Arizona governor vetoes anti-gay law, clearing path for Super Bowl XLIX

Reuters

Super Bowl XLIX will be played in Arizona as scheduled.

Barring, you know, a blizzard.

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer announced moments ago that she has vetoed Senate Bill 1062, which would have allowed discrimination against gay men and women by business owners under the guise of religious freedom.

“It could divide Arizona in ways we can not even imagine, and no one would ever want,” Brewer said in explaining her decision.

Brewer cited that the bill had broad wording, which could have led to unintended consequences.  One such consequence could have been the loss of Super Bowl XLIX.

The NFL had issued a statement criticizing the bill in a roundabout way.  The league had not ruled out moving the Super Bowl, if the law had been passed.

56 responses to “Arizona governor vetoes anti-gay law, clearing path for Super Bowl XLIX

  1. So you’re telling me there’s a chance, as long as I edit it to be more specific? (Burkman’s immediate reaction?)

    It’s just curious that she said “too broad” like as if she only rejects the scope of the bill rather than rejecting it categorically.

  2. You should be able to hire and fire whoever you want and you should be able to refuse service to whoever you want if it’s YOUR business and YOU pay the bills!

  3. Economic reality has trumped the Reich Wing wet dreams of Arizona bigots. They have folded like a weed, rather than give up the financial boon guaranteed by the NFL, MLB and the NBA.

    This proves how principled these clowns are. Capitalism has made them forget about the religious crusade.

    They sold out!!! The base should be happy to know, the party who proposed this, have ZERO principles.

  4. I agree with you Expert…..sounds fishy to me….I bet it passes after the SB….with a reword of course and she will justify it…..move the SB to Buffalo or Cleveland…..haha

  5. Arizona just seems to be a pretty crazy state in general with a lot of weird people making strange laws. I wonder if we ask nicely if Mexico would be willing to take it back.

  6. She looks like a villain in a bad science fiction movie. I hear that, politics aside, that she’s actually a nice lady.

  7. I love how it’s an anti gay bill instead of something necessary for protecting religious freedom. Was it a perfect bill? No. But something of the kind is a constitutional necessity, such tension and ambiguity result in needless tension.

  8. Know the facts. There was not one mention in the bill anything about gays or discriminating against them. Typical leftist media making up talking points without reading the bill

  9. I think she did exactly what she should have done. As much as some of the people on these boards say. There was merit why the whole issue law was proposed. I know religious freedom is in the constitution as much as people would like to just ignore that now. just like guns and speech and all those other things people hold so dear. You should not be subject a law suit if you are being asked to do something you some people have a moral and religious objection too. What I have said a bunch of time and will say it again. There needs to be tolerance from both sides. Not just one. I know the one side in this feels justified in the intolerant attitudes. An example. If you are having a gay wedding and the photographer that you asked has religious beliefs that conflict, Go to another photographer! don’t sue them. Take you business elsewhere. Be tolerant. I know that is a hard concept for both sides to figure out. especially when neither side wants to be tolerant.

  10. Its funny… even before the hoopla from the NFL about the Super Bowl, it was suspected that she was going to veto the bill. Governor Brewer could give a rat’s butt what the NFL thinks, I do hope you realize that.

  11. Strategy, it’s not cut and dried. Complicated issue. The bill was a bad idea for many reasons, but the intention was to prevent businesses from being compelled to violate their religious convictions, as has happened in other states. I still don’t support it. It was unnecessary as gays are not a protected class in AZ under their current laws. It also was a bad publicity move to be sure.

  12. Anti-gay law? “Gay” doesn’t appear in the bill. The bill puts AZ law on basically the same footing as federal law and the Religious Freedom Restoration Action. The bill would allow someone to raise a religious objection to a refusal to conduct business with anybody. BTW, wasn’t the NFL refusing to do busy with AZ if they passed the law?

  13. Yeah. “Too broad” as in if it were more narrowly tailored to the purpose of not serving Gay people, it’d be more acceptable. Too too funny. And Sad. But Funny.

  14. This really shouldn’t be in sports news at all. As far as I am concerned the NFL should stay out of politics and just play football. The way the NFL is going everyone should boycott the Super Bowl.

  15. “It would divide us in ways we cannot even imagine…unless you consider thinking of it, proposing it, and passing it through our state’s legislature ‘imagining’ it.”

  16. So people dhould be forced to do things they dont want to do? Iron heres kettle. Im all for equal rights but one of those rights is a a right to have your own beliefs. If you dont want to take someones money in exchange for your good or service why force that person. This law is like twlling libs they cant tell people with guns to leave their privatly owned businesses to leave because of discrimination and personal beliefs. Sad day. And im for gay rights. Im just not for forcing people into doing things.

  17. Quickly losing interest in the NFL. Used to be one could turn to sports to forget about politics. No longer the case.

  18. Notice how she didn’t say the bill advocating discrimination was wrong, just how it would “could divide Arizona”. She left the door open for the conservative Christian Taleban to rewrite the bill to be “less broad”. That the Arizona state legislature even passed the bill should be grounds for taking away the Super Bowl if the NFL had any guts.

  19. No one should over think this on either side of the argument. If you agree or not, it was a bad bill. No one should make a choice on serving or turning away a person for being gay or not. I myself don’t agree with the gay community , but that doesn’t mean I can shut them out because we disagree. On the contrary, I should help as much as I can. I ask them to tolerate my beliefs. They should have the same tolerance. They are still my neighbor’s and I should treat them with respect. I am not there judge. This bill would make me their judge and I have enough responsibility. Gov. Brewer made the right choice on this veto. We have turned everything into a political argument to divide. When all we have to do is use our heads and common sense. Then do the right thing.

  20. The veto had nothing to do with the law itself and everything to do with businesses (including the nfl) speaking out about how insane this law was. Brewer’s no friend of the gay community but she’s also not a complete idiot.

  21. Wow…I haven’t seen Sally Jessie Raphael since I was a kid and here it turns out shes the Gov of AZ. Wonder where Donnahue and Geraldo are..

  22. What happened to “We reserve the right to refuse to service to anyone”?
    Let the free market system take care of things, we don’t need Nanny Government stepping in & telling people that they need to get along with each other.

  23. NFL still needs to remove the Super Bowl from Arizona. It will send the message they aren’t like the IOC giving the Olympics to Sochi and Russia.

  24. Pathetic waste of time creating this ridiculous law. Roger, you should pull the Super Bowl outta there and see how the bible-beating business owners like it. Let them see what discrimination feels like when they lose thousands.

  25. Everyone screaming religous freedom should keep in mind that religion was supposed to be in two places. Churches and your home. Nowhere else. The public was meant to be secular, with no mention of jesus, god, or religion of any kind anywhere in public.

  26. So much for “scorpions for breakfast”! Instead, Governor Brewer bowed to the pressure of the media painting this issue to be something it absolutely is not. They shouted “discrimination against gays” and the sheeple came running to protest, including the NFL, albeit mostly with good intentions. But for anybody who actually read the bill, it’s easy to see that it was about preventing further discrimination against Christian business owners as several have lost their family livelihoods recently because activists have sought them out to try to force them to take part in their gay wedding ceremonies when they had plenty of pro-gay providers from which to choose. But still, this bill did NOT allow businesses to discriminate against any people, it only intended to protect people from providing services and products which are against their faith (i.e.- gay “wedding” photography and cakes). The NFL further contributed by trumpeting the paradoxical Humanist mantra of Relativism, the absolute moral that there can be no absolute morals. And they believe that absolutely!

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!