Disney is taking none of your shit, Georgia.

[Wahrheit]

Just spam.

 

So, I suppose this thread has a good resolution, as Governor Nathan Deal has in fact decided to veto this bill.

Came here to post this - surprised and pleased at the result.

[epicmemesbro]

Other companies followed suit including the NFL. The governor caved in due to this. He's claiming he vetoed the bill because he does not endorse this kind of discrimination but the real reason was from how their economy would be damaged. Apparently this bill was really popular with voters there. Looks like the governor won't be reelected.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/28/us/georgia-north-carolina-lgbt-bills/index.html

[vla1ne]

Apparently this bill was really popular with voters there. Looks like the governor won't be reelected.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/28/us/georgia-north-carolina-lgbt-bills/index.html

Reeally starting to think he should have just let them suffer the natural results of their desires. 

[Phantom Roxas]

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/03/georgias-republican-governor-rejects-a-religious-freedom-bill/475668/

 

Deal is already in his second term, so he can't run again anyway. However, he's only halfway through his term (Georgia's elections don't seem to coincide with presidential elections), so he's got until 2018 to try and turn things around.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Shrugs, running the risk of being called a Homophobe again, I will say that manhandling people into situations like Disney just did won't fix a damn thing.

 

LGB relations just got set back 10 years cause now they (people who supported the bill) think the game is rigged against them.

 

Putting somone in the corner will only make them snap back at you. If there conclusion was false, we wouldn't have racism and all the rednecks would be singing Kumbaya with the blacks

But don't let me piss in your Cheerios. Celebrate all you want

[Phantom Roxas]

LGB relations just got set back 10 years cause now they (people who supported the bill) think the game is rigged against them.

The LGBT community has had to deal with people like those who supported the bill thinking the game is rigged against them. That this bill even went so far as to needing to be vetoed already sets back relations. If supporters of the bill are left feeling cheated, then they deserve it. They can keep their religious freedom, but it should not prohibit the freedom of same-sex marriage.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

The LGBT community has had to deal with people like those who supported the bill thinking the game is rigged against them. That this bill even went so far as to needing to be vetoed already sets back relations. If supporters of the bill are left feeling cheated, then they deserve it. They can keep their religious freedom, but it should not prohibit the freedom of same-sex marriage.

Yeah, well I guess I'm not a fan of SCOTUS pushing their agenda like that on people. A group of 9 lawyers should not be progressively speaking for a country of millions.

 

I couldn't care less if they feel cheated, what will happen is that they won't feel any more sympathetic towards the LGB community and you're just institutionalizing the disconnect. Dunno about you, but I don't like to give my enemies a reason to hate me.

[Phantom Roxas]

Well, I'm straight white guy, so I'm probably the least qualified to talk about this, but this bill was designed because people already lacked sympathy towards the LGBT community (Even though it's a different matter altogether, considering what's going on in at least North Carolina, I'm including transgender people in this group), and the "religious freedom" was their reason for hating your community. They were the ones trying to institutionalize the disconnect, so we were going to be seeing something either way. If you want to talk about where we would be left, then here are your options. If the bill was approved, it would have allowed people to exercise their freedom to discriminate against same-sex marriage, while vetoing the bill says they would be wrong to exercise such a freedom. Regardless of whether or not the bill was approved, these people were never going to be sympathetic, and they were always predisposed to hate. Strong-arming them like this makes it explicitly clear that such behavior should not be tolerated.
 
If they're going to get upset about this, that isn't the fault of the companies for threatening Georgia. It's the people who supported this bill who are at fault, and they should learn to change their attitude. None of the companies, particularly Disney, were "Putting someone in a corner." The general reason, such as with Warner, was that companies wish to continue their businesses in Georgia. This bill put the companies in a corner, because it meant those companies would be active in a state that completely goes against their ideals, which would reflect poorly on them. The threat to boycott Georgia was the companies snapping back.

[Aix]

Yeah, well I guess I'm not a fan of SCOTUS pushing their agenda like that on people. A group of 9 lawyers should not be progressively speaking for a country of millions.

 

I couldn't care less if they feel cheated, what will happen is that they won't feel any more sympathetic towards the LGB community and you're just institutionalizing the disconnect. Dunno about you, but I don't like to give my enemies a reason to hate me.

I see what you are saying, but I find it funny you say this when you've barely any tact.

 

However, I don't see any other way really of going about the issue. These people aren't going to change their mind regardless until society basically forces them to.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

I see what you are saying, but I find it funny you say this when you've barely any tact.

 

However, I don't see any other way really of going about the issue. These people aren't going to change their mind regardless until society basically forces them to.

Yeh, well I'm a bisexual minority male, and I do live in the south. I didn't get people to accept me by shoving the fact that I'm not straight down their throat, I did it by my actions. I showed them I'm not any worse than them, and my sex life really doesn't impact me as a person.

 

You're correct, SOCIETY will force them, (why do you think Obergefell happened when the national sentiment for gay rights is over 50% and not back in when it wasn't), the GOVERMENT shouldn't, cause that's a hollow victory.

 

Tact? Moves like this trash everything we've been working for, because suddenly all that work to prove we're not inherently worse is now overshadowed by fact we're blackmailing their governor.

 

And yes, we're is the itended word cause people don't seem to understand that the LGB (I disagree that T is in the same movement even thought it is an equally pressing problem), isn't as unified as it may seem

 

You confuse sensitivity with realism and effectiveness. Things like Disney's asspull is a short run victory, if such tactics would work in the long run, you'd see something like racism against blacks have vanished in the south by now

 

But hey, I can see the crowd that I'm arguing against here, and there's really no point trying if y'all wanna live in some idyllic perfect world.

 

Now I'm gonna say something here, that there's a good chance you guys will ban me for saying, but I need to say it.

 

I don't like this whole "Gay pride" movement. Both meanings.

 

"With a negative connotation pride refers to an inflated sense of one's personal status or accomplishments, often used synonymously with hubris.

 

With a positive connotation, pride refers to a satisfied sense of attachment toward one's own or another's choices and actions, or toward a whole group of people, and is a product of praise, independent self-reflection, and a fulfilled feeling of belonging."

 

Being Gay, Lesbian, or Bi doesn't make us better in any way, and it also shouldn't. And I have no attachment to the movement. I'm happy that I haven't bent to my knee when I didn't need to, that's not "gay pride," that's self-respect. I pride myself on being able to change the minds of others around me, and I pride that I was able to prove that I wasn't inferior. Since being LGB isn't superior to being straight having pride in something that's normal is silly. Having pride in being able to reason with people is something that's sorely lacking in our culture, and that's where our pride should be

 

So no, I don't agree with many of my "fellows" trying to prove to the world that their equality is anything special, cause that's hypocritical right there

 

Actions speak louder than words is what I've found, but I guess that's my two cents on the matter

[Aerion Brightflame]

If nothing else the fact that there's multi-billion dollar companies willing to leverage there political influence for the sake of social progression instead of lining there own pockets is progress of a kind. Admittedly extremely minor progress, but hey. It's still horrifying because it's still essentially extortion and says a lot about how warped political landscapes are but it's the best of a bad situation. 

 

The actual bill itself that was shut down is just icing on the cake. 

[vla1ne]

Yeh, well I'm a bisexual minority male, and I do live in the south. I didn't get people to accept me by shoving the fact that I'm not straight down their throat, I did it by my actions. I showed them I'm not any worse than them, and my sex life really doesn't impact me as a person.

 

You're correct, SOCIETY will force them, (why do you think Obergefell happened when the national sentiment for gay rights is over 50% and not back in when it wasn't), the GOVERMENT shouldn't, cause that's a hollow victory.

 

Tact? Moves like this trash everything we've been working for, because suddenly all that work to prove we're not inherently worse is now overshadowed by fact we're blackmailing their governor.

 

And yes, we're is the itended word cause people don't seem to understand that the LGB (I disagree that T is in the same movement even thought it is an equally pressing problem), isn't as unified as it may seem

 

You confuse sensitivity with realism and effectiveness. Things like Disney's asspull is a short run victory, if such tactics would work in the long run, you'd see something like racism against blacks have vanished in the south by now

 

But hey, I can see the crowd that I'm arguing against here, and there's really no point trying if y'all wanna live in some idyllic perfect world.

 

Now I'm gonna say something here, that there's a good chance you guys will ban me for saying, but I need to say it.

 

I don't like this whole "Gay pride" movement. Both meanings.

 

"With a negative connotation pride refers to an inflated sense of one's personal status or accomplishments, often used synonymously with hubris.

 

With a positive connotation, pride refers to a satisfied sense of attachment toward one's own or another's choices and actions, or toward a whole group of people, and is a product of praise, independent self-reflection, and a fulfilled feeling of belonging."

 

Being Gay, Lesbian, or Bi doesn't make us better in any way, and it also shouldn't. And I have no attachment to the movement. I'm happy that I haven't bent to my knee when I didn't need to, that's not "gay pride," that's self-respect. I pride myself on being able to change the minds of others around me, and I pride that I was able to prove that I wasn't inferior. Since being LGB isn't superior to being straight having pride in something that's normal is silly. Having pride in being able to reason with people is something that's sorely lacking in our culture, and that's where our pride should be

 

So no, I don't agree with many of my "fellows" trying to prove to the world that their equality is anything special, cause that's hypocritical right there

 

Actions speak louder than words is what I've found, but I guess that's my two cents on the matter

ok, normally  i agree with you, but here i've gotta go against that, the law (not the vetoed one, the actual law) is meant to support the rights of the people, and while it was heavy handed this time, it was not wrong to do so. if given the chance, it likely would have taken Georgia decades more to support a veto of this bill. it does set back relations, but that goes both ways.

 

do you think you deserve to have your rights blocked by a bunch of bigoted a******s just so they can drag ther heels for as long as possible? because currently that's what you're arguing for. My brother, 37 years old, just proposed to his partner, they've been together since before i can remember, (i'm 23 now, i met them when i was 9, they've been together since long before that) and only now can he access the same marriage rights that my other brother and his wife have. So what if it sets back relations if it evens the playing field? To use a line that i said in another topic, how long are you willing to wait until you're sick of it? I agree with you that it shouldn't have been forced, but at the same time, it's been way too long.

 

do you think that law was tact? setting something like that into law sets back relations just as far as the SCOTUS granting gay marriage, it grants a legal excuse to discriminate, and uses religion as a buffer.

 

you're right, you aren't better because you're bi, and you also aren't worse, you're equal, and the fact that you would allow a bill such as that to be signed before accepting the step in of the supreme court really makes me feel as if you don't want to be on the same level. i too prefer changing minds on the ground before changing laws in the court, but sometimes you've got to be practical, you're not always going to get people to change their minds unless you drag them kicking and screaming out of their holes. this was one of those times.

 

it's not about "gay pride" here, it's not even about disney, it's about Georgia's political leaders (and population) holding a completely different view from much of the rest of america. disney wasn't blackmailing, neither was the NFL, they simply disagreed with the law that was about to be placed onto the state, and said "if you go full bigot, we leave" that's not blackmail, that's capitalism. if you don't support a decision, why would you give money to the people making said decision? had disney remained, they could likely have suffered a loss of profits from associating with what could have been called a bigoted state. they, and the NFL saw this, and chose the more profitable of the two options.

 

not sure if i made sense seeing as i just woke up, but i'm willing to clarify anything you either disagree with or don't understand.

[Phantom Roxas]

not sure if i made sense seeing as i just woke up, but i'm willing to clarify anything you either disagree with or don't understand.

 

Actually, you made perfect sense and that was an incredible response. Well said.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

ok, normally  i agree with you, but here i've gotta go against that, the law (not the vetoed one, the actual law) is meant to support the rights of the people, and while it was heavy handed this time, it was not wrong to do so. if given the chance, it likely would have taken Georgia decades more to support a veto of this bill. it does set back relations, but that goes both ways.

 

do you think you deserve to have your rights blocked by a bunch of bigoted a******s just so they can drag ther heels for as long as possible? because currently that's what you're arguing for. My brother, 37 years old, just proposed to his partner, they've been together since before i can remember, (i'm 23 now, i met them when i was 9, they've been together since long before that) and only now can he access the same marriage rights that my other brother and his wife have. So what if it sets back relations if it evens the playing field? To use a line that i said in another topic, how long are you willing to wait until you're sick of it? I agree with you that it shouldn't have been forced, but at the same time, it's been way too long.

 

do you think that law was tact? setting something like that into law sets back relations just as far as the SCOTUS granting gay marriage, it grants a legal excuse to discriminate, and uses religion as a buffer.

 

you're right, you aren't better because you're bi, and you also aren't worse, you're equal, and the fact that you would allow a bill such as that to be signed before accepting the step in of the supreme court really makes me feel as if you don't want to be on the same level. i too prefer changing minds on the ground before changing laws in the court, but sometimes you've got to be practical, you're not always going to get people to change their minds unless you drag them kicking and screaming out of their holes. this was one of those times.

 

it's not about "gay pride" here, it's not even about disney, it's about Georgia's political leaders (and population) holding a completely different view from much of the rest of america. disney wasn't blackmailing, neither was the NFL, they simply disagreed with the law that was about to be placed onto the state, and said "if you go full bigot, we leave" that's not blackmail, that's capitalism. if you don't support a decision, why would you give money to the people making said decision? had disney remained, they could likely have suffered a loss of profits from associating with what could have been called a bigoted state. they, and the NFL saw this, and chose the more profitable of the two options.

 

not sure if i made sense seeing as i just woke up, but i'm willing to clarify anything you either disagree with or don't understand.

I agree with Roxas here, while I don't agree with your response, it was a fine, rational one based on logic, so I must applaud you for that. Now, why do I disagree with you?

 

P1

 

I'm not denying that, it would take decades more, it might even take a century. But that type of change will be a lasting change. New generations will be born, new generations will see the world, new generations will realize that LGB isn't some innate inferiority. And they will come to that conclusion on their own, rather than be forced to accept it by a minority (which is exactly that the situation in Georgia would be). Relations can only improve from that bill onward, because I see the good in humanity. It becomes very difficult to ruin the life of a man or woman who has been kind to you all their life, it might not happen today or tomorrow, but it will happen.

 

P2 

 

I guard my heart very carefully, so the answer to your question is an eternity. I am willing to die for LGB relations to improve, even if I don't see it fully capitalized in my lifetime, I have hope that it will improve in future generations. When people see travesty's like the Matthew Shepard Murder, they re-evaluate their stance, and that re-evaluation is lasting. Having 5 lawyers a world away, tell you something doesn't have that kind of response. For all my preaching of logic, we are emotional beings, and emotion is what lasts. That should be what we should tap.

 

I'm truly overjoyed for your brother and his future husband (I'm sorry if the term husband offends you, I mean no disrespect when I use it in this context), but that's a struggle many of us in the LGB community go through. I'm only 19, and to be quite honest, I'm not even fond of the idea of marriage in my life. But that hasn't stopped everyone from rednecks at my university to my own father spitting in my face for not being straight. You know what you should do there, be the better person, and you weather the hate, as your brother clearly has done by remaining true to himself. I proved my mettle to all those who doubted me, but I didn't do it by flaunting my sexuality in their face. I did it by showing that my sexuality did NOT represent me as a person, and as a human I was their equal. Now you may say, we shouldn't have to prove anything. It should be a right. I disagree, nothing is given, every right was fought for at some point in time.

 

The playing field isn't even, all you've done is forced the hatred underground, and now the warfare will be one of Guerrilla and Cell warfare rather than one of a clear opposition. You flattened the playing field, all that does it bury the hate deeper into the ground and now, you have to dig it out to get rid of it. It's not been too long, because there is not set time limit on how long humanity has to evolve. You really should not force these things. I'd hope that reconstruction would have shown this to the world, but apparently not.

 

P3

 

I think a law speaks the will of the people. There is a reason why the LGB movement went through the courts instead of congress, because while the population in total might support the movement, looking at that 53% un-stratified paints a rosier picture of how people truly feel about it. It might be unfair to the minority, but it's not you can change your sexuality. Homosexuality isn't a new concept, we have weather'd thousands of years, and we will weather it a thousand more for a lasting resolution to it rather than a cheap fix that will only fan the flames of disconnect

 

P4

 

Really? LGB has won 3 major cases. Lawrence, Obergefell, and Windsor. Yet why did support for LGB increase so drastically regardless of these cases? Because of the sacrifices by people in our movement. Tragedy speaks, be it Shepard, or something like Governor Milk. Injustice speaks. Bigotism, a term so easily thrown around, is largely discomfort born out of ignorance. Peacefully easing out that ignorance will on it's own ease out the discomfort. People didn't need to be dragged out kicking and screaming cause they were already changing. Moves like this really don't help, because again, people don't like being strong armed. 

 

I hate to draw this analogy, but here goes. What Disney did to Georgia isn't far different than someone refusing to hire me unless I changed, or atleast pretended to change my sexuality. You might say, but being Bi isn't wrong...well following your Religion isn't wrong either. Many people feel that homosexuality works against their religion, but it should be our goal to prove that we adhere to so much more of the Bible (most relevant example) than we go against it (Leviticus) 

 

Change cannot be forced if it is to be lasting. At the end of the day, you may say Winter, you're bi, you're not religious and thus don't understand the pain of not being married, you're young. And that's all fair, I can't disagree with that. All I can say is that aggression has never solve problems like this. The answer is to stay firm to your views (which in LGB's case is factually correct), and not force it on others, but rather let them see the wrong of their ways in a more natural way. I grew up not being entitled to anything, and thus feel that it's my duty to fight for what I want. But I can understand if not everyone shares that vision

[vla1ne]

I agree with Roxas here, while I don't agree with your response, it was a fine, rational one based on logic, so I must applaud you for that. Now, why do I disagree with you?

 

P1

 

I'm not denying that, it would take decades more, it might even take a century. But that type of change will be a lasting change. New generations will be born, new generations will see the world, new generations will realize that LGB isn't some innate inferiority. And they will come to that conclusion on their own, rather than be forced to accept it by a minority (which is exactly that the situation in Georgia would be). Relations can only improve from that bill onward, because I see the good in humanity. It becomes very difficult to ruin the life of a man or woman who has been kind to you all their life, it might not happen today or tomorrow, but it will happen.

 

P2 

 

I guard my heart very carefully, so the answer to your question is an eternity. I am willing to die for LGB relations to improve, even if I don't see it fully capitalized in my lifetime, I have hope that it will improve in future generations. When people see travesty's like the Matthew Shepard Murder, they re-evaluate their stance, and that re-evaluation is lasting. Having 5 lawyers a world away, tell you something doesn't have that kind of response. For all my preaching of logic, we are emotional beings, and emotion is what lasts. That should be what we should tap.

 

I'm truly overjoyed for your brother and his future husband (I'm sorry if the term husband offends you, I mean no disrespect when I use it in this context), but that's a struggle many of us in the LGB community go through. I'm only 19, and to be quite honest, I'm not even fond of the idea of marriage in my life. But that hasn't stopped everyone from rednecks at my university to my own father spitting in my face for not being straight. You know what you should do there, be the better person, and you weather the hate, as your brother clearly has done by remaining true to himself. I proved my mettle to all those who doubted me, but I didn't do it by flaunting my sexuality in their face. I did it by showing that my sexuality did NOT represent me as a person, and as a human I was their equal. Now you may say, we shouldn't have to prove anything. It should be a right. I disagree, nothing is given, every right was fought for at some point in time.

 

The playing field isn't even, all you've done is forced the hatred underground, and now the warfare will be one of Guerrilla and Cell warfare rather than one of a clear opposition. You flattened the playing field, all that does it bury the hate deeper into the ground and now, you have to dig it out to get rid of it. It's not been too long, because there is not set time limit on how long humanity has to evolve. You really should not force these things. I'd hope that reconstruction would have shown this to the world, but apparently not.

 

P3

 

I think a law speaks the will of the people. There is a reason why the LGB movement went through the courts instead of congress, because while the population in total might support the movement, looking at that 53% un-stratified paints a rosier picture of how people truly feel about it. It might be unfair to the minority, but it's not you can change your sexuality. Homosexuality isn't a new concept, we have weather'd thousands of years, and we will weather it a thousand more for a lasting resolution to it rather than a cheap fix that will only fan the flames of disconnect

 

P4

 

Really? LGB has won 3 major cases. Lawrence, Obergefell, and Windsor. Yet why did support for LGB increase so drastically regardless of these cases? Because of the sacrifices by people in our movement. Tragedy speaks, be it Shepard, or something like Governor Milk. Injustice speaks. Bigotism, a term so easily thrown around, is largely discomfort born out of ignorance. Peacefully easing out that ignorance will on it's own ease out the discomfort. People didn't need to be dragged out kicking and screaming cause they were already changing. Moves like this really don't help, because again, people don't like being strong armed. 

 

I hate to draw this analogy, but here goes. What Disney did to Georgia isn't far different than someone refusing to hire me unless I changed, or atleast pretended to change my sexuality. You might say, but being Bi isn't wrong...well following your Religion isn't wrong either. Many people feel that homosexuality works against their religion, but it should be our goal to prove that we adhere to so much more of the Bible (most relevant example) than we go against it (Leviticus) 

 

Change cannot be forced if it is to be lasting. At the end of the day, you may say Winter, you're bi, you're not religious and thus don't understand the pain of not being married, you're young. And that's all fair, I can't disagree with that. All I can say is that aggression has never solve problems like this. The answer is to stay firm to your views (which in LGB's case is factually correct), and not force it on others, but rather let them see the wrong of their ways in a more natural way. I grew up not being entitled to anything, and thus feel that it's my duty to fight for what I want. But I can understand if not everyone shares that vision

alright, you've got your reasons, and i can understand them, but i still disagree, so we probably won't see eye to eye on this for a long while, I don't have enough time today to argue that particular point, since it really can boil down to individual differences, but i have no issue with your own views, because i understand where you're coming from as far as SCOTUS decisions and not forcing the point. so that's that for now, and i'll respect it.

 

but one thing i would like to point out is that the Disney issue, and by extension the NFL statement don't count as blackmail or extortion, they're both independent businesses who are allowed to choose whom they partner with, Georgia's decision would have likely negatively impacted both companies images, and as such, it was a legitimate business decision to choose cutting relations rather than continue business. in addition, Georgia is not owed business from either Disney or the NFL, they simply had aligning interests (unless there was a form of contract that i am not currently aware of) outside of a contract, not only is it allowed, it's completely reasonable for a business to take away their resources from any given partner who's views threaten their bottom line. it's akin to a voter choosing a separate party/candidate when the current party/candidate disappoints him. it does have more impact because even today money speaks louder than votes, but it remains equally as valid a tactic.