Takei Reacts To Arizona Bill
2 min read
Star Trek‘s George Takei is not happy with the new controversial anti-gay bill recently passed in Arizona.
The bill, which would need to be signed into law by Governor Jan Brewer to take effect, would permit business owners to deny service to gays on religious grounds.
“Congratulations,” said Takei. “You are now the first state actually to pass a bill permitting businesses–even those open to the public–to refuse to provide service to LGBT people based on an individual’s ‘“sincerely held religious belief.’ This ‘turn away the gay’ bill enshrines discrimination into the law. Your taxi drivers can refuse to carry us. Your hotels can refuse to house us. And your restaurants can refuse to serve us.”
Takei likened the law to ones in force during the time of Jim Crow. “You say this bill protects ‘religious freedom,’ but no one is fooled,” he said. “When I was younger, people used ‘God’s Will’ as a reason to keep the races separate, too. Make no mistake, this is the new segregation, yours is a Jim Crow law, and you are about to make yourself ground zero.”
If Arizona does indeed make the anti-gay bill law, expect a backlash, says Takei. “If your Governor Jan Brewer signs this repugnant bill into law, make no mistake. We will not come,” he said. “We will not spend. And we will urge everyone we know–from large corporations to small families on vacation–to boycott. Because you don’t deserve our dollars. Not one red cent.”
About The Author
The bill is utterly pointless given that privately owned establishments can refuse the right to serve anyone, with the exception of the requirements of the ADA or another law requiring them to provide service. The caveat is that the owners could be sued if it can be demonstrated that they refused service for discriminatory reasons.
All this bill accomplishes is to allow bigots to openly deny service to groups that their religious beliefs find intolerable. This isn’t just limited to homosexuals by the way. Protestant businesses will be able to openly refuse service to Catholics, Moslem businesses can refuse Hindus, and for everybody in general to refuse Jews; and vis versa. And all it will take is that one little lunatic thrift store run by the Little White Supremacist Sisters of the Aryan Ubermensch to refuse service to blacks and Katie bar the door.
The only apparent function of this bill is as yet another huge middle finger at the civilized world from the crack-addled Arizona legislature. Is it too late to evacuate all the sensible people and razorwire off the entire state as a white-straight-religious bigot enclave and above-ground nuclear test site?
I have to be honest, as a gay man I don’t mind this. I don’t want to shop at some bigots shop, I don’t want to drive in a taxicab with some bigot who sneers at me but still takes my money. I hope they out signs out so I know where to avoid, and go to the many, and majority, of establishments that do welcome my business. If I couldn’t get essential services or government access, that would be an entirely different matter – but if there are two cafés and one is owned by bigots, I’d rather know and go to the other one. Though I think it should extend past this – smoking for example. If someone wants to own a bar and allow smoking, they should be allowed to – just out up a sign so no smokers know where not to go. And if they do go, don’t complain. I never understood this concept of just because you open up a business you need to cater to everyone.
You tell ’em, George!
Why am I not surprised? I’m with AWwriter. As a straight woman, I don’t care to frequent these businesses. Prejudice usually extends across the board. I don’t want to have to slap the crap out of an idiot.
Takei then mailed a thank-you note to Phoenix for helping him to keep his name in the media for another week.
How are actual lawmakers in the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA actually wasting time with the promotion of EVIL like this. There is soooooooo much to look after in North America…… and large groups of people are MOTIVATED to take the time to create laws to give them the right to DENY SERVICE.
This is the country that complains about lack of work and jobs. So there are people running businesses ACTIVELY LOOKING TO TURN AWAY CUSTOMERS??????
WHHHHATTTTTTT THEEEEEE F——————————————
The bill sounds like it was written by people unfamiliar with how World War II turned out.
First, even without this law, private business owners don’t have to cater to everyone. Before this bill was passed they already had the right to refuse service to anyone. What they couldn’t do is state outright that “We don’t serve stinkin’ queers here.” That is what this law allows them to do. And it is not just gays. They can also do this to any other group that they have a sincerely held religious belief about: Moslems, Catholics, Jews, Hindus, men without beards, women with uncovered heads, the list can be extended as far as religious extremism– SINCERE religious extremism– cares to take it.
Second, if they sneer at you, don’t give them your money. I’ve been known to push back what I’m purchasing and walk out. I’ve been known to give managers, owners, and corporate headquarters hell. I’ve been known to tell everyone I know or can reach about places that treat people badly, whether it’s me, Mrs. Kang and myself, or someone else.
Third, don’t wear the pink triangle because someone tells you that you have to. Don’t let them section you off from society. People in this nation fought too long to abolish this sort of nonsense– and too long overseas to bring this sort of evil down.
Honestly, this won’t last any longer than Arizona’s last discriminatory debacle did. That doesn’t mean people should sit back and allow it. Complacency is what lets cancers like this grow.
I think it would be better for business owners to put out signs saying that they are gay-friendly, tolerant, accepting, non-discriminatory. This will let you know where better to spend your time and money, and give bigots the choice of sucking it up or going elsewhere. No extra laws required.
Clearly. As well as still butthurt about that whole civil rights movement thing.
Then walk out, and tell everyone you know. There are plenty of people willing to slap for you.
Well, in this case he is in the right. Perhaps we should lobby the state of Arizona to stop giving George so much air time?
Frankly, I see nothing wrong with the owner of a private business being able to refuse service to anyone they don’t like or refusing service on religious beliefs. It used to be a free country. If I walk into a muslim restaurant and demand a bacon sammich, I expect to be told to hit the road, and I’ll take my money and go buy a bacon sammich someplace else. Frankly, i wouldn’t WANT food from some place that was forced to serve me. And this is all stemming from the case where the two homosexuals got all bent out of shape because the religious owner of a cake shop refused to make a cake for their gay “wedding” because he believes homosexuality is a sin. Like I said, it USED to be a free country. UNtil the radical minority took over.
Tell that to all the Christian cake bakers, dress makers, photographers and whoever else that have been taken to court over this issue. I’m sorry, but why is ok to discriminate against these people?
No, evil is forcing people against their will, which is what the courts are doing to Christian business people.
I’m ashamed of every Star Trek fan here who slams this bill, or the idea behind it anyway. The fact is Christian business people are being forced by judges to work on gay weddings or else. Look, I’m not going to say that it’s right to actually discriminate against gays (although what that actually means is up to interpretation), but it’s also not right to discriminate against Christians. It just feels like with every victory for “gay rights,” it becomes that much easier to discriminate against Christians. I don’t understand how in a country that prides itself on religious freedom, this is acceptable?
Why do you think that private business owners can’t already refuse service to anyone in any grounds?
With the exception of federally protected classes, businesses can refuse service based on peoples’ shoe sizes or fingernail length if they want. This bill is completely unnecessary.
If you want an example of what this bill could do, let’s look at some statements from Arizona state representative Al Melvin, in an interview with Anderson Cooper (I know, I don’t like him either, but there it is):
Pressed… about whether the bill could be used to deny service to
divorcees or unwed mothers on religious grounds, he scoffed.
“I think you’re being farfetched,” he told Cooper. “Who would
discriminate against them? I’ve never heard of discrimination against
people like that. … I don’t know of anybody in Arizona that would
discriminate against a fellow human being.”
Let’s leave aside the implication that he might not consider homosexuals to be “fellow human beings” and consider something more important. The language of the bill is very open. It can be used to justify discrimination against anyone, by saying that you have a deeply held religious belief that such discrimination is right. And this bill is completely unnecessary.
Both of Arizona’s Republican senators, Jeff Flake and John McCain, have this same position. Here’s John McCain speaking about it:
http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/bestoftv/2014/02/25/newday-intv-mccain-arizona-anti-gay-bill.cnn.html
I have to tell you, Christians who believe they need laws to protect freedoms they already have, by restricting the rights of others, are the radical minority. The overwhelming majority of Americans, and most Christians, don’t share that point of view. Most people would rather get along and get on with their lives.
Milo, they don’t need this bill to refuse to serve someone. Under existing law, they can refuse to serve anyone they want. What this bill would have done is grant extra protection, special protection, to Christian business people by protecting them from lawsuits when their refusal is on religious grounds. It’s a moot point. Gov. Brewer has vetoed it and with good reason: It is too broadly worded and can be easily misused.
How is filing a lawsuit against someone discriminating against them?
So how would you feel if the bill had become, and a Hindu business owner used it to justify refusing to serve you?
Stay tuned, the day isn’t far off when some gay couple, somewhere in America, specifically chooses the most homespun-white-bread Grandma-Jones’-Treats-and-Eats small-business-bakery they can find so that they can sue the little-old-lady owner-operator behind the counter into oblivion and make themselves the center of the latest national cause celebre when she refuses to honor their request that she bake a wedding cake in the shape of a giant, veiny erect penis with a small fountain at the center that dribbles cream cheese from the tip.
George Takei will be on the scene immediately to take another “brave” stand for the most fashionable cause on Earth by issuing a press release in the gay couple’s defense that compares Grandma Jones to the illegitimate love-child of Hitler and George Wallace. He’ll have to take time out from recording self-indulgent gay jokes for the next Epix Trek movie marathon (not kidding; I watched part of that) in order to log yet another chapter in his second career as a professional asshat, but he’ll be there. Restaurants in West Hollywood with severe irony deficits will put up We Reserve The Right To Refuse Service to Grandma Jones of Stick County, Nebraska signs.
All so very brave, all so very noble, all will shake each other’s hands and congratulate themselves for making some old white bitch in Flyover with a silver cross pendant around her neck pay for the crime of showing up for work that morning. I’m a fuckin’ agnostic and even I find the smug war against religious conscience disgusting.
You sure are making a lot of assumptions about me there, including the fact you believe I am a sheep wearing a pink triangle (not that it matters, but I normally have to tell someone I am gay before they figure it out unless they see me kissing a guy), but I appreciate the effort LOL. I also have no problem walking out of a store if I feel I’m being mistreated for any reason – though leaping out of a running cab as I used a cab driver as an example probably wouldn’t be so smart haha. I was just stating that it doesn’t really bother me because I wouldn’t want to patronize those establishments, anyway. That’s all. 🙂
No assumptions mate, and I didn’t mean to sound like I was calling you a sheep; the point of that was encouragement, don’t move to the back of the bus, don’t give up your seat at the counter, give them the finger instead. But sounds as if you have that part well in hand.
The main thrust of my overlong tirade is that complacency makes things worse, encourages these reactionary people to write more laws to keep undesireable people under control, in the name of safety and freedom. Laws that change how people interact with each other need to be scrutinized and thought through very carefully before they are enacted, and once again the Arizona legislature has proven themselves incapable of that.
That does happen; groups will create a case to force a decision on an issue, and organizations supporting that group will swoop right in and create a media fecal vortex over it. This is a tactic that was successful during the civil rights movements in the fifties and sixties. Sometimes it’s necessary and valid, sometimes it’s merely to pick a fight and make noise; but whatever the reason, you can count on George Takei to be in the thick of it.
George is going to crow triumphantly, but it is not his victory. What happened is a conservative governor evaluated the bill and found it redundant, poorly written, and wide open for abuse, and vetoed it. That’s right, George; conservatives were against this bill. You were in the right on this, and your help is appreciated, but you aren’t the big hero and it’s not your trophy.
Gay rights is indeed a fashionable cause these days, for two major reasons. The first is that they are actually discriminated against. The second is that they are a nice boogeyman for the right, and a distraction from the real, important issues facing America.
My opinion is that the businesses should be allowed to serve or not serve at their own discretion– as they currently can in Arizona. If these businesses turn people away, then the consumers have the right to take their business elsewhere; and if enough of them do so, the businesses will either reevaluate their policies or they will fail. They should have the right to fail on their own recognizance.
I know just what you mean. The religion I was raised in taught me that coloreds were farm animals, yet the government forces me to treat them like they were humans! The very nerve! [/sarcasm]
Fuck you and whatever smelly breeder whore you crawled out of.
Please tell the audience which religion of which you were a member. Perhaps you’re muslim. Ever read what they have to say about gays?
We’re kinda close here. Personally, I think a private business owner should be able to tell anyone, even members of federally protected classes, that they don’t want their business simply because “I don’t like (insert religion, color, gayness, whatever). If, for example, a white guy opens a sammich shop in Harlem and proceeds to say “I ain’t servin n****** “, then that’s his own dumbass fault when the business fails. Far fetched example, but you get the jist. LIke I said, it USED to be a free country
Don’t like cream cheese?
I am no longer a member of any religion. I was raised Southern Baptist. Do you know why the Southern Baptist Convention was founded?
One would think that such persecution and primitive thinking was dead, buried, and forgotten by now. Obviously, there are still some residual effects from the socio-political events of the late Sixties still floating about.
Mankind has certainly not evolved for the better. And this ignorant, foolish, fucked up, turdheaded, dumbass, dickheaded, insane bill is proof positive of that.
And the last time I looked, it is both a MAJOR and HUGE violation of the 1965 Civil Rights Act Movement!
Arizona is one fucked up state and its government is run by a bunch of lousy human bastards!
Nichelle Nichols was right in her viewpoint. “Baby, we still have a long way to go!”
The misrepresentation of the bill should have been expected from “activists” with an agenda. They won. Congrats. So when is the next business going to be targeted??
Check out the the Hobby Lobby Case before the Supreme Court, then let’s talk.
You’re a bigoted fool yourself.
Just Like Sen Robert Byrd (D)… 🙂
Ah, the Tolerance of the superior “minority” 🙂
And you’re uninformed person BT. Congrats, the Ministry of Truth is proud of you.
They are obviously watching “the wrong networks” as your Dear President said just a few days ago. Maybe you should do something about that.
It sounds like you’ve been listening to the Ministry of Truth too much.
And you really should stop watching “the wrong Networks” 🙂
Yeah, and then “activists” sue them for it. Gee, no one every does that… 🙂
Yeah, and I don’t want a bigot like you in my state either. (Because you call the “not of the body” a bigot).
You mean like ObamaCare, The IRS and the FDA… No I doubt you did…:)
Can’t wait for the next “gay activist” to have a hissy fit about some business discriminating against them (when they weren’t) just so you can leap to their defense! After all, on “gay activists” have Civil Rights because they are “oppressed”. 🙂
Then you avoid Liberals too then, eh?
Activists such as Arizona’s Republican senator Jeff Flake, Arizona’s Republican senator John McCain, and Arizona’s own conservative Republican governor Jan Brewer?
All of whom examined the language of the bill and determined it to be unnecessary, since it would provide an exemption, a special protection, for said businesses for a law that does not exist; that the language of the law is poorly written and too broadly worded, which would allow it to be used against Christians as well?
Are those the activists you are talking about?
Arizona SB 1062 would have allowed businesses to ignore Arizona state law requiring them to serve people if doing so violated their religious beliefs.
Wait. An exemption to… what Arizona state law again? One requiring businesses to serve certain classes of people?
There IS no Arizona state law requiring ANY business to serve ANY class of people. SB 1062 would provide an exemption to a law that doesn’t exist.
As it stands Arizona businesses can refuse service to anyone on any grounds whatsoever, and this does include on religious grounds.
So why are you clamoring for special protection?
The lawsuit in question is in New Mexico, which was stupid enough to enact a law making it illegal for businesses to refuse service based on gender or sexual preference. So if you’re in the mood for a fight, take it to New Mexico and protest their law, or any of the other 21 states that have enacted laws creating protected classes. And you might want to actually learn about those laws and those lawsuits first. It helps if you have a leg to stand on.
Yes actually, I did. Though I’m puzzled as to what the Food and Drug Administration has to to do with it.
Wasn’t this conversation that you’ve invited yourself into about not making assumptions? So why then are you assuming that because I can read the letter of the law and say, “Yep, this is crap”, that I must be liberal?
If you want to know why conservatives, including your own governor and US senators, think SB 1062 is a useless, counterproductive ego-stroke for paranoiacs, try reading my other posts that go into the subject in detail. If you actually have something worthwhile to say instead of ignorant attempts at insults, I’ll be happy to discuss it with you.
Now, you see what I have to put up with?
Slavery wasn’t it?
I didn’t say I wouldn’t tell everyone I know but slapping gets you one place and that’s nowhere. Going to jail because you don’t get your way is juvenile thinking. There are lots of avenues to pursue. Notifying the media works for me, locally. You go higher as the dumbass gets bigger. If the bill is passed, then the next step is to take it to the state supreme court. It is unconstitutional as it stands, so it would be struck down. The people of Arizona need to do something about their politicians speaking or acting for them. It’s their decision to be put to vote not state idiots.
Liberals and conservatives start to look like each other when stupidity is involved, don’t you think?
First the Gunfight At The O.K. Corral and now this….
I’ll ignore the sarcasm and also state(no pun intended)that the people behind the idea of that Bill have behaved in a confusing, inexplicable, atypical, and illogical manner. One that clearly represents the qualities of the very smelly flower of humanity itself: Cruel, treacherous, savage, unprincipled, inept, fatous, and inane.
And I might also add that because of these inhuman actions, they have made the state of Arizona a boil on the buttocks of the world that is in dire need of being lanced and cauterized. And I might also add that this also gives Arizona and its state government the well deserved description of being both a pigmire and a festering, fetid sewer populated by pernicious vermin who have no comprehension of both the English language and human rights, whatsoever!
Yeppers, Arizona has become a gated community of the damned with definite segregationist tendencies.