After veto in Arizona, conservatives vow to fight for religious liberties

[cbayer]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/after-veto-in-arizona-conservatives-vow-to-fight-for-religious-liberties/2014/02/27/4e0f877a-9fcb-11e3-b8d8-94577ff66b28_story.html


Ross D. Franklin/AP - Arizona Republican Gov. Jan Brewer, right, vetoed legislation on Wednesday that would have allowed businesses to refuse service to gays and lesbians.

By Juliet Eilperin, Published: February 27

Conservative activists said Thursday that they will continue to press for additional legal protections for private businesses that deny service to gay men and lesbians, saying that a defeat in Arizona this week is only a minor setback and that religious-liberty legislation is the best way to stave off a rapid shift in favor of gay rights.

Gov. Jan Brewer (R) vetoed legislation on Wednesday that would have provided a wide variety of religious exemptions to Arizona businesses, after major business groups, prominent Republicans and gay rights advocates argued that it would amount to discrimination.

Many conservatives said they will continue working to convince voters and judges that opponents of same-sex marriage and abortion are motivated by faith rather than bigotry.

“The fight has to be over what the First Amendment is,” said John C. Eastman, chairman of the National Organization for Marriage, adding that his side needs to convince the public that conservatives are not trying to deny the rights of other Americans. “This is not somebody adhering to old Jim Crow lunch-counter discrimination. This is a fundamental dispute about what marriage means, and why it’s important for society.”

more at link

[atreides1]

1. Perhaps...

...these laws could be written in a more narrow aspect!

The private business claiming a "sincere religious belief" would be required to follow the actual tenets of their religion, and be required to provide proof that it had been doing so, for a period of 1 year...and no waivers for any reason!

Realistically, most of those businesses wouldn't be around after 1 year!

[rickford66]

6. Yes. They shouldn't be allowed to pick and choose their tenets.

Hobby Lobby probably picks and chooses also. They need to be held to their own religious standards.

[callous taoboy]

2. Yes, please continue to advance toward political extinction.

[cbayer]

3. I agree. I think they are pushing more and more people away.

And that's just fine with me.

[longship]

4. Please proceed, bigots. nt

[skepticscott]

5. Opponents of same-sex marriage ARE motivated by faith

Their faith just happens to be bigoted, and undeserving of any "tolerance" by appeasers and accomodationists, not to mention undeserving of any voice in public policy debates.

[pinto]

7. I love the push back from a broader range of groups on this.

Including corporate objections. For them it's a matter of including as many people in their businesses as employees and customers. I'm fine with that. Other factors aside, I welcome them to the table.

Equality in the larger sense holds sway, imo. And we are all recognizing that. I'm loving the judicial decisions in these legislative runs on the Constitution. The 1st Amendment doesn't address a "fundamental dispute about what marriage means", part of it sets out the separation of church and state. And free speech has nothing to do with some assumed fundamental dispute about marriage.

Overlooked in the last ditch effort is - the law wasn't held unconstitutional on 1st Amendment grounds. Judges cited the 14th, Equal Protection Clause. LOL.

The Equal Protection Clause requires each state to provide equal protection under the law to all people within its jurisdiction. This clause was the basis for Brown v. Board of Education (1954), the Supreme Court decision that precipitated the dismantling of racial segregation, and for many other decisions rejecting irrational or unnecessary discrimination against people belonging to various groups.

[okasha]

8. Me, too.

There's nothing quite like an economic threat to bring politicians to their senses. We LGBT's represent a formidable amount of buying power, and we're discovering we can use that to our advantage.

[cbayer]

13. There's also a voting bloc comprised of GLBT people and allies.

I think Brewer's decision was entirely politically motivated and she sees where this is going.

Still despise her, but really glad she vetoed.

[cbayer]

12. Agree. The push back was rapid, deep and wide, including

from some major religious organizations.

I think this country has embraced GLBT civil rights at this point. While there are still holdouts, and there probably always will be, IMO the tide has turned and things like this are just not acceptable.

[muriel_volestrangler]

9. That include the Catholic Arizona dioceses, if anyone's wondering

2/21/14:

If signed into law, SB 1062 will provide an important update to Arizona’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act to make sure that the religious liberties of Arizonans are better protected. Please be sure to go to www.azcatholicconference.org and use our “Action Alert” to politely ask Governor Brewer to continue her support of religious liberty by signing SB1062 into law.

http://www.azcatholicconference.org/?p=804

2/27/14:

On Wednesday, legislation relating to religious liberty (SB 1062) was vetoed following a week of extremely intense, if not misleading, rhetoric.

Religious liberty is an important concept upon which our country was founded. In Arizona, we also have a proud tradition of supporting religious liberty dating all the way back to statehood. Unfortunately, however, threats to religious liberty have become very real in courts across the country and are seemingly on the rise all around the world.

The Arizona Catholic Conference (ACC) is strongly in support of religious liberty and we are most grateful to those who have been willing to defend this fundamental principle. We also want to be clear that our support of religious liberty is consistent with our support for the human dignity of all people and does not diminish our opposition to all forms of unjust discrimination.

http://www.azcatholicconference.org/?p=806

[edhopper]

10. Truly disgusting

Why Gay people still belong is beyond me.

[cbayer]

11. Have you ever asked any of them?

[edhopper]

14. Yes.

on this Forum.
They still believe and have faith, no matter how much the Vatican shits all over them.
I guess being treated like garbage doesn't matter when your soul is at stake.

[cbayer]

15. You have asked glbt catholics on this site why they remain with the church

and they tell you it's simply belief and faith and they don't mind being treated like garbage?

Really?

You must take them for fools, or you didn't really hear what they had to say about it.

I know quite a few GLBT people in the church and their answer to that question are generally complex and unique.

But the one you propose is so simplistic and generalized. I wonder why that is.

In the past, you have started threads asking these kinds of question and often gotten some very interesting responses. In fact, I think you have often gotten responses that you did not expect at all.

[edhopper]

16. They didn't say the don't mind being treated like garbage

I said I guess they don't mind. My editorial comment.

Why do you think they don't leave a Church that treats them like shit?

[cbayer]

17. I think you really need to ask them.

I don't leave the democratic party even though there are some things in the platform I disagree with.

I have been a member of other groups where I had significant differences in some areas, but felt it was best to try and change things from inside and that the benefits of being a member outweighed the negatives.

The catholic church is much more than just it's position on some issues. Some people have found those differences to be so great that they can not be a part of it. Others have not.

And in many instances, they haven't been treated like shit at all, but been embraced and affirmed, despite a specific policy.

When you attempt to distill something as complex as the RCC down to a few points, I can see why you might reach the conclusions you do.

But I really think you need to ask some GLBT catholics, that is if you really want to know.

[edhopper]

18. And it all really comes down to

faith and belief.

You mention the Democrats, but do you think Gay people should have a problem being a member of the Republicans, who fight to deny them of rights?

[cbayer]

20. I think that's an assumption on your part.

I think it has to do with a lot more than faith and belief, though those are important aspects to many.

I have also talked to many GLBT people who have voted republican, even have some log cabin friends. Like those who are members of the RCC, their reasons are complex and unique. I may not agree with them, but I have some understanding of where they are coming from.

Who am I to decide who should and should not have a problem being a member of a specific group? That seems very judgmental to me.

[edhopper]

21. God forbid

we ever think anybody is wrong about anything?

It's not an assumption, it's my analysis after hearing their rationalizations.

So you want to be tolerant of beliefs that actually harm people after all? Or do you not think the RCC and the GOP are out to harm the GLBT community?

There were black people in the South who tracked down runaway slaves and supported the slave institution. If their reasons were nuanced enough, would you also be understanding of them as well?

[cbayer]

22. Gee, I'm not so sure. The most active catholic, glbt person I know on this site

would give you a much more complicated answer than the one you offer.

Who is it you have discussed this with here?

Where did I say I wanted to be tolerant of beliefs that actually harm people? See, I didn't and once again you just twisted my words.

I said that if an individual chooses to remain a member of an organization that has positions that appear not to be in their best interest, who am I to tell them that they should leave.

I completely reject the anti-GLBT positions of the RCC and GOP and work to defeat them whenever possible. I do not choose to be a member of either organizations.

Judging those organizations and the positions they take is very different than judging an individual who may choose to be a member of that organization for a variety of other reasons (including the belief of some that they have more chance of making changes from within).

[edhopper]

23. So you don't think

we should try to convince people who the Republicans harm, like the poor, middle class, Hispanics. GLBT and others to leave the party and not keep supporting and voting for them. Because their reasons might be "nuanced"?

Who are we to judge, huh?

[cbayer]

24. I've got a suggestion for you.

Stop starting sentences with phrases like "So you don't think" or "you think".

I will advocate for the democratic party, it's platforms and candidates. I will listen to the reasoning of people that remain parts of groups that I think don't share some of those values. I recognize that the catholic church is a highly complex organization that has and does supply support to many poor, middle class, hispanics and glbt persons that may be otherwise completely unavailable to them.

Yes, I think it's nuanced and that I am in no position to judge.

You apparently think you are in the position to judge. But who would be surprised by that, as you also apparently think you can read minds.

[edhopper]

25. you said you won't judge or try to convince people

who support these organizations.
I asked if that includes trying to convince people to not support the GOP?

Still not sure what your answer is.

[cbayer]

26. I am not a recruiter or proselytizer.

I am interested in why people make the choices they do and often learn a lot by asking them. I will advocate my position and my candidates and will give information, particularly if I think the person I am talking to is working from faulty premises.

When done in a way that indicates that I respect their right to make their own decisions, sometimes we even find common ground.

What's your approach? Do you try to convince people not to support the RCC?

[edhopper]

27. I do ask them why they support such an institution

and might point out how it might be counter-productive to their own interest.

But faith and belief often trumps reason.

[cbayer]

28. As long as all you hear is "faith and belief", you are going to remain

in the dark as to all the other reasons that people stay with the RCC.

And the assumption that they are lacking in "reason" is simply arrogance.

Good luck with that.

[edhopper]

29. I tend to think

faith and belief are pretty big reasons why people belong to a Church. In fact i've been told by some it is the main reason they believe in God and belong to a particular Church. Or don't you think belief has a dominating role in Church?
I didn't say they are lacking reason, just that their faith trumps it. Talk about putting words in someones mouth, wow.

[cbayer]

31. Of course faith and belief are important for many people who affiliate themselves with a certain

religion or religious group. But there are many, many other factors at play, which is the part you often seem blind to.

One can have both faith and reason. You apparently rely on reason and some people seem to only rely on faith. But perhaps those that have both hold a perspective that bears further inquiry, as I don't think one trumps the other. It is only those that hold one or the other as valuable that seem to think otherwise.

[skepticscott]

19. Does the Democratic Party believe

as a matter of absolute and unalterable truth, that your very existence, your entire way of life is an anomaly and an aberration? Does it believe that you should not be allowed to live as a full and complete human being? Of course not. Nothing remotely like that. So why you would try to draw such a ridiculous and deeply flawed analogy makes me wonder what your real agenda towards homosexuals is.

[pinto]

30. I'm gay and still self-identify as Catholic.

Like most American Catholics - gay, straight or otherwise - I disagree with the Vatican, don't regularly attend mass, choose to support targeted social programs, don't hold to many of the tenets of the Catholic Church (with a capital C).

A lot of my identity as a Catholic is cultural, ethnic and historical. Grew up in Massachusetts, Irish family, overwhelmingly Catholic state at that time. Still is I guess. The point being, it was part of the framework of my community. My neighbors were Irish, Italian, Syrian, Lebanese. 1st, 2nd or 3rd generation immigrants. All Catholic.
The sea I swam in as did we all. In that sense I'd say it was a positive common bond.

And I like ritual, which is what the mass is. Repetitive ritual. In a way similar to other rituals. A well known time out. Pretty simple, tell the truth. And it's only ~ 45 minutes! A high mass is a different thing. Formal, long, often done in Latin on big religious holidays. Often sung, i.e. the weekly mass is "said" a high mass is "sung".

Those rare times when I do go to mass I usually go with a friend, a regular church goer, Latina. We share mass together, see some friends, go for breakfast. Adamantly refuse the menudo special.

A timely side note - One year I "gave up Catholicism" for Lent. Went around to other churches to see what they did, what the feel was, etc. Didn't really find anything I wanted to join. The lesson - I'm probably not that typically religious after all. But I've no qualms with it. So -

Yes, I say I'm a Catholic when asked. I'm not just gay, I'm not just Catholic, I'm not just an aging white male, I'm not just an AIDS activist, I'm not just a PWA, I'm not just a retired Public Health worker, I'm not just an all around good guy (lol) - I'm just who I am. And that's just enough for me.

[cbayer]

32. Thanks for this wonderful post, my friend.

I was hoping you would chime in.

Your post is full of the nuance and complexity that I have referred to and would very much like edhopper to recognize.

And you are indeed an all around good guy and continue to be an inspiration to me.

[Warren Stupidity]

33. Hmmm, so on your vacation from the homophobic RCC did you manage to visit

the accepting and inclusive Episcopalians?

If so, why on earth would you stick with the RCC?

[pinto]

34. Yeah I went by an Episcopalian church. One I had been invited to years ago to make an address.

Last edited Sun Mar 2, 2014, 07:30 AM - Edit history (1)

A very open group of folks.

They are clearly the biggest supporters in religious communities around here for equality. I know many of the congregation. It's a fairly small city, lol. Live here long enough you know most everyone.

Just didn't choose to join their group.

[edhopper]

35. Thanks for the reply

It sounds like you identify yourself as a Catholic, but are not staying an active part of the Church. More of a cultural identification and a way you frame your beliefs.
I was speaking more of those Gay Catholics who remain active and support the RCC.