A Sensible Response To Indiana

NASCAR

People are people.  And as such, will find that they want to associate with people they find … agreeable.

I may find that association unacceptable – think my daughter and ANY boy – or not.  But the truth remains that we are free, it’s a hallmark, to associate with any one we want.

Indiana has sparked controversy, and many liberal groups have responded by “banning” behavior they find disagreeable.  Funny that.  Disagree with a Leftist?  Be banned!

But I like NASCAR’s response:

NASCAR is disappointed by the recent legislation passed in Indiana,” chief communications officer Brett Jewkes said in a statement. “We will not embrace nor participate in exclusion or intolerance. We are committed to diversity and inclusion within our sport and therefore will continue to welcome all competitors and fans at our events in the state of Indiana and anywhere else we race.

In short – “we disagree with Indian but will continue doin’ what we do!”

Redneck logic!

5 responses to “A Sensible Response To Indiana

  1. The funny thing is that the Leftists believe this a harbinger of a pogrom against gays, and yet no such thing is in sight. It’s pure projection – they anticipate violence because they themselves are violent and cannot imagine free association that does not lead to misery and strife. They are narcissists, and any rejection of their world view is taken personally and cause for eventual reckoning.

    • they themselves are violent and cannot imagine free association that does not lead to misery and strife. They are narcissists, and any rejection of their world view is taken personally and cause for eventual reckoning.

      Yes.

      Diversity in spirit is their domain UNLESS you do not buy into their doctrine!

  2. “Indiana has sparked controversy, and many liberal groups have responded by “banning” behavior they find disagreeable. Funny that. Disagree with a Leftist? Be banned!”

    Except that’s not even remotely true. What has happened is that groups, including other state governments and large corporations, have said they don’t support this law and won’t do business in Indiana. That’s EXACTLY what you supposedly want! You don’t like a law? Don’t live in that place. Don’t work in the place. In a free market, a state that passes bad laws will suffer for it and change their minds (or not, and deal with the consequences).

    Similarly, NASCAR is free to still do business there while publicly opposing it. That’s their choice, and I applaud their stance while being disappointed that they haven’t tried to use more of their leverage.

    Name a single instance where Indiana’s law has been “banned”, a word you use twice in your post. How could you even ban a law? Have the groups that oppose gay marriage been “banned” by “leftists”? Of course not. You’ve descended back into barking like a bad Glenn Beck impression.

    Let’s just look at your absurd position:
    1) “I don’t want to serve gay customers because it’s against my religion” — Pino disagrees but thinks that this is a protected right
    2) “I don’t want to do business with anti-gay states because it’s against my personal moral beliefs” — Pino thinks that this is lefists banning behavior?

    • nickgb | April 6, 2015 at 2:43 pm

      Good to see you old friend! Mom in town and a wedding in Virginia – I left THR unattended.

      What has happened is that groups, including other state governments and large corporations, have said they don’t support this law and won’t do business in Indiana. That’s EXACTLY what you supposedly want!

      Um, yes. You are right. My world view says that if I disagree with you for what so ever reason, I don’t have to associate with you. The liberal world view says that if you don’t agree with me, you must associate with me.

      Just because.

      So, if the baker disagrees with Mark and Jason, the baker must associate. But it is entirely alright for Seattle to not associate with Indiana.

      Be consistent.

      Name a single instance where Indiana’s law has been “banned”

      The law isn’t being banned, just the state. Which is silly.

      Let’s just look at your absurd position:

      1. I think the law is silly on one point – they don’t need to appeal to religion. I need not provide a single reason why I choose not to do business with someone.

      2. I think the left is fine in denying service when it suits them – think musicians and republican candidates – but are just appalled, Appalled I tell you – when someone denies a ‘chosen’ class.

  3. NY and Connecticut both banned state-funded travel to Indiana, stupid over-reactions they’ve since come to their senses over.

Leave a Reply