Make anti-LGBT businesses publicly post their policy.

[MrFun]

I can't help you there. Mr Fun can't even explain the cause of his hysteria in a clear and cogent manner.

I can explain the legitimate anger with Indiana's anti-LGBT - um, excuse me - "religious liberty" bill.

People are angry, because they know that these so-called "religious liberty" bills are really just a ruse to legislate bigoted, discriminatory anti-LGBT laws.

The Republicans in the various states who are passing these so-called "religious liberty" bills would like to think we are dumb, and that we're unable to call a spade, a spade.

[MrFun]

At the signing of Indiana's "religious liberty" bill, Governor Pence had invited several prominent Republican supporters of this bill, who are all well known for their anti-LGBT bigotry.

In addition, those supporters, and the governor himself, have in the past, stated as much, saying that this "religious liberty" bill was necessary in light of equal marriage rights for LGBT people.

[DinoDoc]

In addition, those supporters, and the governor himself, have in the past, stated as much, saying that this "religious liberty" bill was necessary in light of equal marriage rights for LGBT people.

Then what's the magic formula to legally discriminate against gays that has thus far eluded every other state? Because as far as I can see the law as passed in Indiana ain't it.

[regexcellent]

I am and always have been in favor of people being allowed to associate or not associate with whomever for whatever for whatever reasons they choose including in business transactions so meh.

[Aeson]

I doubt you really mean "whomever" or "whatever". Surely you can think of a type of association or business transaction you would feel shouldn't be allowed.

(I'm going to guess your actual threshold is somewhere between a sign that says "No N***** or F*** Allowed" on a flashing neon sign and a pimp proselyting outside a grade school to sign up new 10yo hookers.)

[DaShi]

I am and always have been in favor of people being allowed to associate or not associate with whomever for whatever for whatever reasons they choose including in business transactions so meh.

Even...communists?!

[Kidlicious]

I can explain the legitimate anger with Indiana's anti-LGBT - um, excuse me - "religious liberty" bill.

People are angry, because they know that these so-called "religious liberty" bills are really just a ruse to legislate bigoted, discriminatory anti-LGBT laws.

The Republicans in the various states who are passing these so-called "religious liberty" bills would like to think we are dumb, and that we're unable to call a spade, a spade.

They don't care what you think because you're a liberal.

[Kidlicious]

http://www.inquisitr.com/1976056/religious-freedom-law/

So much for that. You can't practice your religion if it embarrasses people. Have a nice day Fun.

[MrFun]

I am and always have been in favor of people being allowed to associate or not associate with whomever for whatever for whatever reasons they choose including in business transactions so meh.

It's too bad then, that business owners cannot racially segregate their places of business, or to be allowed to post a sign that says, "no blacks served here." They are being denied their freedom to associate.

[MrFun]

Then what's the magic formula to legally discriminate against gays that has thus far eluded every other state? Because as far as I can see the law as passed in Indiana ain't it.

The magic formula is to draft bills to discriminate against LGBT people using nice, sanitized words like, "religious liberty," instead of using words, like, "we hate ******s."

A bill or a law does not have to explicitly mention the minority group it wants to target, in order for it be discriminatory or bigot-motivated.

Look at the laws on voting restrictions in late nineteenth century up to the twentieth century Civil Rights Movement, for example. Such laws requiring literacy, ability to pay poll taxes, and so forth, did not explicitly mention blacks in their wording, but the intent/purpose was clearly to find ways to disfranchise black people.

[Kidlicious]

It's too bad then, that business owners cannot racially segregate their places of business, or to be allowed to post a sign that says, "no blacks served here." They are being denied their freedom to associate.

You aren't black.

[Pedotard]

What would the gay rights movement look like if slavery had never happened?

[rah]

You aren't black.

Do you have to be black to desire equality for blacks?

[Kidlicious]

Do you have to be black to desire equality for blacks?

????

This has nothing to do with equality.

[rah]

Most people consider discrimination and equality issue. But then you're not most people.