Understanding SB1062: 8 things you need to know about Arizona's controversial bill

[mota bhai 2,675]

PHOENIX - A controversial bill passed by the Arizona Legislature has sparked conversation and debate across the nation.

What does the new bill change?

Senate Bill 1062 re-defines and expands the state's definition of "exercise of religion" and "state action" to protect businesses, corporations and people from lawsuits after denying services based on a sincere religious belief.

According to the bill, "A person whose religious exercise is burdened in violation of this section may assert that violation as a claim or a defense in a judicial proceeding, regardless of whether the government is a party to the proceeding."

The bill also establishes a set of needed guidelines for when this potential defense could be used in court:

- The person's action or refusal to act is motivated by a religious belief

- The person's religious belief is sincerely held

- The state action substantially burdens the exercise of the person's religious beliefs

The bill defines a "person" as "any individual, association, partnership, corporation, church, religious assembly or institution or other business organization."

Opponents of the bill fear that the legislation would lead to businesses discriminating against people, such as those in same-sex unions, based solely on the owner's religious beliefs.

Cathi Herrod, President of the Center for Arizona Policy, an organization that supports the passing of the bill, says the bill "protects the religious freedom of every Arizonan."

In a statement released Saturday, Feb. 22, Herrod said, "It's a shame that we even need a bill like this in America. But growing hostility against freedom in our nation, and the increasing use of government to threaten and punish its own citizens, has made it necessary."

...

The Arizona State Legislature approved passage of SB1062 on Thursday, Feb. 20. Governor Jan Brewer now has five days to either sign the legislation into law or veto it.

...

"I think anybody that owns a business can choose who they work with or who they don't work with," Brewer told CNN in Washington on Friday. "But I don't know that it needs to be statutory. In my life and in my businesses, if I don't want to do business or if I don't want to deal with a particular company or person or whatever, I'm not interested. That's America. That's freedom."

http://www.abc15.com/news/state/understanding-sb-1062-7-things-you-need-to-know-about-arizonas-controversial-bill

Edited February 24, 2014 by mota bhai

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

It's bigotry, pure and simple.

[mota bhai 2,675]

It's bigotry, pure and simple.

Isn't it also bigotry to tell people of faith that they must be accepting of lifestyles they consider sinful?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Isn't it also bigotry to tell people of faith that they must be accepting of lifestyles they consider sinful?

Who is telling anyone that they must do so?

[mota bhai 2,675]

Who is telling anyone that they must do so?

If my religion forbids me from engaging in commerce with sinful people, then how is it not a violation of my religious freedoms to compel me to do so?

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

Isn't it also bigotry to tell people of faith that they must be accepting of lifestyles they consider sinful?

How are they accepting anything? It's a service. You pay your money, get your food, clothing, etc, then leave. If you have an issue with Gay people, then say you don't want to serve them. Don't hide behind your religion because you're a bigot and lack the courage to say so. But when you lose other customers who don't share your views, own it.

[mota bhai 2,675]

If you have an issue with Gay people, then say you don't want to serve them. Don't hide behind your religion because you're a bigot ...

You are making a very offensive assumption about people of faith. I would be careful about doing so, this is a family and faith friendly site.

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

If my religion forbids me from engaging in commerce with sinful people, then how is it not a violation of my religious freedoms to compel me to do so?

News flash, everyone sins.

[mota bhai 2,675]

News flash, everyone sins.

Sure, but when you flaunt your sin and take pride in it, we've hit a new level of moral decay. The West is rapidly turning into the most hostile to family values part of this world.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Live show? For free? Why not!

Edited February 24, 2014 by The Postmaster

[mota bhai 2,675]

That's disgusting. Please edit your post to remove the sexual reference, I do not wish to see this thread locked.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

That's disgusting. Please edit your post to remove the sexual reference, I do not wish to see this thread locked.

Okay.

Better?

[mota bhai 2,675]

I would remove the reference to indecent exposure, too. It's kind of indecent.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

It's bigotry, pure and simple.

Yes it is no doubt. However is it the Govt's place to tell you who you can and can not serve.

If you want to open a coffe shop that serves only black sailors, as distasteful as I may find it, I am not sure it should not be your right

Like I said it's sticky slope. Not sure the right answer. Deprive one persons rights to ensure anothers.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

It's bigotry, pure and simple.

Yes it is no doubt. However is it the Govt's place to tell you who you can and can not serve.

If you want to open a coffe shop that serves only black sailors, as distasteful as I may find it, I am not sure it should not be your right

Like I said it's sticky slope. Not sure the right answer. Deprive one persons rights to ensure anothers.