Filibuster in MO Senate over "Religious Freedom" bill

[Ebsy]

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/filibuster-against-anti-gay-wedding-measure-rolls-on-in-missouri/article_566c9413-41bc-513e-9da8-0cbaac1a8557.html

JEFFERSON CITY • Democrats in the Missouri Senate are in their 21st hour of blocking a proposed constitutional amendment prohibiting government penalties for clergy and wedding vendors who decline to participate in same-sex marriage ceremonies.

The overnight filibuster, which began shortly after 4 p.m. Monday, was targeted at a resolution introduced by Sen. Bob Onder, R-Lake Saint Louis. The resolution would need only the approval of the Missouri House and Senate to be placed on the ballot. If approved, Democratic Gov. Jay Nixon would choose to put the question on either the August or November ballots.

Soon after the proposal was brought up on the Senate floor, Democrats began their effort to kill the bill. They argued that the proposal would enshrine discrimination against gay people into the state’s constitution and damage the state’s economy.

21 hours so far. Missouri Democrats are in a super minority, so this is pretty much their only way to block legislation.

[YPestis25]

God help us if Koster isn't elected. FF move by the Democrats though.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

This is ridiculous. You all heard Kasich at the last debate. If a wedding-related business doesn't want to serve you for a given reason, be considerate and find another provider.

And isn't Missouri one of the states that doesn't prohibit discrimination on the basis of orientation anyways?

[Mr. Reactionary]

This is ridiculous. You all heard Kasich at the last debate. If a wedding-related business doesn't want to serve you for a given reason, be considerate and find another provider.

And isn't Missouri one of the states that doesn't prohibit discrimination on the basis of orientation anyways?

But Clergy worship bigoted sky fairies and we all know that forcing everyone to personally applaud the fact that you are gay is more important than some silly free exercise of religion or whatever. It's not like religion is a protected right or anything.

[The Arizonan]

This is ridiculous. You all heard Kasich at the last debate. If a wedding-related business doesn't want to serve you for a given reason, be considerate and find another provider.

What if the given reason was sexual orientation?

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

This is ridiculous. You all heard Kasich at the last debate. If a wedding-related business doesn't want to serve you for a given reason, be considerate and find another provider.

What if the given reason was sexual orientation?

Respect the first amendment and find someone else. Marriage is a key part of all religions and it therefore should be treated differently from other industries.(where I don't support discrimination)

[The Arizonan]

This is ridiculous. You all heard Kasich at the last debate. If a wedding-related business doesn't want to serve you for a given reason, be considerate and find another provider.

What if the given reason was sexual orientation?

Respect the first amendment and find someone else. Marriage is a key part of all religions and it therefore should be treated differently from other industries.(where I don't support discrimination)

I'm honestly trying to process this post in my mind and how someone can post it and actually mean it.

I was about to bash God and his homophobia in this post, but I don't have the willpower right now.

[Xing]

How is denying someone service because of their sexual orientation not discrimination?

[RightBehind]

Refusing to serve people on their sexual orientation is simply cherry picking which sinners you want to serve.

[The Arizonan]

If the government made you serve people regardless of their sexual orientation, is that considered a middle finger to your deity?

If it is, then so be it.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

I see the "wedding industry" as a special realm where you should have more latitude to claim a religious exception, even in the public sphere. By the way, I'm speaking about any sort of religious exemption, not necessarily a Christian one. I don't support similar exemptions in other industries.

If this position is theocratic, so be it.

[Negusa Nagast 🚀]

Just to be clear Wulfric, say someone's "religion" viewed blacks as the spawn of Cain, and a black walked into their store; they should be refused service to?

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Just to be clear Wulfric, say someone's "religion" viewed blacks as the spawn of Cain, and a black walked into their store; they should be refused service to?

I see the "wedding industry" as a special realm where you should have more latitude to claim a religious exception, even in the public sphere. By the way, I'm speaking about any sort of religious exemption, not necessarily a Christian one. I don't support similar exemptions in other industries.

So, yeah, if providing something for the wedding (including the marriage license, the flowers, the officiator....) of an all-black or interracial couple violates someone's religious beliefs, they get an exemption. Again, this does not apply to any transaction not having to do with marriage.

[The Arizonan]

Just to be clear Wulfric, say someone's "religion" viewed blacks as the spawn of Cain, and a black walked into their store; they should be refused service to?

I see the "wedding industry" as a special realm where you should have more latitude to claim a religious exception, even in the public sphere. By the way, I'm speaking about any sort of religious exemption, not necessarily a Christian one. I don't support similar exemptions in other industries.

So, yeah, if providing something for the wedding (including the marriage license, the flowers, the officiator....) of an all-black or interracial couple violates someone's religious beliefs, they get an exemption. Again, this does not apply to any transaction not having to do with marriage.

There is actually an obscure Bible verse in the Old Testament that forbids marriage between two people of different races.

What if someone used that as an excuse not to serve them?

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

Just to be clear Wulfric, say someone's "religion" viewed blacks as the spawn of Cain, and a black walked into their store; they should be refused service to?

I see the "wedding industry" as a special realm where you should have more latitude to claim a religious exception, even in the public sphere. By the way, I'm speaking about any sort of religious exemption, not necessarily a Christian one. I don't support similar exemptions in other industries.

So, yeah, if providing something for the wedding (including the marriage license, the flowers, the officiator....) of an all-black or interracial couple violates someone's religious beliefs, they get an exemption. Again, this does not apply to any transaction not having to do with marriage.

There is actually an obscure Bible verse in the Old Testament that forbids marriage between two people of different races.

What if someone used that as an excuse not to serve them?

he said, literally in the post you quoted, that he's fine with that