Takei Calls For Boycott
2 min read
Star Trek‘s George Takei is calling for a boycott of Indiana.
The reason for Takei’s anger is because of a bill, SB101, recently passed in the state.
According to the bill, “state and local government cannot substantially burden a person’s religion, including if that burden stems from a rule, unless the government has a ‘compelling interest’ and it is the ‘least restrictive’ means of doing so.”
This could mean that service could be denied on the basis of religious grounds. Say that a baker did not agree with gay marriage because of his religious beliefs; according to the interpretation of this bill, he could not be forced to sell a wedding cake to a gay couple who came into his business.
Those supporting SB101 believe that it “protects fundamental religious rights,” but opponents believe that it will “legalize discrimination,” especially against same-sex couples.
“I am outraged that Governor Pence would sign such a divisive measure into law,” said Takei. “He has made it clear that LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) couples, like Brad and me, are now unwelcome in his state. The notion that this bill was not driven by animus (hostility) against our community is belied by the record and frankly insulting.
“I will join many in demanding that socially responsible companies withdraw their business, conferences and support from his state and that LGBTs and our friends and supporters refuse to visit or do business with Indiana. It is a sad day for the Hoosier state, and indeed for the many good people of Indiana, for whom this law now stands as a terrible blight upon that state’s reputation.”
“The legislation, SB 101, is about respecting and reassuring Hoosiers that their religious freedoms are intact,” said Pence. “I strongly support the legislation and applaud the members of the General Assembly for their work on this important issue.”
About The Author
Oooh, you poor thing.
That’s 2 to 3 percent who cannot naturally reproduce – which makes them useless for the evolution as evolution is all about reproduction. Ever thought about that? I know this sounds hard but it’s a fact that nature has no use for gay people or animals. So stop whining about being discriminated or whatever.
There’s nothing wrong with their orientation (and no, it isn’t a ‘behavior’.) Put down the Bible and pick up some books about the real world for a change, please.
This hatred and intolerance is the opposite of what Star Trek stands for.
“The world is run by the gay mafia” – Good grief. Get back inside your compound, the end times are upon us!
I have more knowledge that you do, with your worldview obviously influenced by Faux Noise and CBN. Try watching something else than those outlets.
Thank you for the thoughtful, insightful, and incredibly relevant commentary. The amount of effort and wisdom displayed is no doubt a reflection of years of higher learning and a deep understanding of the human condition. Or you’re a simple troll. Pick one.
Nice Straw man arguement Cosmo, but what you are saying has nothing to due with what Milo has said. I am sure there are some pastors/priests/etc… willing to marry gays. Good for them, that is their choice. However, Milo did not say anything in support or against those pastors that willingly marrying same sex couples. He is just bringing up a valid point in that there are very real instances that the gay community is trying to force their beliefs on others. If gay people wanted to take the high road, they could simply request services from those that don’t mind the issue or move to places that are more supportive. Instead they make a big scene, when most of those probably are not even from the state as stated before. People need to actually read the bill instead of reading the talking points and think that they know what is in the legislation. From what I have read, in the bill, it only protects businesses that hold religious affiliation/beliefs and allows for them to refuse service if they do not support same sex marriage. There are plenty of other businesses that don’t care either way. So gay people can request service from those businesses instead.
So. And your point is?
Marriage is not a civil right. There is no right given to any people to marry in the U.S. Constitution. Thus, marriage is a civil institution that all societies in history have recognized and used as the best way to legitimize, protect and raise children as well as to solidify familial and political connections. This makes it only a right in the sense of marriage law. Please read this enlightening article about the idea of law on this matter.
http://www.cpjustice.org/stories/storyReader$1178
Very fascinating article.
Great point! That sounds exactly what that one organization does… oh what are they called… oh yeah, the mafia! So the gay community is just as good as the mafia. Hooray for tolerance!
What truth? Marriage isn’t even a right. Here is some enlightening material for you.
http://www.cpjustice.org/stories/storyReader$1178
Oh and by the way, the same “poor me tactic” is used by gay people too. Just look what is going on now. Actually what they are doing sounds more like bullying to force people to cater to them. Much like the mafia. I already schooled Cosmo so I don’t need to say any more to him.
And I have more knowledge than you. You should stop watching BSNBC. Your worldview is twisted and delusional.
You don’t see the commonality between the LGBT community in their shakedown of religious affiliated businesses and the tactics used by organized crime to control neighborhoods by forcing “protection” money out of businesses? That makes you pretty delusional because they are one in the same. Let me draw it out for you:
LGBT enforcers go into businesses that are religious affiliated and request services. They get refused and get “offended” and take the matter to court to sue them into conforming or to complete obliteration.
Mafia and other organized crime rings go into businesses and request “protection” money. They get refused and get “offended” and start destroying the business person’s property until they conform or to complete obliteration.
The only difference is the tactics, but the strategy is the same.
I like the way Theragen Derivative said it:
“The values of freedom of thought and the right to self-determination have been at the core of Star Trek from the very beginning. It seems as though you’re the one who’s been watching but does not see.”
Sorry ahki, but you are NOT purporting equality with your words.
I want to add saying that ahki already contradicted himself. The taxes paid for police protection and street maintenance is already paid thus giving those protections to run. So ahki doesn’t even have an argument.
Allow me to interject. What do you say about those that claim to be bisexual? Aren’t they not choosing sides when they feel like switching? There seems to be a growing number of women especially claiming bisexuality and go between the two genders at will. And how do you then determine whether they are truly straight or truly gay? I understand that for you it may not have been a choice, but for a growing number it is a choice.
Excellent point.
There are plenty of other demographics that can garner money, so no, if they want a bakery, they can open a bakery. And you have clearly gone to delusional-ville with your second sentence. This is not about what you make it out to be. Get a life!
I don’t watch that channel, sir, as I don’t have it on my TV. I read off of the Internet, which is what you should be doing. Unless of course being a bigot is all that you can be.
I just want to add my own input on top: There is no right given to any people to marry in the U.S. Constitution. Thus, marriage is a civil institution that all societies in history have recognized and used as the best way to legitimize, protect and raise children as well as to solidify familial and political connections.
For all interested, please read:
http://www.cpjustice.org/stories/storyReader$1178
Well said.
Marraige isn’t a human right or civil right. There is no right given to any people to marry in the U.S. Constitution. Thus, marriage is a civil institution that all societies in history have recognized and used as the best way to legitimize, protect and raise children as well as to solidify familial and political connections. At best it is a right within marriage law. Please read this enlightening article.
http://www.cpjustice.org/stories/storyReader$1178
And others interested in this issue, I welcome to read as well.
Unless you don’t trust facts and data from government sources. But liberals always trust government sources. Dusty: Does not compute, must… self… terminate.
This is from an earlier post that I believe in whole heartedly:
“The values of freedom of thought and the right to self-determination have been at the core of Star Trek from the very beginning. It seems as though you’re the one who’s been watching [Star Trek] but does not see.”
-TD
readmylips did not use any slurs or derogatory language, just fact. So you are the one opposite of Star Trek.
This is for the benefit of the people reading this thread. Gay marriage is not a civil right. There is no right given to any people to marry in the U.S. Constitution. Thus, marriage is a civil institution that all societies in history have recognized and used as the best way to legitimize, protect and raise children as well as to solidify familial and political connections.
Please read this enlightening article:
http://www.cpjustice.org/stories/storyReader$1178
Furthermore, do you believe in IDIC Cosmo or ahki? Because if you do, your statements are then hypocrisy. Or you just don’t know what infinite means.
Wrong. No different from you and your ilk spewing your bullshit far and wide. According to your logic you are a bigot of religious freedom. And I thought all you delusional lefties liked the First Amendment
Then you are a bigot just as much as you claim Milo is being. Is it right to purposefully enter an establishment with certain beliefs and get refused to take them to court and ruin their livelihood? This isn’t disgusting legislation if you actually read the legislation and stop getting your “facts” from talking point sources. It is to protect businesses from being targeted by LGBT enforcers. If you can’t see what is going on in the real world then you are just naive. You don’t have to like peoples’ opinions, but you damn well better respect them or you are a hypocrite.
And vice versa, bigot.
Hardly, it protects businesses from pro-gay bigotry. Get informed before forming an opinion, not the other way around.
Do you feel an establishment should have the right to deny a person service based on race and in term should also be protected from said race if they chose to take legal action?
The people who created and own the corporations are the corporations. So that notion doesn’t hold. Secondly, marriage is not a right, it is an institution. There is no right given to any people to marry in the U.S. Constitution. Thus, marriage is a civil institution that all societies in history have recognized and used as the best way to legitimize, protect and raise children as well as to solidify familial and political connections. Read this:
http://www.cpjustice.org/stories/storyReader$1178
You must not understand IDIC, because if you did, you wouldn’t be offended in the slightest. IDIC means everyone, even those that posit different opinions and views from your own. Furthermore, taken from an earlier post, “the values of freedom of thought and the right to self-determination have been at the core of Star Trek from the very beginning.” – TD
Finally, do you feel that it is correct for LGBT to purposefully enter businesses known to have religious affiliations just to get refused in order to take them to court and ruin a person’s livelihood? Because that is what the law is protecting against. These kinds of disgusting tactics to bully people into their beliefs. If you agree with any of that kind of behavior, then you have much less humanity than you claim.
Wow. That is incredible.
Wrong again buddy. You just don’t get it do you? And showing a poster from “progressive” liberals just shows that you are an anti-american, far left extremist thug. Sorry, you lost all credibility.
Sounds like something the gay advocacy groups are doing.
And gay people have one advantage the mafia hasn’t – they go public and destroy a business legally, while the mafia has to keep quiet about their business. Doesn’t that qualify as discrimantion? Maybe the mafia should sue the gay community and demand equal rights. 😀
It’s a simple and complicated issue at the same time.
What is simple is that as a business I should be able to refuse service for whatever reason; be that logical i.e. “You are drunk it
would be irresponsible of me to sell you more booze” or illogical i.e. “I won’t rent you my hall because you are using it for a wedding between two people of the same sex”. The result is that the second business decision reduces that business income potential and earns me a bad reputation, i.e. my ‘punishment’ for being bigoted is that my business will ultimately suffer. If you stick up a sign in your window saying ‘no
Blacks, Jews, Gays or people with glasses’ then market forces will soon punish you. I agree with the legislation, to support people’s beliefs, but not the rationale of the people (in this example) it seeks to protect. After all surely if I am a caterer offered the chance to cater for a racist organisation like the EDL (English Defence League) I’d want the right to refuse them? Who decides if the business decision is a moral and ethical one worthy of challenge and which are not? What if I refuse to bake for a gay couple because I want a day off? What if I agree to cater for the EDL without realising who they are?
Where I disagree with George Takei specifically is the pro active desire to force beliefs on others. Here in England we had a case where a
couple sued a B&B (Bed and Breakfast) for not honouring their room reservation because the B&B couple specified ‘no same sex couples’. As
distasteful as that couple’s beliefs were, it’s their stance and their business. What emerged during the case was that the couple in question made the reservation knowing the policy, they did it to make the point, they didn’t want the holiday, they wanted to force their beliefs onto the couple. At this point the moral high ground begins to shift as people who don’t believe others beliefs should be imposed on them seek instead to impose theirs on others. I don’t agree with the B&B couple’s stance but I’m not sure that the aggressive pursuit of them for having an opinion or a belief is any less bigoted. In addition the news that the couple received death threats etc is hardly a good advert for the gay community amongst those who are already prejudiced. In short its easy to be tolerant to those you agree with, true tolerance comes when you tolerate those you very strongly disagree with.
I don’t care that George Takei is gay, it has no bearing on his portrayal of Mr Sulu and no effect on my personal life. If Mr Takei can be
a positive influence for Gay issues and a role model for young Gay people who feel marginalised then fantastic. I don’t believe in religion myself, whilst I remain spiritual in nature my feeling is that religion is a man-made construct full of arbitrary rules used to influence others and keep the ruling religious or political elite in power. I don’t believe the idea God creates gay people only to tell prophets 3000 years ago that they shouldn’t tolerate them expecting modern people to follow that guidance. However if people do believe that, and it gives them comfort, then fair enough, and based on that I’ll decide for myself what my interactions are with them. After all if all businesses are forced by law to be welcoming of all clientele how do we as customers discriminate between the good and bad suppliers. Forcing businesses by law to
welcome all through gritted teeth is like paying for a date, like buying valentines cards for yourself or hiring friends for a night out. I’d rather know who I am dealing with up front and exercise my rights to discriminate against them too.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2424983/Christian-B-B-owners-refused-gay-couple-close-business.html
Yeah, the mass killings are ignorable. So when it’s in your backyard you’ll care. Gee, that’s short sighted.
Ok, so you’re a gay business owner and a client comes in and wants a screamingly anti-gay product produced BY YOU then you can “discriminate” against him and you have to produce it, right? You can’t refuse.
Agreeing that gay people should live their lives free of discrimination, and agreeing that people should also be free to discriminate, if that is their will, are not mutually exclusive. These Christian businesses have a belief system and however much one may disagree with it its their right to hold those beliefs. So, sadly yes I think Quark should be able to turn them away, and then lose his business as his reputation amongst the crew is ruined and lose his friend Jadzia in the process.
In numerous episodes Quark uses his bar to service Federation interests by getting Cardassians drunk or keeping them distracted, i.e. he allowed his moral judgement to affect his business decisions. Do you think he should have been forced to treat Cardassians, Bajorans and Starfleet officers equally and without question despite his beliefs?
You are a true oracle. Not only do you think you know the percent of the population that is gay (Despite my showing you numbers from the last census), you now know my personal religious beliefs as well. I normally don’t do liberals homework, but I firmly believe ignorance must be overcome, so here is the definition of “behavior”
Full Definition of BEHAVIOR
1
a : the manner of conducting oneselfb : anything that an organism does involving action and response to stimulationc : the response of an individual, group, or species to its environment
2
: the way in which someone behaves; also : an instance of such behavior
3
: the way in which something functions or operates
Fortunately, we’re not talking about race here, we’re talking about a behavior, although I know the left tries hard to equate the two
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YtyUXnBhXU
President Clinton Signs the Religious Restoration Act (1993)
Introduced originally by Chick Schumer (D-NY) and passed by a Democrat controlled Congress.
So who are you going to boycott now?
(This footage is official public record produced by the White House
Television (WHTV) crew, provided by the Clinton Presidential Library.)
Indiana is actually soon to be just one of 20 states with a version of
the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, or RFRA, according to the
National Conference of State Legislatures.
Boycotting them too?
Then-State Senator Barack Obama voted for RFRA in Illinois, which the White House did not refute
White House press secretary Josh Earnest to respond to Pence’s
claim: “Josh, you just heard the governor say right there this is the
same law, he says, that Barack Obama voted for as a state senator back
in Illinois.”
Earnest didn’t dispute the Indiana governor’s statement. “Look,
if you have to go back two decades to try to justify something that
you’re doing today, it may raise some question about the wisdom of what
you’re doing,” Earnest said.
Hmmm… 🙂
Police in Niger say 45 churches were set on fire in a weekend of protests (Jan 2015).
2013:”In the four days since security forces cleared two sit-in camps by supporters of Egypt’s ousted president, Islamists have attacked dozens of Coptic churches along with homes and businesses owned by the Christian minority,” reported AP. “Nearly 40 churches have been looted and torched, while 23 others have been attacked and heavily damaged since Wednesday [August 14].”
A more detailed report lists 56 churches attacked in a 24-hour span that started on August 14. Fifteen more were hit over the next two days. Dozens of Coptic institutions like schools, monasteries, bookstores and even an orphanage were also attacked.”
Not to mention the mass beheadings and executions. But since that’s not in your backyard you don’t care. Now that’s “compassion” and “sensitivity” for you.
So you support the Christian “demographic” being “ouraged” about the gay rights bullies then? 🙂 or is that invalid because you didn’t share those same experiences? 🙂
It seem the the Christian persecution complex has gotten to you, although there’s no Christian persecution at hand in the USA.
I’m not an American, sir. so shut it. You and your fellow cons have lost the credibility.
I’m not being a bigot, sir; nobody is ‘persecuting Christians’, it’s gay, lesbians, and transsexuals that are being persecuted (and in the case of transsexuals, being murdered.) When Christians are being murdered in the USA, then you can say you’re all being persecuted, but not before. Look up the stats on what’s happening to GLBT people, I’m not going to do your homework for you (and not, I’m not confirming your biases against GLBT people.)
Religions don’t deserve the ‘freedom’ to make laws discriminating against people. Please don’t expect me or anybody else with sense to fee into your ‘Christians are being persecuted’ bullshit; it isn’t true, and it won’t work on me. Turn off Faux Noise and CBN, put down the Bible, and live real life.