or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Arizona governor vetoes gay discrimination bill Apple rallied against
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Arizona governor vetoes gay discrimination bill Apple rallied against

post #1 of 322
Thread Starter 
Arizona Governor Governor Jan Brewer on Wednesday vetoed a controversial bill that would have, in effect, legalized wide-ranging discrimination of homosexuals as an extension of religious freedom. Apple, along with a number of other major U.S. corporations, banded together to have the bill shot down.

Brewer
Arizona Governor Jan Brewer vetoes bill SB1062. | Source: Jan Brewer via Twitter


In a tweet on Wednesday, Gov. Brewer confirmed that she had officially vetoed bill SB1062, which proposed to grant Arizona business owners the right to turn away gay and lesbian customers on religious grounds.

The measure, sponsored by Republican State Sens. Steve Yarbrough, Nancy Barto and Bob Worsley, landed on the governor's desk last week after being approved by a Republican-led state legislature, reports CNN.

On Monday, Apple requested governor Brewer veto the bill. As noted previously, Apple's ask carried clout considering the company invested millions of dollars in an Arizona-based sapphire production facility to be run in partnership with GT Advanced Technology.

February 27, 2014


Supposedly devised to protect religious freedom and non-government business entities, the bill proposed a revision to the definitions of "exercise of religion" and "person." The following key provision was of special concern to rights activists:

Expands the definition of

person to include any individual, association, partnership, corporation, church, or other business entity.
The legislation lost its legs soon after the public caught wind of the bill's potential to institutionalize discrimination. Supporters of a veto included Arizona Sens. John McCain and Jeff Flake, while major businesses and corporations like American Airlines and Marriott also stood against SB1062.

post #2 of 322
Welcome to the 21st century, AZ and TX!

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #3 of 322

Brewer only did this to save $$$. The 19th century (pre-Emancipation Proclamation) still rules the Arizona state government.

post #4 of 322
Even some of the republicans that voted for it were saying it was bad and asking her to veto it.
post #5 of 322
Good and I'm not shocked at all by this news. The bill embodies hate an intolerance towards others, no one should be discriminated no matter what it is. We can't move forward as a species with these officials having such an archaic way of thinking.
My blender/recipe blog: http://blenderinsider.com
Reply
My blender/recipe blog: http://blenderinsider.com
Reply
post #6 of 322
Wow what a shock. 1rolleyes.gif I'm okay with this only because I don't think it was a pressing issue hopefully we can now stop talking about gays 24/7 (at least until the next manufactured crisis arises).
post #7 of 322
We are all humans and we are allowed to love according to that basic "constitution" = LOVE!
post #8 of 322
I'll bet it hurt her a lot to veto this bill. I am sure she did it with contempt. applezilla is correct.
post #9 of 322
Quote:
Originally Posted by HealthNut View Post

Good and I'm not shocked at all by this news. The bill embodies hate an intolerance towards others, no one should be discriminated no matter what it is. We can't move forward as a species with these officials having such an archaic way of thinking.
Ok well then I think vegetarian restaurants should be forced to serve meat because not doing so discriminates against consumers who prefer meat. And eating mets is perfectly legal in the United States. And I think CVS should have to reverse its policy of not selling cigarettes in its stores because that is discriminating against smokers, many of whom I'm sure shopped at CVS for other items as well. Last time I checked, smoking cigarettes is perfectly legal in the United States.
post #10 of 322

The Republicans and especially the Tea Party are really on the fringe. I can understand them at all. Why are they so hateful?

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #11 of 322

Everyone should have the right to discriminate between right and wrong.

post #12 of 322
Ok.
post #13 of 322
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

The Republicans and especially the Tea Party are really on the fringe. I can understand them at all. Why are they so hateful?
Just because someone doesn't prefer gay marriage doesn't make them hateful. And there's plenty of hateful people on the left too.
post #14 of 322
Quote:
As noted previously, Apple's ask carries clout considering the company invested millions of dollars in an Arizona-based sapphire production facility to be run in partnership with GT Advanced Technology.

being an apple enthusiast, "fanboy", and advocate for as long as they've been around, and a lifelong gay american, the quoted statement is fucked up and so wrong.
"Personally, I would like nothing more than to thoroughly proof each and every word of my articles before posting. But I can't."

appleinsider's mike campbell, august 15, 2013
Reply
"Personally, I would like nothing more than to thoroughly proof each and every word of my articles before posting. But I can't."

appleinsider's mike campbell, august 15, 2013
Reply
post #15 of 322
We need laws that simply state that no state law or regulation could be construed as requiring any one party to enter into a contract with any other party.
post #16 of 322
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post
 
Ok well then I think vegetarian restaurants should be forced to serve meat because not doing so discriminates against consumers who prefer meat. 

I hope you simply forgot the slash s. If not you are really being silly. 

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #17 of 322
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Just because someone doesn't prefer gay marriage doesn't make them hateful. And there's plenty of hateful people on the left too.

1) Sure, there are haters on the left, center and right, and in every party but that's irrelevant.

2) This is a civil rights issue. Nothing more, nothing less. I would much prefer if marriage were to simply go away altogether but if one group of consenting adults is allowed to get married I think all consenting adults should be allowed to get married.

3) As for not making one "hateful" if they don't like gay marriage is it not "hateful" if one were to say, "I don't hate black people but I don't think they should be able to share the same water fountains and bathrooms as whites"? I don't put the same weight behind each of these civil rights movements but I do believe they are all discrimination based on hate.
Edited by SolipsismX - 2/26/14 at 9:32pm

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #18 of 322
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pooch View Post

Quote:
As noted previously, Apple's ask carries clout considering the company invested millions of dollars in an Arizona-based sapphire production facility to be run in partnership with GT Advanced Technology.

being an apple enthusiast, "fanboy", and advocate for as long as they've been around, and a lifelong gay american, the quoted statement is fucked up and so wrong.

Why? I think the point is Apple is spending a lot of money in Arizona and they would not be comfortable doing that in a state that endorsed discrimination.
post #19 of 322

Gay people have a ton of disposable income. Arizona would have missed out on a lot of it.

post #20 of 322

We need laws that allow business owners to have values.  Even if some don't like them.

post #21 of 322

Everyone should have the right to be miserable in marriage.

post #22 of 322
Quote:
Originally Posted by bdkennedy1 View Post
 

Gay people have a ton of disposable income. Arizona would have missed out on a lot of it.

 

Must be I'm missing out on something then....

Mac Mini (Mid 2011) 2.5 GHz Core i5

120 GB SSD/500 GB HD/8 GB RAM

AMD Radeon HD 6630M 256 MB

Reply

Mac Mini (Mid 2011) 2.5 GHz Core i5

120 GB SSD/500 GB HD/8 GB RAM

AMD Radeon HD 6630M 256 MB

Reply
post #23 of 322

Not sure this is really an Apple story.  But from a business perspective supporting a veto made a lot of sense.  

Apple is rightly viewed as a progressive company and wouldn't want to be perceived as bigoted.  

post #24 of 322
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post
 
Just because someone doesn't prefer gay marriage doesn't make them hateful. 

If you do not like gays then I would suggest not marrying one. What other people do is none of your business unless they are harming your safety, financial well being or your civil rights.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #25 of 322
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post
2) This is a civil rights issue. Nothing more, nothing less. I care about homosexuals and would much prefer to marriage to simply go away altogether but if one group of consenting adults is allowed to get it I think all consenting adults should be allowed to have it.

But what if our creator actually made us male and female for a reason?  And marriage, too.

post #26 of 322
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post


Ok well then I think vegetarian restaurants should be forced to serve meat because not doing so discriminates against consumers who prefer meat. And eating mets is perfectly legal in the United States. And I think CVS should have to reverse its policy of not selling cigarettes in its stores because that is discriminating against smokers, many of whom I'm sure shopped at CVS for other items as well. Last time I checked, smoking cigarettes is perfectly legal in the United States.

Apples and oranges.

 

The discriminating part is not what you sell, but not selling what you sell to specific people.

post #27 of 322
But are there any gay people in AZ?

This is obviously good news but it seems wrong to celebrate the prevention of a reactionary dimwit bigot bill as 'progress'.
post #28 of 322

"Ok well then I think vegetarian restaurants should be forced to serve meat because not doing so discriminates against consumers who prefer meat. And eating mets is perfectly legal in the United States. And I think CVS should have to reverse its policy of not selling cigarettes in its stores because that is discriminating against smokers, many of whom I'm sure shopped at CVS for other items as well. Last time I checked, smoking cigarettes is perfectly legal in the United States."

 

And boink'in a sex doll is also legal, so by your logic, CVS should be selling those at the check out also.

post #29 of 322
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post
 

If you do not like gays then I would suggest not marrying one. What other people do is none of your business unless they are harming your safety, financial well being or your civil rights.

 

 

Same applies for people who marry 4 wives

or who have sex with animals

or who smoke drugs

yet all 4 are illegal

how come no one is fighting for those issues?

post #30 of 322
Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality View Post

But what if our creator actually made us male and female for a reason?  And marriage, too.

Creator or not, the species is male and female for a reason. That reason is clearly for procreation of the species, but let's consider that not all acts of coitus are done for procreation. If you want to go strictly by this biological reason then should it also be illegal to engage in any coital act that isn't specifically for the procreation of the species. Catholicism seems to think so and they have a good track record of out populating other forms of Christianity.

However, if one person in a "marriage" can no longer produce children should they be forced to get a divorce and never engage in such acts again… with anyone? What if one knows they are incapable of producing offspring before they get married; should they not be allowed to get married since their "reason" is now on par with the gays?

But that's just talking about the sexes, of which our species has only two… and variations of those two. Gender, however, is a completely different topic.
Edited by SolipsismX - 2/27/14 at 5:28pm

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #31 of 322
Quote:
Originally Posted by kmarei View Post

 

Same applies for people who marry 4 wives

or who have sex with animals

or who smoke drugs

yet all 4 are illegal

how come no one is fighting for those issues?

Being gay is not against the law. Those four things are none of Rogifan's business unless they are doing it his house without his permission. If you are concerned about those issues, call 911.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #32 of 322
Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality View Post

There are no gay people.  Only heterosexual people with identity issues.

Are you being serious right now? 1confused.gif

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #33 of 322
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


Creator or not, the species is male and female for a reason. That reason is clearly for procreation of the species, but let's consider that not all acts of coitus are done for procreation. If you want to go strictly by this biological reason then should it also be illegal to engage in any coital act that isn't specifically for the procreation of the species. Catholicism seems to think so and they have a good track record of out populating other forms of Christianity. However, if one person in a "marriage" can no longer produce children should be forced to get a divorce and engage in such acts again? What if this is found before they get married; should they not be allowed to get married since there "reason" is now on par with the gays?

But that's just talking about the sexes, of which our species has only two… and variations of those two. Gender, however, is a completely different topic.


I wasn't talking about biology or Catholocism.  I said, "What if our creator made us male and female for a reason?"

 

Sex and gender are exactly the same.

post #34 of 322
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


Are you being serious right now? 1confused.gif


Absolutely.

post #35 of 322
Quote:
Originally Posted by kmarei View Post


Same applies for people who marry 4 wives
or who have sex with animals
or who smoke drugs
yet all 4 are illegal
how come no one is fighting for those issues?

Irrelevant. And actually, with the possible exception of animals, people are fighting for those issues. But for f**k's sake, an animal is not a consenting adult! A gay person is. Your examples have nothing to do with this discussion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality View Post

But what if our creator actually made us male and female for a reason?  And marriage, too.

And what if Jesus said to love everyone? Doesn't matter though, as the USA and AZ are not theocracies.
post #36 of 322
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gustav View Post

And what if Jesus said to love everyone? Doesn't matter though, as the USA and AZ are not theocracies.

To love someone doesn't mean you have to agree with them.  A mom and pop cake shop in AZ shouldn't have to make wedding cakes for 2 women who want to get 'married.'  But they can still love the women as people.

post #37 of 322

Hey Rogifan, you may or not be gay, but when laws like this directly effect you and/or your family, you might care more. I'm gay, so when people vote on MY EQUAL RIGHTS, I pay attention. Just because something doesn't personally effect you, doesn't mean it's not important. 

post #38 of 322
Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality View Post
 


Absolutely.

Do you remember those kids from elementary school that acted a bit 'gay'...? They are most likely gay now. They didn't have to go through a traumatic experience, they didn't eat a bad batch of ice cream that made them gay, they dont do it because its the new cool thing. People are born gay, people are born straight. 

 

I don't like fish... Now maybe God put fish here for a reason, so I could eat it, but I just don't like it, so if someone has a preference towards the opposite sex, why does it have to be an identity issue?

post #39 of 322
Quote:
Originally Posted by kmarei View Post


Same applies for people who marry 4 wives
or who have sex with animals
or who smoke drugs
yet all 4 are illegal
how come no one is fighting for those issues?

1) It's weird that those that are afraid of homosexuals seem to always jump right to sex with animals. What the hell is up with that? Can an animal consent? I don't think so, hence the use of consenting adults.

2) I'm not against polygyny or polyandry as a general rule. These have come about in society for very good reasons. Historically polygyny has been done because there were too many women and not enough men, and polyandry is done for the opposite reason. Polygyny results in an increased population growth within a culture whilst polyandry helps limits population growth which is what you want to do with resources are scarce.

3) Smoke em if you got em but please keep your secondhand smoke away from children and me.

4) I only see 3 things in your list and yet you mention four.
Edited by SolipsismX - 2/26/14 at 9:35pm

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #40 of 322

Curious as to why would GLB want to go to an establishment that doesn't want them there?

 

And here's a good one.

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2014/02/25/weho-bar-to-ban-lawmakers-who-support-anti-gay-legislation/

"David Cooley, the founder of The Abbey Food & Bar located at 692 North Robertson Blvd., has announced the popular gay bar will add any legislator in any state who votes for “bills to allow for discrimination against LGBT people” to a “Deny Entry List.”"

 

Why is it okay for him to ban people from his establishment but others cannot?

?!?!

 

and what does this story have to do with Apple, apart from they urged Governor Jan Brewer to not sign it?

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Arizona governor vetoes gay discrimination bill Apple rallied against