Arizona Governor Jan Brewer
Arizona Governor Jan Brewer (R) has vetoed Senate Bill 1288. The bill would prevent professional licenses from being suspended based on the holder’s religious or moral beliefs.
The bill was passed by Arizona lawmakers, but has been vetoed by the Governor.
“…Government shall not deny, suspend or revoke a professional occupational license, certificate or registration based on a person’s refusal to affirm a statement that is contrary to the person’s sincerely held moral or religious belief, regardless of whether those beliefs are specifically espoused by a recognized church or religious body…”
AZ wanted a governor who hates the Constitution – or rather one who is obviously QUITE unfamiliar with it – and they got her!
Bravo, AZ. Bravo.
As Steve, Dean and Bill pointed out, she finally did something right, as this bill would enable the bigots to discriminate….
To enable the surgeon on duty to not operate on a known to be gay, lesbian, or trans person because they do not agree with LGBTQI people…
This bill makes it so their religious beliefs can’t prevent them from OBTAINING a license, it says nothing about allowing them to keep it for denying services based on their religious beliefs.
Jan Brewer should understand the work of our founding fathers,she appears to br a life support system for a virgina
this bill is written awkwardly, but I’m not reading this as some of you are. this says “government shall not deny… the license, certificate or registration… based on refusal to affirm…” this says nothing about refusing TREATMENT to anyone. so as I read this, government cannot deny your LICENSE if you refuse to sign a STATEMENT that is contrary to your own beliefs. it only references issuing the license (or not). so unless there is more to this bill that talks about allowing the refusal of treatment based on personal beliefs, I disagree with her veto.
She is an ugly old tool of the White Supremists and the Private Prison Industry. Look,Listen and Learn. Vote Non-R in 2012! Send the bitch and the other A-holes packing. Our state has been shamed in front of the entire world long enough! Let’s go back to the Sunshine State instead of the Sellout State.
Read the artical, not the headline. If someone goes to a doctor and he refuses to treat her because she is a lesbian and he is some bible thumper, this bill would allow him to turn her away without any repercussions. Or an anti-abortionist doctor refuuses to give a women a morning after pill because it is “murder”. The bill basically would any let any business pick or choose their customers
Read the bill, not the article if that’s your issue. This bill makes it so their religious beliefs can’t prevent them from OBTAINING a license, it says nothing about allowing them to keep it for denying services based on their religious beliefs.
Before we go jumping in on this argument, can we get from Gov. Brewer’s office her reasoning for issuing the veto?
Which way was this bill going to go? Was it to prevent people from being discriminated for their beliefs while applying for jobs? Was it meant to allow pro-lifers to work at pharmacies where they would deny birth control pills to legal customers? What?
Regardless of her reasoning, this bill makes it so their religious beliefs can’t prevent them from OBTAINING a license, it says nothing about allowing them to keep it for denying services based on their religious beliefs.
Even a pig can dig up a truffle once in a while!
After reading some of the other commenrs here, I take back my previous comment. yes, the law may allow those to refuse treatment or giving prescriptions based on religious belief and those who would practice such discrimination should not be licensed. i humbly admit guilt at being too quick to judge.
The comments on here are misleading. This bill makes it so their religious beliefs can’t prevent them from OBTAINING a license, it says nothing about allowing them to keep it for denying services based on their religious beliefs.
unconstitutional. impeach the bitch
Steve and Dean are correct. Brewer finally did something correct. A doctor who refuses to give a pregnant woman lifesaving treatment because the fetus might be harmed doesn’t deserve to have a license.
That’s incorrect. This bill makes it so their religious beliefs can’t prevent them from OBTAINING a license, it says nothing about allowing them to keep it for denying services based on their religious beliefs.
Wow, that headline is totally misleading. The bill would have allowed zealot pharmacists, for example, to deny drugs to certain people on religious grounds and retain their licenses. She actually did a good thing, in my view. She’s certainly not cutting off the right to practice religion freely. This kind of emotional, knee-jerk reaction doesn’t help anyone.
Have you actually read the bill? This bill makes it so their religious beliefs can’t prevent them from OBTAINING a license, it says nothing about allowing them to keep it for denying services based on their religious beliefs.
This woman is a dope! How people can vote for such stupid, ignorant people I can’t understand.
You screwed the pooch on this one. This bill would have allowed religious pharmacists to refuse to dispense contraceptive, religious therapists to refuse to treat LGBT people, etc. Vetoing this bill was the right thing to do.
Did you read the bill? This bill makes it so their religious beliefs can’t prevent them from OBTAINING a license, it says nothing about allowing them to keep it for denying services based on their religious beliefs.
To be a Governor, I presume that, the part where, when sworn, “defend and protect the Constitution of the United State” part must mean something. That is, I also have to presume, that she can read and can think, now that may be a big leap of “Faith”.
Governors don’t swear to defend the US Constitution, they swear to defend their state’s constitution.
This is a blatant attempt to make Secular Public Schools into Christian Schools.
Typical Republicunt.
I love the term, It is right on~!
who says stuff like this…what bunch of blind hate and lefty is too ignorant to even understand that Democrats voted against this bill also
Actually… as worded, the bill can be swung either way. Not only could it be used to protect an atheist from discrimination by religious zealots, but it could be used to, for example, force the board to retain the license of a religious-zealot LPC who refused to treat homosexuals when their national rules of ethics require them to treat all patients regardless of faith or sexuality. These sorts of laws are invariably a double-edged sword, and the religious right takes advantage of every one of them; when in doubt, it’s better to stand on the simple words of the 1st Amendment than to let such a law pass. I think Brewer is a pea-brained harpie, but this time she did us all a favor.
Agreed. I think this is the first bill she’s signed where I think she got it right. Note that she has vowed to work with the sponsor to reword the bill to make it less broad. We haven’t seen the end of this nonsense.
I think the comments are misleading. This bill makes it so their religious beliefs can’t prevent them from OBTAINING a license, it says nothing about allowing them to keep it for denying services based on their religious beliefs.
Actually, this bill makes it so their religious beliefs can’t prevent them from OBTAINING a license, it says nothing about allowing them to keep it for denying services based on their religious beliefs.
This deluded baggy faced old hen needs to be recalled.
“The modern conservative is engaged in one of man’s oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness” – John Kenneth Galbraith
I guess Brewer is standing up for those who want to be able to discriminate against Muslims and atheists….
Actually why were they bothering to write a law like this unless they wanted to allow for pharmacists to refuse birth control medicines to raped women?
I think that is EXACTLY what was on the mind of this bill’s sponsor. Here is another take on why she vetoed: http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2011/04/11/brewer-vetoes-religious-liberty-bill-warns-of-unintended-consequences/
Is Arizona still part of the US? How did the bill get that far?
I hope this means we can start discriminating against Christians!
Absolutely, “Steve”! I totally agree! This woman is batshit!
Hitler Came Back As A Woman—
You might be onto something… According to Wikipedia, Hitler died 7 months after Brewer was born. Maybe he took over her body? :o
thats funny, she looks much older then that
Hitler died 66 years ago this month.
Whoopie! have at’em! This is not Jesus’s form of Christianity! It is the Hell and Damnation .form!
Rep. Debbie McCune Davis, D-Phoenix, who voted against the measure said, “I’m always more comfortable when we move the bills through the process that we can explain and define. This bill doesn’t meet either of these tests.”
House Minority Leader Chad Campbell, D-Phoenix, called the bill “very, very dangerous” because its broad interpretation of a religious belief could lead to abuse. He said, for example, a doctor could treat cancer patients with leeches and keep his license by claiming the leeches are part of his personal religion.
Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2011/04/08/20110408arizona-religion-bill.html#ixzz1JMjlfRmn
What I cant believe is that you moron buy into this crap
Not a great example, leeches are still routinely used in modern, western medical practices as are Maggots.