Posted on 02/26/2014 6:25:31 AM PST by SeekAndFind
All signs indicate Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer will likely veto politically-charged legislation that supporters say promotes religious freedom and opponents contend discriminates against gays and lesbians.
Brewer did not signal her intention either way in an exclusive interview with CNN on Monday at the National Governors Association meeting in Washington.
"I can assure you, as always, I will do the right thing for the state of Arizona," she said.
But some Arizona Republicans who know her well say they are confident those comments mean Brewer will almost surely reject the bill that is generating nationwide controversy.
The Republican-led measure would allow Arizona business owners to deny service to gay and lesbian customers as long as they assert their religious beliefs.
Brewer is scheduled to return to Arizona on Tuesday, and a source tells CNN those familiar with her thinking say she will likely spend at least one full business day in the state before acting.
"I'm going to go home, and when I receive the bill, I'm going to read it and I'm going to be briefed on it. We have been following it. And I will make my decision in the near future," Brewer told CNN.
She has until Saturday to sign or veto the bill. If she does nothing, it automatically becomes law.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
wth? you are wrong.
you want government to force a private business(like a doctor) to give service to some one? that’s socialism/totalitarianism . a private business is like your home as it is your property (just as this site is) . you have a right to not let anyone into your home even if you advertise for a garage sale. you can kick out anyone out of your home . what you are advocating is empowering government to take over our individual rights . you trust government to make the right decision over a private business owner.
the key battle is between individual rights(right to ownership) and between the growth of government power. if you empower government in any are you lessen our rights and freedom and weaken the right to ownership.
I agree but the press is totally ginning this up, nationally.
I say he might want to take a stand.
Maybe not however. We shall see... he seems to be quite on the ball about what to speak up about, so I leave it up to him to decide.
We’ve allowed a loud vocal minority to completely frame the debate. Repubs can’t talk and explain anything so they cave. Would any rational person have an issue with businesses being able to do business with whom they choose regardless of what it is they oppose?
Republicans are so scared of their own shadow, they can’t function. Brewer is gonna hang the conservatives out to dry because she cannot communicate.
Call their bluff, sign the bill, explain the fact that is has to do with business being free to conduct business with whomever they choose and let the chips fall. Boycott your ass off folks.
I agree with your point about giving the Dems and issue, but I’d like to see the Repubs fight something for once. If we are going to flush down the toilet, we may as well go down swimming. The Dems are operating from a house of cards. The vast majority of their positions are MINORITY positions. Take a stand and see if these threats actually happen. The low information voter door can swing both ways. Even the stupidest person on earth can see something wrong with forcing a businessperson to make a cake when they don’t want to. Why can’t the homos see the business opportunity and open a Homo Cake Shop? It’s not about cake. They are subverting freedom.
> Muslim Doctor refuses to give emergency treatment to Christian.
Whaddya mean? Moslem taxi drivers and store clerks can already refuse to serve people who buy alcohol or who have seeing-eye dogs.
The only people being CRUCIFIED Gaystapo lawsuits are CHRISTIANS.
I’d love to see one of those fairies go into a Moslem bake shop and ask them to make a fairy wedding cake, or, better yet, to ask a Moslem photographer to “shoot” their fairy wedding.
If someone is going to not sign a law that has LONG TERM ramifications for religious freedom simply because she wants football games to be played in her state, I say she is very short sighted indeed.
One signs or veto’s a law based on whether it is good or bad law, not because of fear of the NFL...
Who gave these clowns the idesa that THEY own the country anyway!
> Which makes me wonder... are there such things in America?
Dearbornistan has lots of them.
I’m sure you can find them in other Moslem enclaves throughout the country, and, as they become more “mainstream”, even on Main St. America.
Yeah don’t look for trouble there. Sometime in the future it will look like s day at Utah beach for him. Don’t rush it
What isn't debatable is the Constitution gives the federal government NO AUTHORITY to interfere with an individual or a business in their freedom of choice.
I think I see your point. As society devolves, and words are redefined, the meaning and application of this legislation will change, and likely become malicious. Isn’t that true of all legislation?
Hilarious. Lets just take gay and lesion groups at their word without question, and not bother to actually read the bill to see if it truly is what those groups say.
Today's US media is a tragic farce.
come on Jan!!! don’t bend over for them!!!!!!
I’m shocked these two would have the same position as Obama. Shocked. Wonder what Lindsey Graham thinks. Someone should ask hm if he’ll boycott AZ if she doesn’t veto it.
RE: come on Jan!!! don’t bend over for them!!!!!!
Like talking to a brick wall...
Great graphic!
If this bill is “Legally Flawed”,she should veto it;if(on the other hand)she is yielding to”Extortion”by The NFL???
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.