one side are Arizona residents seeking to live their lives in accord with traditional moral positions embraced in the Bible’s Old Testament – positions that condemn homosexuality
Stopped right there. The Old & New Testament condemns homosexuality.
Brewer = COWARD.
I think the Law while good intentioned concerning religious freedom and government overreach it was just plainly worded wrong. Here is a few things i would have changed.
1. Remove the word Religion - Religion is a hotword that causes all the MSM and weak spined RINO-crats to get all worked up in a tizzy dizzy. (I hate doing it, but it removes whole invalid as it may be sepration of church and state weasel words the libs like to use to get bills killed intheir tilted courts.)
2. Replace the word “Business” with “Artisan”
3. Rename the bill to “Artistic Expression Protection Act”
4. Re-word the bill to emphasize “Commissioned Work or individualized Consumer Products” are a product of an Artist and you cannot legally compel an Artist under force of law to produce something using their own artistic talent that is against their own personal beliefs or customs or if they are are uncomfortable with the subject matter.
5. Make sure the Bill also defines that any occupation involving an artistic services like Photography, Disc Jockey, Gourmet Catering, Entertainment, or Cultural Ceremonies are also covered by the “Artistan Rights” as well.
This would be how you write a bill that could easily pass even in a blue state that would prevent the bullying abuse that we see when a caterer or photographer is bullied by a group that wishes to make a point by bullying.
It is not just about Religion, but about protecting the occupation of an artist as well as their artistic expression.
I ask you, how would a conservative feel if they were forced to cater a luncheon for a bunch of commies against their will? How would a Stanist Sculptor feel about beign forced to sculpt a sculpture or Jesus (not that I actually give a damn).
This would protect Poltical groups as well as Religious groups as well.
I am just wondering what happened to the “reserve the right to refuse service to anyone” that so many businesses used to do. I think if a business does not want to make cakes for a gay wedding, that should be their choice. If gays and those that support them wish to boycott a business that won’t make a wedding cake for a gay couple that should be fine too. What I do have a problem with is a lawsuit for not baking a cake for a gay wedding...or some government entity saying they must...