KY senate passes bill allowing discrimination against interracial couples

[Underseer]

http://winningdemocrats.com/kentuck...g-discrimination-against-interracial-couples/

Hoo boy.

If this bill gets signed, then it will be legal to refuse services to interracial married couples. As someone from a very multiracial family, I don't think I have to tell you how I feel about this, but as you can imagine it involves a lot of language that should not be used around children.

Necessary disclaimer for conservatives and libertarians (who are completely different, honest): I know that you are offended because I think there is something racist about this. I don't care how offended you are. This is racist as fuck.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

This is another example of a "religious rights" bill that gives carte blanche to Christian business owners to discriminate any way they want for any reason they want. Don't like gays, interracial couples, Moslems,? No problem! Discriminate away!

"And then with the tears streaming down their lousy fink faces the do-rights leap up as one man and bellow out the Star Spangled
Banner. "
- William S. Burroughs

 

[fromderinside]

This is another example of a "religious rights" bill that gives carte blanche to Christian business owners to discriminate any way they want for any reason they want. Don't like gays, interracial couples, Moslems,? No problem! Discriminate away!

"And then with the tears streaming down their lousy fink faces the do-rights leap up as one man and bellow out the Star Spangled
Banner. "
- William S. Burroughs

Wow! Conservatives are enacting Christian Sharia law. ISIS wins in the south. Natch.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I liked this from the comments:

... 60% of the voters in Ky. couldn't tell you how many branches of Govt. we have and 40% couldn't name them ? They can grow tobacco, dig coal, clean a gun, but they are at the bottom in spelling, adding, and naming the food groups ? If you live in the Baptist belt you can go get a check-up at the dentist ! If you live in Appalacia, you can't spell Dentist ! Don't put the blame anywhere except where it belongs ...

And it's accurate, not because it applies to Kentucky or Tennessee or any place, but because people who are stupid will behave expectedly.

 

[Derec]

A very misleading headline, but then what else is new.

 

[laughing dog]

A very misleading headline, but then what else is new.

How is it misleading?

 

[krypton iodine sulfur]

...unless a court finds that the complaining person or the government proved by clear and convincing evidence that a compelling governmental interest in infringing upon the act or refusal to act existed and the least restrictive means was used.

.

Would the courts not ultimately consider prohibiting discrimination a compelling state interest?

 

[southernhybrid]

I don't think this will pass and even if it did, it would be easily challenged and overturned by the courts. It's very common in southern states for looney bills to be brought up for a vote when the originator of the bill likely knows it has no chance of becoming law. And, if Kentucky has anywhere near the number of mixed race couples as we do in Georgia, it's laughable that some idiot would even bring up such a bill. Businesses would be leaving the state in large numbers, if such a bill was ever made law.

I will admit that a lot of southern states have some crazy loons in state level government. Perhaps all states do. I've just been in the south for many decades so that's what I'm most familiar with when it comes to politics.

 

[Rhea]

I don't think this will pass and even if it did, it would be easily challenged and overturned by the courts. It's very common in southern states for looney bills to be brought up for a vote when the originator of the bill likely knows it has no chance of becoming law. And, if Kentucky has anywhere near the number of mixed race couples as we do in Georgia, it's laughable that some idiot would even bring up such a bill. Businesses would be leaving the state in large numbers, if such a bill was ever made law.

I will admit that a lot of southern states have some crazy loons in state level government. Perhaps all states do. I've just been in the south for many decades so that's what I'm most familiar with when it comes to politics.

I hope this gets derided enough to maybe shut down the next batch of loons for a while. It needs to not _just_ get defeated, it needs to get shredded.

 

[Jarhyn]

And so now the new smokescreen for animalistic tribalism is 'religion', we should be allowed to be tribal and xenophobic and be allowed to fight in the mud (and drag everyone else down into the mud fighting too) because... Why exactly? Religion doesn't explain it. You can have religion and not be an asshole.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

A very misleading headline, but then what else is new.

How is it misleading?

I think Derec means because the Republicans failed using Appointments of Democrats to create seats they thought they would win in Special Elections, the Democrats were still in charge of the House and it would be unlikely that this bill would pass there and become law after the asshole Governor signed the bill.

I could be wrong though.

 

[funinspace]

FWIW Underseer, I also find this racist as fuck, especially as a libertarian leaning person. As the religious Taliban has let loose its fury in the US over the gay marriage ruling last year, they seem to have let many of their racist dogs come out of the wood shed.

 

[Derec]

A very misleading headline, but then what else is new.

How is it misleading?

Because it is a broad "religious freedom" bill, inspired by gay marriage. The headline makes it out to be all about interracial marriage, which it is not.

These "religious freedom" bills are bad enough without engaging in misleading reporting.

 

[Keith&Co.]

How is it misleading?

Because it is a broad "religious freedom" bill, inspired by gay marriage. The headline makes it out to be all about interracial marriage, which it is not.

These "religious freedom" bills are bad enough without engaging in misleading reporting.

From your understanding of the 'broad religious freedom' legislation, COULD it be used to discriminate against interracial couples because of, say, Matthew 25:32?

 

[laughing dog]

How is it misleading?

Because it is a broad "religious freedom" bill, inspired by gay marriage. The headline makes it out to be all about interracial marriage, which it is not.

These "religious freedom" bills are bad enough without engaging in misleading reporting.

No, the headline points out an implication of this religious freedom bill - it would permit discrimination against gay couples and interracial couples.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Because it is a broad "religious freedom" bill, inspired by gay marriage. The headline makes it out to be all about interracial marriage, which it is not.

These "religious freedom" bills are bad enough without engaging in misleading reporting.

No, the headline points out an implication of this religious freedom bill - it would permit discrimination against gay couples and interracial couples.

BS Politics Filter #1 - If the term "freedom" is in the title of a bill, it likely is about curbing freedoms, not expanding them. Much like how anti-abortion laws are not about protecting the health of women, these "freedom" bills are about removing limitations put forth on people against the right to discriminate.

• Can bill pass Federal muster? No. Say you are for the States to decide.
• Can bill pass State muster? No. Say you want to pass a "Freedom" bill and let the people decide.

 

[Malintent]

How is it misleading?

Because it is a broad "religious freedom" bill, inspired by gay marriage. The headline makes it out to be all about interracial marriage, which it is not.

These "religious freedom" bills are bad enough without engaging in misleading reporting.

.. ok, that.. and that the bill wasn't passed.. so, like, the complete opposite of what the OP says.

 

[TSwizzle]

A very misleading headline, but then what else is new.

Describing the headline as misleading is an understatement.