HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Southwest

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1441  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2014, 4:37 AM
rocksteady rocksteady is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 167
Not to bring up politics, but I can't help but wonder if this new law allowing businesses to deny service based on religious beliefs will throw a wrench in all our recent economic and development gains we've had lately in the same way sb1070 did. Does Google Fiber decide they don't want to do business with us? Does Apple decide to pull out? Do future companies looking at relocating here decide they want to go to a more friendly environment?

To early too tell, but let's hope Brewer vetoes this. Unfortunately the word of mouth may be damage enough. New, high paying, forward thinking industries looking to set up shop look at things like this.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1442  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2014, 2:13 PM
nickw252 nickw252 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: North Mesa
Posts: 1,603
Quote:
Originally Posted by rocksteady View Post
Not to bring up politics, but I can't help but wonder if this new law allowing businesses to deny service based on religious beliefs will throw a wrench in all our recent economic and development gains we've had lately in the same way sb1070 did. Does Google Fiber decide they don't want to do business with us? Does Apple decide to pull out? Do future companies looking at relocating here decide they want to go to a more friendly environment?

To early too tell, but let's hope Brewer vetoes this. Unfortunately the word of mouth may be damage enough. New, high paying, forward thinking industries looking to set up shop look at things like this.
I was thinking the same thing. This is the MLK Day controversy all over again. Hopefully we don't lose the Super Bowl over this.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1443  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2014, 5:31 PM
Leo the Dog Leo the Dog is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: The Lower-48
Posts: 4,789
Quote:
Originally Posted by rocksteady View Post
Not to bring up politics, but I can't help but wonder if this new law allowing businesses to deny service based on religious beliefs will throw a wrench in all our recent economic and development gains we've had lately in the same way sb1070 did. Does Google Fiber decide they don't want to do business with us? Does Apple decide to pull out? Do future companies looking at relocating here decide they want to go to a more friendly environment?

To early too tell, but let's hope Brewer vetoes this. Unfortunately the word of mouth may be damage enough. New, high paying, forward thinking industries looking to set up shop look at things like this.
What new law is this? I'd like to read it.

A business can refuse or provide goods/services to anyone they choose, by the way.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1444  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2014, 5:58 PM
KevininPhx KevininPhx is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leo the Dog View Post
What new law is this? I'd like to read it.

A business can refuse or provide goods/services to anyone they choose, by the way.
http://www.azcentral.com/news/politi...call-veto.html

I don't know enough about Gov. Brewer to guess what she'll do, but I can't imagine any governor signing this. It's a terrible bill, mostly for being unclear in its intent. Can you deny service to someone with no religion? Can a business ask a person what their religion is? Etc.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1445  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2014, 6:39 PM
mdpx's Avatar
mdpx mdpx is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 172
The Republic has an excellent editorial today calling on the Gov. to veto it with really clear points. Fingers crossed!

http://www.azcentral.com/opinions/ar...dom-bills.html
__________________
You want your mind blown? Seinfeld ended 21 years ago.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1446  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2014, 8:23 PM
nickw252 nickw252 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: North Mesa
Posts: 1,603
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leo the Dog View Post
What new law is this? I'd like to read it.

A business can refuse or provide goods/services to anyone they choose, by the way.
That's not exactly correct. A business can deny service for a good reason (unruly customer, closing time), for no reason, but NOT for an illegal reason (i.e. discrimination).

The AZ legislature recently passed a law saying that businesses can discriminate against customers if it offends their subjective religious beliefs. They are basically giving businesses a free pass to discriminate against gays under the guise of religion (I'm not sure what religion preaches intolerance? ).

In reality I don't think this law will have earth-shattering effects on how business is operated but it will have a profound effect on how Arizona is perceived by the public and business community. As a result, it will be bad for business and tourism similar to SB1070 and Arizona's refusal to recognize Martin Luther King Day which resulted in the NFL taking away the Super Bowl.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1447  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2014, 8:34 PM
westbev93 westbev93 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 203
I'm actually for this bill not because I am in favor of discriminating against anyone, but rather, because it is so incredibly stupid and will backfire (hopefully with hilarious results).

Remember the Goddess Temple prostitution bust a few years ago? The Temple Goddesses (prosecuted as prostitutes) were adhering to their religious beliefs and using sexual healing techniques. Under this bill, the generally applicable prohibition against prostitution would not be enforceable. Polygamy is a part of certain fundamentalist LDS sects. This bill would arguably allow polygamous marriages. And perhaps most ironically, this bill could arguably allow same-sex marriage so long as you practice a religion that allows for same-sex marriage. Rastafarians use marijuana in religious ceremonies (I think), and if so, they arguably have a free pass on using marijuana without State prosecution.

The government can overcome the presumption if it can show that its law is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest and is the least intrusive way of furthering that interest. With the Temple Goddesses (as an example), the compelling governmental interest against prostitution is public health. But wouldn't it be less intrusive to meet that purpose by requiring condoms? Same-sex marriage was never previously subjected to strict scrutiny because no protected class was involved, but now it arguably could be if your decision to marry is substantially motivated by a religious belief.

Either the Legislators need to listen to their lawyers or they need to hire better ones. Because this bill is full of unintended consequences.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1448  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2014, 8:48 PM
nickw252 nickw252 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: North Mesa
Posts: 1,603
Quote:
Originally Posted by westbev93 View Post
I'm actually for this bill not because I am in favor of discriminating against anyone, but rather, because it is so incredibly stupid and will backfire (hopefully with hilarious results).

Remember the Goddess Temple prostitution bust a few years ago? The Temple Goddesses (prosecuted as prostitutes) were adhering to their religious beliefs and using sexual healing techniques. Under this bill, the generally applicable prohibition against prostitution would not be enforceable. Polygamy is a part of certain fundamentalist LDS sects. This bill would arguably allow polygamous marriages. And perhaps most ironically, this bill could arguably allow same-sex marriage so long as you practice a religion that allows for same-sex marriage. Rastafarians use marijuana in religious ceremonies (I think), and if so, they arguably have a free pass on using marijuana without State prosecution.

The government can overcome the presumption if it can show that its law is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest and is the least intrusive way of furthering that interest. With the Temple Goddesses (as an example), the compelling governmental interest against prostitution is public health. But wouldn't it be less intrusive to meet that purpose by requiring condoms? Same-sex marriage was never previously subjected to strict scrutiny because no protected class was involved, but now it arguably could be if your decision to marry is substantially motivated by a religious belief.

Either the Legislators need to listen to their lawyers or they need to hire better ones. Because this bill is full of unintended consequences.
Based on the last few years the Arizona legislature should be renamed to "The Constitutional Lawyer's Full Employment Act."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1449  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2014, 8:48 PM
KevininPhx KevininPhx is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 149
[QUOTE=westbev93;6462600]I'm actually for this bill not because I am in favor of discriminating against anyone, but rather, because it is so incredibly stupid and will backfire (hopefully with hilarious results).

Stupid bills don't backfire. They hibernate until they can be strategically used to really damage a group of people. "It's the law."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1450  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2014, 8:58 PM
westbev93 westbev93 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 203
A stupid bill can backfire when you inadvertently legalize a whole host of things you never intended to legalize.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1451  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2014, 9:25 PM
PHX31's Avatar
PHX31 PHX31 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: PHX
Posts: 6,559
I really wonder what the point of this is. Is this REALLY an issue? How many religious types out there are incredibly put off by having to serve LGBT in their place of business? One? One wacko had a problem with it and complained? This is such an unbelievable joke. The author behind this bill must really have problems. This CAN'T just be about religious beliefs. That legislator must have major psychological issues. He had to know the shit storm this would create and he must be basking in it...

That, or I completely don't understand politics (which is already true).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1452  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2014, 11:26 PM
HooverDam's Avatar
HooverDam HooverDam is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Country Club Park, Greater Coronado, Midtown, Phoenix, Az
Posts: 4,610
Its a classic solution in search of a problem kind of thing.

This bill is being put forth by the lunatics over at Center for Arizona Policy, specifically Cathi Herrod.

Notably, Doug Ducey has tapped Cathi Herrod to be one of his key advisers.

I highly encourage everyone to vote for Scott Smith. Fred DuVall might be a good guy too, I honestly don't know a ton about him yet. However it seems unlikely any Democrat will win. Register Independent, vote in the Republic primary for Smith. While he's in the GOP, he's lead from the center and is probably the best thing to ever happen to Mesa.

If Doug Ducey, Christine Jones, or any of those other nuts wins...it'll be bad times for AZ.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1453  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2014, 11:28 PM
nickw252 nickw252 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: North Mesa
Posts: 1,603
Quote:
Originally Posted by westbev93 View Post
A stupid bill can backfire when you inadvertently legalize a whole host of things you never intended to legalize.
Unintended consequenses. Look at the alt-fuel fiasco the legislature created a few years ago.

The Arizona legislature needs to take a vacation and stop writing stupid laws.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HooverDam View Post
Its a classic solution in search of a problem kind of thing.
Just like last year's potty laws (aimed at discriminating against trans-gender people by criminalizing using the bathroom).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1454  
Old Posted Feb 22, 2014, 6:32 AM
Leo the Dog Leo the Dog is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: The Lower-48
Posts: 4,789
Well, if it makes you guys feel any better, I haven't heard of this silly law until I read it here. It hasn't hit the newsreel in California yet, therefore I don't think it'll be a big national media story.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1455  
Old Posted Feb 22, 2014, 3:12 PM
PHX31's Avatar
PHX31 PHX31 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: PHX
Posts: 6,559
It was the secondary headline of CNN.com and there is already a current event thread on it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1456  
Old Posted Feb 22, 2014, 3:23 PM
KevininPhx KevininPhx is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leo the Dog View Post
Well, if it makes you guys feel any better, I haven't heard of this silly law until I read it here. It hasn't hit the newsreel in California yet, therefore I don't think it'll be a big national media story.
Noted, you're in California. Got it. It's national news on every national newscast and every 24-hour cable news. I even heard it on BBC World News yesterday.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1457  
Old Posted Feb 22, 2014, 3:56 PM
HooverDam's Avatar
HooverDam HooverDam is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Country Club Park, Greater Coronado, Midtown, Phoenix, Az
Posts: 4,610
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leo the Dog View Post
Well, if it makes you guys feel any better, I haven't heard of this silly law until I read it here. It hasn't hit the newsreel in California yet, therefore I don't think it'll be a big national media story.
Do you own a tv/radio? Its everywhere.

One company that was looking to bring about 1K jobs to Phoenix already called and said forget it. Even if it doesn't pass, they don't want to be in a place where this kind of thing is remotely possible.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1458  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2014, 2:47 AM
Leo the Dog Leo the Dog is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: The Lower-48
Posts: 4,789
Quote:
Originally Posted by HooverDam View Post
Do you own a tv/radio? Its everywhere.

One company that was looking to bring about 1K jobs to Phoenix already called and said forget it. Even if it doesn't pass, they don't want to be in a place where this kind of thing is remotely possible.
I honestly haven't heard a word until today. I think most people are watching the Olympics, concerned about the drought, the Ukraine, local goings on etc...nobody really cares about a local law of another state that doesn't affect them.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1459  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2014, 3:38 AM
RichTempe RichTempe is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leo the Dog View Post
I honestly haven't heard a word until today. I think most people are watching the Olympics, concerned about the drought, the Ukraine, local goings on etc...nobody really cares about a local law of another state that doesn't affect them.
Well it was on the ABC National News tonight so somebody must care about it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1460  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2014, 5:35 AM
poconoboy61 poconoboy61 is offline
skyscrapers!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leo the Dog View Post
I honestly haven't heard a word until today. I think most people are watching the Olympics, concerned about the drought, the Ukraine, local goings on etc...nobody really cares about a local law of another state that doesn't affect them.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/21/us...w-nytimes&_r=1

http://www.latimes.com/nation/nation...#axzz2twhANx4F

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2...-marriage-bill

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-26299559

http://www.washingtonpost.com/nation...tml?tid=pm_pop

http://www.examiner.com/article/ariz...ay-legislation

Yeah, I guess no one really cares. It's only made the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, the Chicago Tribune, the BBC, the Washington Post, and the Examiner, but I guess other than that and the 5.68 million returns in Google regarding this law, it's not really being talked about.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Southwest
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:08 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.