Bookman and Wingfield: Liberty vs. discrimination

kyle-Jay

 

 

 

 

Here’s the second installment of The Jay & Kyle Show, with today’s topic being the “religious liberty” amendment that was the topic of so much debate and anger, especially within the Republican Party, during the recent legislative session.

With a Supreme Court decision expected next month that may legalize gay marriage in Georgia, it is likely to be a topic in next year’s General Assembly as well.



Previous columns on the topic:

Religious liberty and the right to discriminate

Does Georgia need  a religious liberty bill?

Erotic liberty vs. religious liberty? Not hardly

Religious liberty, erotic liberty and 50 Shades of Grey

RFRA backers are being dishonest in the name of God

Reader Comments 0

309 comments
fatleo
fatleo

What is Kyle smoking?

Colwest
Colwest

religion, ignorance, bigotry, xenophobia, homophobia, racism, constructed paranoia, trickle down economics, and bible thumping rich old white folks - all united under one political party, all dying away.  the world will be better when the cretins are all gone

juvenal
juvenal

@Colwest Chinese very xenophobic, doubt they will be gone anytime soon......

GaGirl53171875
GaGirl53171875

Tax and spend (on things that benefit society) DEMOCRATS

Versus

Tax and giveaway (to business interests who donate to my campaign and my own business interests) REPUBLICANS

GaGirl53171875
GaGirl53171875

Progressive Dems - Citizens should have control over health decisions, like abortion and birth control, freedom of speech (how many times have we read about demontrators being arrested at GOP events, everyone should be equal under the law, we must take help those in poverty, a living wage,

Right wing Republicans - Women are not in control of the it bodies unless we say they are, cities and counties are banned from making their own regulations if the state doesn't like them (guns and plastic bags), other religions are not allowed (states making Christianity official religion), you are not allowed to marry who you love if we disagree with your lifestyle, every citizen required to own a gun (I'm looking at you North Georgia), corporations are people, endless warfare over ideological differences, etc

Brosephus
Brosephus

Oh geez...  The segregation/slavery whizzing contest has started.  That means it's time for me to step away for a while, lest I be called the Angry Black Man yet again for voicing my views on that particular topic.  Judging by some of the comments, my views may not be well accepted here.

Later...

josef
josef

SHEETZ

This one didn't last long...

Visual_Cortex
Visual_Cortex

@josef

Dang. I never got to post my bit about the Two Kinds of White People!

some other time perhaps.

N-GA-Online
N-GA-Online

There is no doubt what the motives are behind these bills. Much like the motives behind most of the recent legislation in many states restricting access  to legal abortions. In the first case, legislators are saying that they want people to have the right to discriminate.....PERIOD. In the latter case, legislators are saying they want to deny access to abortions by various means (waiting periods, clinic regulations, etc.).


The party that constantly whines that there is too much government regulation is creating a bunch of its own!


josef
josef

MARY ELIZABETH 

"I chose to leave the South until it changed its social system."

Whoah, hold your white horses right there.  Then you chose to come back and tell the ones who stayed and stuck it out how bad a job they did of it.

That kite don't fly.

MaryElizabethSings
MaryElizabethSings

@josef


Too simplistic an understanding you exhibit through your words, Josef.  In time, you will understand me better, I believe.

DownInAlbany
DownInAlbany

@josef I had a similar thought, though, I doubt she will understand your comment / confusion.

MaryElizabethSings
MaryElizabethSings

@josef


It's quite simple, Josef.  When I was a teenager growing up in South Georgia, I was very lonely even though I had surface friends.  No one really thought as I did/ do.  I felt very isolated.


Then, I met my first husband at summer stock in Connecticut when I was 18 years old.  He had the same vision of life that I had and I was no longer lonely.  We both were looking for something beyond the thinking of the norms of middle class America where we grew up (He was from Tacoma, Washington).  In the Village of New York City, I found that my "unorthodox thinking" for the South was right in tune with others of my generation.  I clarified who I was in New York City and what my thoughts were.  (Even though we divorced for private reasons, we remained the best of friends until my first husband's death at age 69 in 2006.)


When I came back South, desegregation had already begun.  I had had a job already lined up in NYC with the city's recreation department and I was looking to be a teacher there after I got certified, but I missed my family.  As my first husband stated to me at that time, when we were trying to figure out where I should end up (for at that time, after 7 years there, I felt like a New Yorker), he said to me, New York is too harsh a city for you, you need your Southern roots.  Atlanta, not South Georgia, will suit your temperament better.  Being a writer, he said, NYC was a masculine city and Atlanta was a feminine city and that was why I would be better suited for Atlanta.  Being of an artistic temperament myself, I knew exactly what he meant.  And, he was right.


Since I am back, I want to share what I have deepened in my consciousness since I had lived that out-of-the-ordinary existence in NYC's East Village for 7 years (very liberal in thought, although I was a straight, working (at NYU) "hippie.")  I want to be an agent or instrument to see the South bloom fully, not giving up its Southern beauty in traits, only becoming more progressive and expansive in thought, beyond conventional thought, in order to reach its full potential, never before met.  I love the South, but I love America more.  (Besides, I was born to spread my light, not to hide it in darkness.)

InTheMiddle2
InTheMiddle2

@Visual_Cortex Please point out anything in that statement that is innaccurate in any way shape or fashion. If you are able to prove that I am responsible for either the civil war or slavery I will give you $10,000 cash.

RaindroidWillBoy
RaindroidWillBoy

@Visual_Cortex


What is wrong with putting forth that particular argument?  And if you are suggesting that we all continue to be held responsible, how long will that go on?

Hedley_Lammar
Hedley_Lammar

@InTheMiddle2 @Visual_Cortex  Please point out anything in that statement that is inaccurate in any way shape or fashion.


There isn't anything. But some will tell you that slavery and segregation has nothing to do with the black mans plight and he should just overcome all that in a generation


Its on all of us



Hedley_Lammar
Hedley_Lammar

@InTheMiddle2 @HeadleyLamar @Visual_Cortex You can choose to use the past as a crutch, an excuse, motivation, or an afterthougt.


None of the above. And denying the fact that enslaving a people for 200+ years, denying them even basic rights, and then segregating those same people for 100 more years on top of that wont have an effect on that group is incredibly stupid


Of course it will regardless the skin color. 

Visual_Cortex
Visual_Cortex

@RaindroidWillBoy @Visual_Cortex


What is wrong with putting forth that particular argument?

You guys afraid to click the link to find out?

here's a description; they explain better than I can (for free anyway)...

It’s a common and understandable knee-jerk reaction for people in the 21st century to think that just because they were born in the 1980s, or that their grandparents didn’t come to America until the 20th century, that they’re not responsible for something like slavery. Yes, it’s true that you’re not individually to blame for slavery, but you still may reap countless invisible benefits from being a white male in the 21st century that you just don’t get if you’re African-American, or from a poor family, or a woman. There’s an endless context to complicated social matters that doesn’t just begin or end with, “I didn’t start the fire.”

That was just one example of the ways in which many people are blind to the historical context in which we live–that every moment in the present is either consciously or subconsciously tied to the entire history of our species. 

barkingfrog
barkingfrog

The children of God need to grow up.

honested
honested

@barkingfrog @honested 

I am self-aware (for myself) and I don't seem to have any 'gods' in my family tree or dna.

Does that settle it?

josef
josef

IMAM

Like this new touch to the blog.

ON TOPIC

I think it’s time everybody stop, step back, and take deep breath.The last thing we need at this juncture is to start mucking around with one of our most cherished rights.Rolling into the pastures of nyanh-nyanh and s/he started it is counterproductive.

Questioning the motives behind these bills is a legitimate concern.The feeling that their rights of conscience may be being eroded by some is also a legitimate concern.

A dialogue between the two would be advised, but the chances of that happening in today’s climate of polarization is pretty slim.

All in all, the old folk wisdom holds: act in haste, repent at leisure.

 

Brosephus
Brosephus

@josef 

"The last thing we need at this juncture is to start mucking around with one of our most cherished rights."

While I understand your sentiment, there were likely people saying the same thing when Loving v Virginia was the talk of the land. 

"Questioning the motives behind these bills is a legitimate concern.The feeling that their rights of conscience may be being eroded by some is also a legitimate concern."

It's about as legitimate a concern as it is for that same group to erode the rights of others with different legislation at the same time they're worried about their rights being eroded.  Guilty conscience kinda works like that.  You feel something is being done to you because you're doing it to someone else.  

Brosephus
Brosephus

I don't understand the issue of this at all.  While some think the word marriage makes it a strictly religious institution, it would be nothing without the full backing and support of the government.  Religion cannot dictate how property is distributed in probate.  Religion cannot dictate what happens to children and other things when a marriage is dissolved by whatever means.  It's the probate laws that designate succession and so on.

If that were not the case, nobody would have any objection to Muslims using Sharia to determine how their members in their community carry out their actions according to their beliefs.

If Republicans don't intend for this legislation to actively allow discrimination against same-sex couples, then they should not have any objection to such language being contained in the legislation to prevent that.  Given the numerous people saying that inserting such a clause would gut the bill, they show their hand about their true intent.

I simply wish people from both parties would quit trying to dictate what people do behind the doors of their private residences.  If they are two grown and consenting adults, who cares?

Thank you Jay, and thanks Kyle, for debating this like two grown up individuals.

Brosephus
Brosephus

@Doggone_GA 

No disagreement from me there.  It's that legal authority's backing that enforces the marriage contract.

TBS
TBS

@Brosephus 

 "Given the numerous people saying that inserting such a clause would gut the bill, they show their hand about their true intent"

Both Stevie Wonder and Ronnie Milsap can see this from a mile away.  I'd venture to say that those touting the gutting of the bill see it as well but will continue the charades to appease the base.

Doggone_GA
Doggone_GA

@Brosephus The bottom line is that marriage is a LEGAL contract.  If that marriage license isn't signed by the appropriate legal authority (and that's a different issue) it doesn't matter what your church says you are NOT MARRIED.

Doggone_GA
Doggone_GA

@RaindroidWillBoy @Brosephus @Doggone_GA 

Institution:

: an established organization

: a place where an organization takes care of people for a usually long period of time

: a custom, practice, or law that is accepted and used by many people

Please note "law" in the last definition

TBS
TBS

Bottom line:  The RFRA wasn't able to get out of committee because 3 Republicans had the fortitude to join the Democrats to add language to the bill.  Language that as Bookman noted was the part about gays.  You know the bill isn't supposed to be about gays but adding the language somehow kills the intent claims the backers of this bill.  hmmmmmmmmmmm 


To those Republicans I say "Thank you for allowing commonsense and decency to prevail". 


DownInAlbany
DownInAlbany

@TBS In other words, this debate is, "much ado about nothing?"

TBS
TBS

@DownInAlbany @TBS


Take that up with Josh McKoon out of my hometown of Columbus.  He was the sponsor of the bill and the one who thought it was "much do about" a lot based on his whining and killing the bill once the language was added. 

But do carry on

TBS
TBS

@DownInAlbany @TBS 

And for the bill itself ........... You can bet that the RFRA in another form will be back during the next session.  Same piece of crap bill disguised with some different wording.

It wont be about gays in anyway (sold the same as this last round) but talk of adding language to guarantee that is the case will again bring the whines of the added language killing the intent.