It takes real talent for you guys to speak out both sides of your mouth.
1) This law is about religious protection, its not about discrimination. Gays aren't really discriminated against!!
2) Lets make a strawman about Muslims, our favorite boogeyman, that shows actual discrimination, pretend that all libs love Muslims and their anti-gblt actions and make it seem like libs would support them. While simultaneously showcasing the discrimination you say doesn't exist and the law which would protect them.
I mean you really can't make this kind of stuff up. Truly some Kerri Strug level mental gymnastics. Although I wonder if would guys would rather have Rush or Hannity come carry you off the mat.
Only in your bizarre, twisted mind am I talking out of both sides of my mouth. Let me see if I can untangle this for you...
1. The law is
NEUTRAL (or was - I haven't seen the revised version). It only provides the "compelling interest" balancing test that a court has to apply in a religious freedom case.
THIS IS A FACT.
2. Regardless of number 1 above, Americans have freedom of religion in this country.
THAT IS ALSO A FACT. It is therefore
my opinion (and the opinion of a majority of Americans according to polls) that people who object to gay marriage for religious reasons should not be compelled to provide services for gay weddings.
3. While not directly related, I am also pointing out the hypocrisy on the left in attacking Christian businesses, while at the same time largely looking the other way when it comes to Muslim businesses with the same viewpoint. Oh, they'll pay some lipservice to the notion that "I don't care if they're Christian or Muslim, it's wrong" but we all know (at least, all sensible people know) that the libtards won't go after the Muslim businesses with the same zeal as the Christian businesses.
None of that is inconsistent.
