California's travel ban blocks state-funded travel...

...to four more states over LGBT issues. I can tell where this is going.

https://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/06/23/californias-travel-ban-blocks-state-funded-travel-to-four-more-states-over-lgbt-issues/

And some people claim that California's travel ban is "religious discrimination" and that the LGBT issues are "not discriminatory". As if.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jun/23/californias-travel-ban-targeted-christians/

Ah yes the old "being religious makes me above all else" delusion.

Giving gay people equal treatment and not giving religious people special treatment is not discrimination, it is literally the opposite.

Good. Bad behavior should not be rewarded. California again is leading the nation in freedom. I can't wait to see the trumpkins butthurt over this. Lol

Lol Cali, that's all.

Going to be fun to see how this affects the sports teams.

lol being anti-gay in 2017.

I'm rather mixed about this. It's always good to stand up for what you believe is right, but if you never make any progress then good intentions never ends up being of much worth. If you all think this will actually amount to something rather than just causing the other "side" to dig in as deep, then I'd say go for it.

But I could have sworn California tried this as a tactic to combat what it felt was discrimination on immigration from Arizona not too many years ago, and they caved when Arizona actually fought back.

You can't force change. All you can do is try and support the flow forward, however slow it might be, without pushing too hard too fast and getting stuck. We saw this in 2016 Election, and I think stuff like this will just see the same backlash in 2018 and 2020.

Hmm, if any state employee or christian in California feels this ban is discrimination, why aren't they filing a lawsuit, religious discrimination of any kind is against the constitution.

Maybe it´s time tho that California move away from America and form their own country. It´s not like they really want to be considered americans anyways.

I'd rather the south and other red states do that first, with their low average iq, income, gdp, and love of archaic laws bogging down the rest of the Country.

With that, USA might actually be the greatest country on earth stats wise.

The harsh reality is how discrimination happens each and every day by our government and most of you don't even realize that you support it happening.

How is it discrimination? Why does being a Christian mean they should get special treatment?

Whatever, the Oakland Raiders are going to Nevada. Nah-Vah-Dah. The sports teams don't matter any more as far as I am concerned, all is lost. People will bitch about college sports and Cal is meh these days, but that was always a scam from the beginning so no big loss there.

Why Nevada!?!? Hey, let's go catch a Raider's game! Nah, I want to go see Celine Dion. Yeah let's go see her instead...

Yeah, without the real welfare states and the textbook-hypocrites in that part of the country, this nation might actually get somewhere. I don't deride the people and individuals in those areas, I've got family there, but as a whole/as states they really just do nothing but screw us. Rather they "get clean" than move out, though.

Also, just want to say, as a Californian I definitely consider myself American first. I get kind of pissed when I hear my peers ("Californians") think of themselves as unique or separate, like we are foreigners or something. Yeah we might talk different or whatever but that's just a regional thing, doesn't mean we get to be haughty. I think it's incredibly shortsighted to go "Oh all is lost, cast-off and make our own country" a few months into some idiot's presidency when a few short months ago we were experiencing one of the best.

Shit happens, it ends, good stuff happens, it ends.

ironic statement there when California has one of the highest illegal immigration populations.

But i think California would have a easier time getting all the other states to let it go.

Are you being serious?

And it´s not special treatment, no more than if the religion was any other like say Islam.

Muslims also don't have special treatment nor should they get it.

Being religious is not an excuse to discriminate against gays, and the government not giving funding to anyone to travel to a specific place regardless of religious belief is in no way shape or form discrimination.

If they were to say that they won't pay for the travel of Christian employees but will for non-Christian employees, then it would be discrimination. But that's not remotely close to what they did.

And being gay is no reason/excuse to discriminate against a religion.

Also you kinda got this discrimination misunderstanding. If someone can get state funding to travel to Washington but not texas, that is discrimination since the only reason is one being more to the democrats liking than the other.

What discrimination against the religious? You're delusional.

At least i'm not a hypocrite like someone else.

Whats the hypocrisy? Besides you are being hypocritical since you're so furious about discrimination against the religious that you will delude yourself into thinking it's happening when it isn't, but you seem perfectly fine with actual discrimination against LGBT people.

LOL throwing the word discrimination around. You have to be a protected class vis a vis the government.

So seeing how Christians aren't a protected class in most middle eastern countries, there's no Christian discrimination in the middle east?

You have a real messed up world view.

You are against the so called Travel Ban Trump put up, while this is not the exact same in California , the principal are similar.

And your hypocrisy , you are against one discrimination but not against another , and yes making some stateemployees pay for travels while others don't is discrimination when the reason for that is religion.

Straw man is it then? This thread is about California. I wasn't aware it drifted to the Middle East.

Jesus Christ you're slow.

EVERYONE HAS TO PAY FOR THEIR TRAVEL. STRAIGHT, GAY, RELIGIOUS OR ATHEIST, YOU HAVE TO PAY.

It's also funny how you think homophobia is exclusive to religious people.

It's not a strawman as I'm not implying you actually think that, it's a demonstration of how your logic is flawed and hypocritical.

Claiming it's not discrimination if the government don't recognise that group as a protected group is incredibly dumb. Use you're common sense, if the problem is with the actions of the government, then why would that government then add the group they're discrimination against to the protected groups? Clearly you agree otherwise you would think that Christian discrimination by Muslim run governments doesn't exist, unless you do think that in which case you're more messed up than I thought.

Are you high or something? The main topic is "California’s travel ban blocks state-funded travel to four more states" Meaning that some will have a state funded travel allowance for non-essential travels and some don´t

So no everyone does not have to pay for their travels.

Religion is Religion , So not sure where you get that homophobia from. Islam or Christianity , same thing.

This is insane, how can you be so daft? The state said they won't pay for travel to those four states, who is that discriminating against? Religion isn't a part of it, at all. Yet you're trying to make it so because... why exactly?

If I said I'm not going to buy anyone ice cream, am I discriminating against Christians because everyone includes Christians? This is such a simple concept, if it applies to everyone equally, it isn't discrimination. You can argue that it's a bad decision, but to say it's discrimination is pure delusion.

Ok, let´s take this slow. Since you have a hard time following.

California sends A to Washington on a non-essential travel, A gets allowance from the state to fund the travel.

California sends B to Texas on a non-essential travel, B get´s nothing. (reasoning is nothing else then Texas has laws the democrats don't like, Laws that is motivated by a more conservative christian ideology)

You follow, That is discrimination , A gets preferential treatment over B simple because A is going to a more liberal minded state.

Who's it discriminating against?

The irony is how certain people will criticize Trump (one man) for his plan yet another man (A.G. of KA) gets a pass for his plan.

If someone sued against the A.G. and the case went before the 9th, what do you think the opinion would be?

If we pretend that the two are comparable, doesn't that mean it's hypocritical to support trumps ban but be opposed to this one?

Absolutely. You either support one man making policy or you don't. I prefer to get the final ruling from the SCOTUS and living with it. What alarms me though is how the lefties were fast to sue Trump but oddly silent in opposition of this action......unless I missed the lawsuits. Getting off a bit but everything political ends up hypocritical depending on who is doing something and who is not.

Because the two things are completely different.

One targeted a specific group of people while the other is the state saying they won't be paying for anyone's travel to a specific place.

Like I said before you can argue that it's wrong, but you'd have to be delusional to think it's discriminatory.

Nothing shouts 'America' like shitting on gay people.

Funny how American conservatives like to hold up the Constitution about as much as they like holding up the Bible, but they understand neither.

The religious right always playing the victim

No it is a straw man since I've limited my comments to the actual topic and the context of what the government would consider discrimination. It's stupid to confuse the issue with other topics. And stupid is a much more educated word than dumb. smh.

Well, for one the person who is going to a place that the poor Democrats in California have decided they don´t like and have decided that their way is the only way.

Ahh, you mean like the LGBT, illegal aliens, Muslims, BLM right.

Ya i agree it´s terrible when some groups think they are victims.... (P.S.U)

And who is that person?

Discrimination has to be against a specific group of people. When you say person A and person B it doesn't work because as far as I know there's no difference between person A and B. Maybe when person A tries to go to Texas he will also not get his travel paid for.

So tell me which group is getting their travel to Taxas paid for by the state, and which isn't?

So in other words you have cognitive dissonance and don't want to think rationally because that's too hard. I doubt you know what that means but it doesn't matter, you'll probably just try to find some spelling error to distract yourself with so you won't have to think of a proper response.

Like I said, use your brain and think rationally about this. Saying that it's not discrimination for Texas to treat gays like second class citizens because Taxas doesn't recognise gays as a protected group makes no sense of all. Of course Texas doesn't recognise gays as a protected a group because they're the ones doing the discriminating. The ones doing the discriminating are never the ones to protect the victims, whether it be Christians in the middle east, Jews in Nazi Germany, or gays in America.

Also only a pretentious dunce limits their word usage to appear more educated. One day I'll use dumb, another retard, sometimes moronic. It depends on my mood and the level of stupidity on display. I was being polite so I used what I felt was the least insulting insult of ones intelligence, but no I was mistaken, it was way to mild for the likes of you. You aren't just dumb, you're a irrational, uneducated, fool who shuts down all rational thought when their world view is challenged. Cleverbot can reason better than you can.

Considering I was the one on topic why you are throwing straw man's everywhere I'd say you have the cognitive dissonance. This thread is about the state of California period. Get on your soapbox elsewhere I'm tired of reading the whining.

So you did exactly what I said you would do... you're such a disappointingly predictable simpleton.

I gave you a valid counter argument and you're yet to address it, instead you took a single rhetorical question out of context to tried and spin it into something you thought you could argue against (and failing at even that) while ignoring all the rest which made up the bulk of my posts. Why do you even both posting if you can't even engage in the most basic forms of discussion? Won't you have more fun playing with rocks?

I think that what you are missing is that the person traveling isn't deciding where he wants to go. California doesn't pay for Joe traveler to go somewhere for fun. These are state employees conducting state business, as well as some public university students. California just won't be sending people to states that discriminate against homosexuals. The traveler isn't being discriminated against here because the traveler never had a say in where he/she was going in the first place.