WARNING: This blog contains copious amounts of adult GAY material. If that's offensive to you, please leave now. All pix have been gleaned from the internets so, if you see a picture of yourself that you don't wish to have posted here, please leave a comment on the post and I will remove it with my apologies.

I REPEAT: If you see a picture of yourself that you don't wish to have posted here, please leave a comment on the post and I will remove it with my apologies.

Thursday, January 11, 2018

Post-15793...

Welcome to theocracy...


Supreme Court won’t stop Mississippi law allowing discrimination against LGBT people

By Jeff Taylor · Monday, January 8, 2018

The U.S. Supreme Court has decided to allow Mississippi‘s anti-LGBTQ “religious freedom” law to stand by refusing to hear a challenge, letting a lower court’s ruling in favor of it stand.

The law, HB 1523, or the Protecting Freedom of Conscience from Government Discrimination Act, was signed by Republican Governor Phillip Bryant in 2016, with backing from Christian activists and in response to the Supreme Court’s ruling in favor of marriage equality. It allows businesses and government employees to refuse to serve the LGBTQ community if it conflicts with their religious beliefs.



US Supreme Court refuses to hear challenge to Mississippi’s discriminatory “religious freedom” law

By Matthew Taylor and Ed Hightower
11 January 2018

As a result, the ruling of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals remains in effect allowing and encouraging petty and stigmatizing discrimination against Mississippians who do not conform to conservative Judeo-Christian dogma. As the law stands, a county clerk in Mississippi can refuse to issue a marriage license to a gay couple. Likewise, a pharmacist can refuse to refill an unmarried woman’s prescription for birth control, and a restaurant owner could segregate transgender persons in his dining area, or ban them from eating there altogether.

1 comment:

  1. This is going to piss off a lot of people. Personally, if a place refused service, I'm happy to take my money elsewhere; if I'm treated poorly (segregated, if you will), I'm happy to take my money elsewhere. The issuing of marriage licenses, though, is a different story.
    The Supreme Court decides to hear a case based on at least four of the nine Justices of the Supreme Court agreeing to grant the Petition for Certiorari. If four Justices agree to grant the petition, the Supreme Court will consider the case. So, it makes me wonder why this lower court decision was left untouched.

    ReplyDelete

Nice you must be or delete your ass I will.