Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

NY Religous Exemptions posted online - read it here

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
BR_Parkway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-24-11 04:11 PM
Original message
NY Religous Exemptions posted online - read it here
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Unvanguard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-24-11 04:14 PM
Response to Original message
1. They look okay to me. The non-severability clause is a bit weird.
Presumably they're worried that a court will strike down the religious exemptions, but I'm not sure why.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BR_Parkway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-24-11 04:19 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. Yeah, wonder what happens to the SSM part if the whole bill is struck down
by a court.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Unvanguard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-24-11 04:21 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. It's invalidated too. That's the point of the non-severability clause.
Doesn't seem very likely to me. Probably a concession to appease the somewhat-more-paranoid worries of opponents about the liberal activist judiciary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BR_Parkway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-24-11 04:25 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. California deja vu?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BR_Parkway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-24-11 04:15 PM
Response to Original message
2. Appears to only apply to religious organizations and affilitated non-profits
not individual business owners
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mz Pip Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-24-11 04:21 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. That's how I read it.
But I'm not a lawyer. It looks like a church will have the right to refuse to rent out its community hall for a wedding reception for a Gay couple if it chose to.

Not sure if that is really fair. I know I would not be able to get married in a Catholic Church since I'm not Catholic and would not jump through the religious hoops to do so, but I doubt the Church would object to my renting a hall for a reception.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kerrytravelers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-24-11 04:15 PM
Response to Original message
3. i.e. We can be bigots if we want.
And I think it would be perfectly fine to make a public list of who these people are and to post it online so that we all know with who not to conduct business.

Maybe HRC or another organization will do this. I think they should.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-24-11 04:18 PM
Response to Original message
4. Great! Let 'em go broke.
This is a bonanza in a time of trouble. Anyone who doesn't want a piece of this action, GREAT! So very much more for the businesses that do. And there are plenty of them. Desperate restaurants and halls. Caterers with skills sitting by the phone. And gifts! And suits! And gowns!

There is going to be a spending spree and any idiot who doesn't want in on it, hallelujah!

And in Manhattan, I guarantee you that there are loving churches that will embrace you with joy and true friendship, because I had friends who found them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-24-11 04:29 PM
Response to Original message
9. As long as the state recognizes and can perform the marriages,
that is the most important thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eggplant Donating Member (395 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-24-11 04:50 PM
Response to Original message
10. I think that if the non-severability becomes an issue...
...then we can just pass it again without the clause later on.

Having a celebration party at a venue that is hostile to the party goers seems like a bummer of a party anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 07th 2024, 06:51 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC