Las Vegas Weekly Calls Mississippians “Hatemongers” Based On Un-Researched Lies

Standard

Image

They covered the Religious Freedom Acts passage because of the MGM and Caesars Entertainment own Casinos in Mississippi.

After talking about the Arizona “turn away the gays” bill, they directed their attention toward MS to compare the Religious Freedom Bill Act to the legislation there saying:

 

a nearly identical measure flew through the legislature in Mississippi and was happily signed by Gov. Phil Bryant on April 3. In a state where gay people still have virtually no protections anyway, SB2681 makes it super-double-with-a-cherry-on-top okay to tell a gay couple to f*ck off.

 

 

They continue to throw around derogatory comments about Mississippians by saying:

Mississippi is not Arizona. There are precious few massive national companies with significant presences there. Lawmakers in Jackson don’t live in fear of being humiliated as bigots on cable news; theirs is a shameless, almost quaint, homophobia.

 

It has already been established that the bill has nothing to do with gay people and private business, but those on the left continue to push their version of hate on others and accuse them of the same.   There is no language in the bill that says that and I encourage the you to read the bill and all the definitions for yourself here.

They could not understand why those Casinos that have stood up for LGBT rights in the past did not speak up.
That would be because it doesn’t do any of the things these people have fabricated it do.

Where were they, then, when Mississippi was pulling a move that Arizona got scathed for only a month earlier? Silent. And where were they when I reached out repeatedly to find out why they didn’t do anything to oppose the Mississippi law? Silent yet again.

 It is their obligation there for the same reason it was their obligation in Nevada, because they are the biggest fish with the most economic clout, and that’s the only thing that persuades hatemongers not to legislate their hate.

 

You can read the whole article here if you would like, but it just goes to show how some people are willing to jump on a complete lie in order to bring “sensationalism” to Journalism.

Constitutional Clayton – Peace

 

Image

Advertisements

The Religious Freedom Bill has nothing to do with gay people

Standard

The left are yelling about nothing.  They claim that the bill allows a business owner to discriminate against gay people.  This couldn’t be further from the truth.  

Did they actually read the THE MISSISSIPPI RELIGIOUS FREEDOM RESTORATION  ACT?  No.

The language of the bill that pertains to “discrimination” reads:

TO PROVIDE THAT STATE ACTION OR AN ACTION BY ANY PERSON BASED
3 ON STATE ACTION SHALL NOT BURDEN A PERSON’S RIGHT TO THE EXERCISE
4 OF RELIGION;

It clearly states the State cannot discriminate against you for your religion.  It cannot deny you any public service because of your religion. 

It only pertains to public funds and not private businesses. Sec I (d)

So why are they mad?  All the main stream media bigotry continues.


Image

Sec I defines the language for this statement in the bill:

(a) “Burden” means any action that directly or
14 indirectly constrains, inhibits, curtails or denies the exercise
15 of religion by any person or compels any action contrary to a
16 person’s exercise of religion. “Burden” includes, but is not
17 limited to, withholding benefits, assessing criminal, civil or
18 administrative penalties or exclusion from governmental programs
19 or access to governmental facilities.

) “Compelling governmental interest” means a
21 government interest of the highest magnitude that cannot otherwise
22 be achieved without burdening the exercise of religion.
23 (c) “Exercise of religion” means the practice or
24 observance of religion. “Exercise of religion” includes, but is
25 not limited to, the ability to act or the refusal to act in a
26 manner that is substantially motivated by one’s sincerely held
27 religious belief, whether or not the exercise is compulsory or
28 central to a larger system of religious belief.
29 (d) “State action” means the implementation or
30 application of any law, including, but not limited to, state and
31 local laws, ordinances, rules, regulations and policies, whether
32 statutory or otherwise, or any other action by the state, a
33 political subdivision of the state, an instrumentality of the
34 state or political subdivision of the state, or a public official
35 that is authorized by law in the state.
36 (3) (a) State action or an action by any person based on
37 state action shall not burden a person’s right to exercise of
38 religion, even if the burden results from a rule of general
39 applicability, unless it is demonstrated that applying the burden
40 to that person’s exercise of religion in that particular instance
41 is both of the following:
42 (i) Essential to further a compelling governmental
43 interest; S. B. No. 2681 *SS26/R476PS* ~ OFFICIAL ~
14/SS26/R476PS
PAGE 3

44 (ii) The least restrictive means of furthering
45 that compelling governmental interest.
46 (b) A person whose exercise of religion has been
47 burdened or is likely to be burdened in violation of this section
48 may assert that violation or impending violation as a claim or
49 defense in a judicial proceeding, regardless of whether the state
50 or a political subdivision of the state is a party to the
51 proceeding. The person asserting that claim or defense may obtain
52 appropriate relief, including relief against the state or a
53 political subdivision of the state. Appropriate relief includes,
54 but is not limited to, injunctive relief, declaratory relief,
55 compensatory damages, and the recovery of costs and reasonable
56 attorney’s fees.

Image