It's clear the most people in this thread have no idea what they're talking about and just want to argue about religion. People seem to think that these types of laws are made to give state imprimatur to private discrimination whether against gays or some other group, but that simply isn't the case. It is meant to keep state organizations from passing laws or taking actions that burden a person's right to practice their religion. For instance, if a zoning ordinance was passed to force a local mosque to shut down, members could sue under such a law. Do people expect Mississippi lawmakers to pass an anti-gay discrimination bill or something like that? I wouldn't hold my breath. As my example suggests, in practice, these types of laws have tended to benefit non-majority religions disproportionately because most lawmakers are Christian or from a Christian background (thus passing laws that may seem religion-neutral, but really aren't). In any event, this law will probably have little to no effect on gay people, but let us continue arguing about separation of church and state and the liberal pile on.
Not the physical Westboro building itself. But yes, the Westboro people believe in their own unique religion. Is that not common sense?
You do realize no one in this thread criticized this law, right? This seems like a perfect example of this: http://kotaku.com/a-reminder-that-not-everyone-reads-before-commenting-1557812641
As an American, I am and I should be more worried about the legislative influence the Christian right has in my country than Islamic terrorism affecting me in any way shape or form other than a horrible excuse to take my privacy rights away from me.
http://www.theonion.com/articles/gay-teen-worried-he-might-be-christian,2888/ "OH WE LOVE YOU, FREAKS OF NATURE. of course bare acceptance is all you should need from us healthy normals, you deviant. look at how generous we are, casting all kinds of aspersions on your lifestyle and who you are, and pre-forgiving you for them! WOW"
