"The line 'Make America great again' -- the phrase, that was mine. I came up with it about a year ago, and I kept using it. And everybody's now using it. They are all loving it. I don't know, I guess I should copyright it. Maybe I have copyrighted it." -- Donald Trump "Let's Make America Great Again." -- 1980 Reagan-Bush campaign slogan
And let's not forget A California lawyer wants a ballot initiative to require the execution of gay people
It can't be long before we see a case in the Indiana Supreme Court in which a heterosexual plaintiff claims his rights were infringed because a baker, believing the plaintiff a queen ordering a birthday cake for his boyfriend, denied the plaintiff service. How will the plaintiff prove his heterosexuality? And what claim will the defendant make as the basis for his determination that the plaintiff was gay: "When a Britney Spears song came on the radio, Plaintiff rolled his eyes and muttered, 'Leave… Britney... ALONE!'" Or if the discrimination wasn't based on being gay, imagine the baker saying, "Well, he LOOKS Jewish, and the Jews murdered Jesus, so… " How would the Indiana Supremes sort that one out? --John Moyers
. . . two of the twenty anti-gay proposals are constitutional amendments that would basically put Texas’s RFRA on steroids. Most RFRAs have the same formula: government may not “substantially burden” religious exercise without a compelling state interest. But Texas SJR 10 and HJR 55 would remove “substantially.” Unlike a lot of legalese, that word can move mountains. If any burden on free exercise, no matter how slight, is forbidden, then it’s easy for any litigant to claim a de minimis burden and prevail in court. As someone who keeps kosher, for example, it definitely burdens my exercise of religion not to have kosher food at the Alamo. Not a substantial burden, but a burden nonetheless. Bring on the Hebrew National! Or, to take an example from the RFRA fight in Georgia, suppose my reading of the New Testament tells me I should be able to beat my spouse and child. If all I need to show is any burden, should surely get an accommodation from Texas. Do I even need to mention Sharia Law here? Another delicious irony: Texas’s conservatives hate gays so much, they’re willing to help Muslim fundamentalists. --Jay Michaelson
I live in Indiana and absolutely disagree with this idiotic new law. However, it should come as no surprise when you continue to call people stupid just for having a belief in God, then you shouldn't be surprised when they stick a thumb in your eye given the chance. This is nothing more than a fuck you to the radical left. The goofy law has zero chance of standing up to an appeal, but no one deserves a go fuck yourself more than radical lefties.
Looks like a long list of democratic homophobes are about to get their hypocritical dicks stepped on. http://time.com/3762708/indiana-gay-religious-pence-clinton/