Springsteen ws a minor hack - who cares if he won't play in NC!

Perhaps, but Springsteen is just one thing.

There is national movement to push back against each state that passes explicitly hateful anti-GLBT civil rights laws and in some case they will really bite those states big time.

Smarter governors such as in Georgia and in South Carolina are saying NO to the hate laws. Not so much because they care about GLBT civil rights but because they don't want their states to take the economic hit.

Losing big sports events, losing convention bookings, losing major companies opening and creating jobs, losing large segments of major industries, losing tourism potential. It goes on and on.

Hate on GLBT people and pay the price.

Right wing states ... your choice.

Edited April 10, 201610 yr by Jingthing

Ok - so let's get this right.

Let's say you run a Mormon bakery.

A gay couple comes in and asks you to bake a big cock shaped wedding cake.

you refuse on the basis of your religion.

Why should the law force you to bake the cake?

And why does Springsteen care?

Let's face it - these issues only come up because gay activists trawl the US looking for people to refuse to serve them. There really is very little homophobia or racism left in the US besides what activists need to find to prove their points.

Edited April 10, 201610 yr by pedro01

Ok - so let's get this right.

Let's say you run a Mormon bakery.

A gay couple comes in and asks you to bake a big cock shaped wedding cake.

you refuse on the basis of your religion.

Why should the law force you to bake the cake?

And why does Springsteen care?

Let's face it - these issues only come up because gay activists trawl the US looking for people to refuse to serve them. There really is very little homophobia or racism left in the US besides what activists need to find to prove their points.

I've read some absolute crap on here B4 and the above is trying its hardest to push its way to the top of the pile.

Sent from my GT-I9000 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Ok - so let's get this right.

Let's say you run a Mormon bakery.

A gay couple comes in and asks you to bake a big cock shaped wedding cake.

you refuse on the basis of your religion.

Why should the law force you to bake the cake?

And why does Springsteen care?

Let's face it - these issues only come up because gay activists trawl the US looking for people to refuse to serve them. There really is very little homophobia or racism left in the US besides what activists need to find to prove their points.

I've read some absolute crap on here B4 and the above is trying its hardest to push its way to the top of the pile.

Sent from my GT-I9000 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Yes, it was obviously posted just to provoke a reaction.

NO substance at all.

Edited April 10, 201610 yr by Jingthing

States with these anti-gay CIVIL RIGHTS laws may lose BILLIONS of dollars in FEDERAL funding.

Now that would be GREAT news.

Watch these anti-gay politicians retract those laws faster than Trump can say something stupid.

“If these agencies find that Mississippi is in violation of federal nondiscrimination policies, then Mississippi, too, like North Carolina, they could use billions of federal dollars, which North Carolina cannot afford, but which Mississippi desperately cannot afford.”

http://www.advocate.com/politics/2016/4/09/rachel-maddow-mississippi-could-lose-billions-over-anti-lgbt-law

Like I said, the much bigger story here has very little to do with one Springsteen concert.

Edited April 10, 201610 yr by Jingthing

Springsteen ws a minor hack - who cares if he won't play in NC!

http://www.ranker.com/list/all-the-richest-musicians-in-the-world/worlds-richest-people-lists

Not bad for a "minor hack"...

Edited April 10, 201610 yr by mikebike

I can take him or leave him but I'm sure he has LOTS of fans in North Carolina who are not going to be happy about this news.

Next time ... VOTE against the haters.

Springsteen ws a minor hack - who cares if he won't play in NC!

http://www.ranker.com/list/all-the-richest-musicians-in-the-world/worlds-richest-people-lists

Not bad for a "minor hack"...

His 'music' sucked.- admit it...

I really don't see why people are focusing on Springsteen. It's about the message and Springsteen is the tip of the iceberg.

Ok - so let's get this right.

Let's say you run a Mormon bakery.

A gay couple comes in and asks you to bake a big cock shaped wedding cake.

you refuse on the basis of your religion.

Why should the law force you to bake the cake?

And why does Springsteen care?

Let's face it - these issues only come up because gay activists trawl the US looking for people to refuse to serve them. There really is very little homophobia or racism left in the US besides what activists need to find to prove their points.

You're having a laugh.

About half of US states have no laws prohibiting employment and/or housing discrimination against gay people.

I'd say that's a lot more than "a little".

Ok - so let's get this right.

Let's say you run a Mormon bakery.

A gay couple comes in and asks you to bake a big cock shaped wedding cake.

you refuse on the basis of your religion.

Why should the law force you to bake the cake?

And why does Springsteen care?

Let's face it - these issues only come up because gay activists trawl the US looking for people to refuse to serve them. There really is very little homophobia or racism left in the US besides what activists need to find to prove their points.

I've read some absolute crap on here B4 and the above is trying its hardest to push its way to the top of the pile.

Sent from my GT-I9000 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Yet this is the law that Springsteen doesn't like.

Religious business owners - such as hoteliers AND bakeries that object to having gay customers.

The bakery example was used specifically - a bakery had to pay out $135k in damages for refusing to bake a cake for a gay wedding on religious grounds (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/bakery-pays-135k-refusing-gay-wedding-cake-article-1.2479452)

Here's one in Texas - http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2016/02/24/texas-christian-baker-refuses-to-make-wedding-cake-for-gay-couple-just-like-jesus-wanted/

Fact is - just like Muslims won't sell booze, these people believe devoutly that homosexuality is a sin and so they will not get involved in providing services for homosexual weddings. The Texas cake will also not sell alcohol related cakes. Should alcoholics complain OR..... SIMPLY GO TO ANOTHER CAKE SHOP?

Obviously, the left have an issue with Christians. They have no issue with Muslims, yet I am sure if you went to a Muslim cake shop and asked for a gay wedding cake, they should also refuse.

I don't agree with their anti-gay sentiments but I do not think the government should force people to do things against their religious beliefs. I see no harm in this at all.

I don't agree with their anti-gay sentiments but I do not think the government should force people to do things against their religious beliefs. I see no harm in this at all.

I don't think people should be able to discriminate against a particular group of people based on some random interpretation of a fairy tale written thousands of years ago by people who weren't even there.

You do know that the Bible says that people who work on a Sunday should be put to death, right?

I don't agree with their anti-gay sentiments but I do not think the government should force people to do things against their religious beliefs. I see no harm in this at all.

I don't think people should be able to discriminate against a particular group of people based on some random interpretation of a fairy tale written thousands of years ago by people who weren't even there.

You do know that the Bible says that people who work on a Sunday should be put to death, right?

I agree and similarly, I don't think people should be forced to participate in activities that go against their religious beleifs.

I am not gay, nor am I religious but unlike the left, I am not against either.

Some very good points raised in this article: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/02/how_to_win_the_christian_bakersamesex_wedding_cake_debate.html

You have to put emotions aside on this one. It is an emotive issue but this really is not an anti-gay law.

The agenda of the LGBT community is to portray it as an anti-gay law, which is why it appears that way in the press.

We have to put on our thinking caps though and look at the details, not the headlines.

Edited April 10, 201610 yr by pedro01

Don't waste our time.

Perhaps you haven't looked at the Billboard top 100 for a while.

It's mostly vacuous bubble gum pop or "rap" (with a silent "C") allied with Autotune.

They are mostly there because of record company marketing.

Most modern popular music is what constitutes a waste of time.

Pop quizzes are going to be infinitely more difficult in years to come because the rubbish mostly sounds the same.

Jeez double dull Chicog, you sound just like my old man in the 70's and i was playing csny steely Dan eagles ect ect. And probably like every old man in every generation since.

Sent from my GT-I9000 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Except back then they didn't have machines that manufactured the music and autotune that made hideously talentless airheads sounding like they could sing.

The rubbish used to get filtered out.

I find it nothing short of false advertising that most modern acts can even dare to call themselves musicians.

Sounds like you are from the Mitch Miller or Sinatra & the Rat Pack era.

I'm sure glad Dylans or Neil Youngs mom didn't tell them they couldn't sing. Rock is not always about precision or perfect harmony.

Here is a Sid Viscious' version of one of your favorites. Frank Sinatras classic, My Way. Enjoy.

https://youtu.be/HD0eb0tDjIk

Politics should be left to politicians in my view. As it is the confirmed overseas tour venues for 2016 are bastions of Western liberalism, so a clean bill of health on LGBT issues. He has yet to confirm the date for Tel Aviv, but July 2016 is possible. Let's hope he resists any calls to boycott from BDS and goes ahead with a concert in the only middle eastern Country to respect LGBT rights.

I don't agree with their anti-gay sentiments but I do not think the government should force people to do things against their religious beliefs. I see no harm in this at all.

I don't think people should be able to discriminate against a particular group of people based on some random interpretation of a fairy tale written thousands of years ago by people who weren't even there.

You do know that the Bible says that people who work on a Sunday should be put to death, right?

I agree and similarly, I don't think people should be forced to participate in activities that go against their religious beleifs.

I am not gay, nor am I religious but unlike the left, I am not against either.

Some very good points raised in this article: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/02/how_to_win_the_christian_bakersamesex_wedding_cake_debate.html

You have to put emotions aside on this one. It is an emotive issue but this really is not an anti-gay law.

The agenda of the LGBT community is to portray it as an anti-gay law, which is why it appears that way in the press.

We have to put on our thinking caps though and look at the details, not the headlines.

more idiotic nonsense

The wingnuts are consistently on the wrong side of everything.

The law is ridiculous. The boss agrees. So the wingnuts attack the boss.

I should have expected this but honestly, didn't see this coming.

All of our TV wingnuts have chimed in. They're all down on talentless, over-the-hill Springsteen.

Always wrong about everything in the name of their pathetic conservative righteousness. A new low that I didn't think was possible, but there they all are.

Not one of the usual suspects said, "Springsteen's right, this is crazy."

Oh! And on another day and a another child molesting Republican monster gets nailed again(Dennis Hastert)!!! Sexual repression rears it's ugly head again.

Yet, we need a law to stop something that's never happened because you know...LGBT.

I can understand why they want Voter ID laws (stop voters) but I don't get this silly bathroom law. It's unbelievable. These wingnut Republican lawmakers need to find something to do instead of making shit up!

So, let's go after Springsteen for voicing his opinion and taking a stand. What a bunch of tools. And this is in Thailand, with ladyboys everywhere! I'm flabbergasted. A new low for the TV wingnuts.

Maybe the US should consider to have one single law book for the unites States.

Get a bit more United maybe.

I mean surely the wounds from the civil war must hace healed long enough for next step.

Would save zillions of dollars in administration for sure.

Maybe the US should consider to have one single law book for the unites States.

Get a bit more United maybe.

I mean surely the wounds from the civil war must hace healed long enough for next step.

Would save zillions of dollars in administration for sure.

Well, that's not gonna happen and not sure I would want it to.

But some things can and should be legislated nationally. Such as guaranteeing basic civil rights for all citizens, including GLBT. There are protections nationally based on race, religion, and sex, but not GLBT. Time to do that. But might take 20 years or so and there is so much backlash about marriage equality.

I like Springsteen's music, but don't consider him one of the greats (Beatle's, Stones, Led Zeppelin), but, like a lot of these guys, I could care less about his political views.

Protesting about prohibiting homosexuals from getting employment or housing is fighting for freedom. Fighting for men having the "right" to use the women's restroom is just plain silly. His fans should respond by boycotting his music and concerts and see how long he keeps it up.

You just don't have a clue do you? . It's not fighting for the right to use the women's restroom...it's, oh nevermind.

Holy Christ on a cookie.

He is over the hill anyway, so does anybody care ?

Sounds like you are from the Mitch Miller or Sinatra & the Rat Pack era.

I'm sure glad Dylans or Neil Youngs mom didn't tell them they couldn't sing. Rock is not always about precision or perfect harmony.

Here is a Sid Viscious' version of one of your favorites. Frank Sinatras classic, My Way. Enjoy.

https://youtu.be/HD0eb0tDjIk

I wasn't criticising people that never claimed to have a good voice, was I?

I'm criticising the ones that can only pretend to with technology, or worse, don't even try at all and call it "art".

...but I do not think the government should force people to do things against their religious beliefs. I see no harm in this at all.

Mormons at one time believed in and practiced polygamy, southern Christian churches preached slavery was ok because it was in the bible. Both of theses are now outlawed dispite the claim of religious fredom at the time.

Are you advocating it was wrong to outlaw polygamy and silvery because religion at the time said both were protected religious beliefs?

TH

Well done Bruce, pissing off your customers and fans is a brilliant way of making a political statement ......

Excuse me. How about, 'pissing off some of your customers and fans". Do not overstep, you do not suppose

that all would not support him? I for one, support economic boycotts as a means of showing opposition to

law passed, based on religious beliefs of some, to discriminate. That holds with segregation in the US,

apartheid in South Africa or religious discrimination in Saudi Arabia. However, we are focused here on my country.

please could you point out where it mentions SA or Saudi in the article, if Bruce wants to make political statements then he should run for office. him boycotting the concert will lose the ticket holders money as you don't get 100% refunds anymore plus as he doesn't tour much anymore his loyal fans are missing out on seeing him in concert. I still think the majority will be pissed off rather than supporting him as it's not going to have any effect on the people who passed the legislation, does Bruce think the ticket holders are going to protest on his behalf?

Springsteen created some of the best music of my generation- maybe any generation. Rich, Americana, folksy, and palpable. However, when we became adults and realized he uses our support of his products to act upon very political issues, he loses credibility as an artist, not gains credibility as a politician.

I get that everyone should be able to have a voice and fame should not saddle that. However, he does not action his voice in spite of his fame, he actions his voice leveraging his fame. Without question, this is abusive of fans; he leverages the fans. Those that love him likely reject the obvious ethical conflict, but most of what Springsteen endorses over the years is entirely ethical relativity. Without question the greatest source of bigotry, intolerance, and loathing is found in his politics, dressed in liberty, fraternity, and equality. Bruce was a radical leftist long before today.

We're seeing the usual left-right divide which is okay cause the right had already lost on all its issues over the past several score years right up to the present. The right has an instinct for it. It's compulsive. It's zero-sum with the right wearing the zero. They couldn't win at tic-tac-toe if they made the first three moves every time.

The right would need to document that the fans of The Boss have turned against him on this or are up in arms or are doing something --anything-- to boycott him. Some on the right are predictably howling but those old fans had, by their own admission, left Springsteen long ago and haven't ever looked back. Until now and in the name of religion, ethics, freedom and much else that they abuse.

Yes Bruce Springsteen is an entertainer so his political and socio-cultural statements make the news. Much like the views and jobs did of Ronald Reagan, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Sonny Bono, Fran Tarkenton who endorsed Richard Nixon and so many more public figures of the right.

The reactionary right pursues a double standard while it in fact ends up with no standards, or vacuous standards. The majority isn't always right but the right hasn't been right for a couple of generations now.

Gotta love those Southerners in the US. It's like a different planet down there.

https://youtu.be/cSZfUnCK5qk

Does Springsteen have problems like this when he tours the South I wonder?

https://youtu.be/RdR6MN2jKYs

Well done Bruce, pissing off your customers and fans is a brilliant way of making a political statement ......

Excuse me. How about, 'pissing off some of your customers and fans". Do not overstep, you do not suppose

that all would not support him? I for one, support economic boycotts as a means of showing opposition to

law passed, based on religious beliefs of some, to discriminate. That holds with segregation in the US,

apartheid in South Africa or religious discrimination in Saudi Arabia. However, we are focused here on my country.

please could you point out where it mentions SA or Saudi in the article, if Bruce wants to make political statements then he should run for office. him boycotting the concert will lose the ticket holders money as you don't get 100% refunds anymore plus as he doesn't tour much anymore his loyal fans are missing out on seeing him in concert. I still think the majority will be pissed off rather than supporting him as it's not going to have any effect on the people who passed the legislation, does Bruce think the ticket holders are going to protest on his behalf?

Springsteen created some of the best music of my generation- maybe any generation. Rich, Americana, folksy, and palpable. However, when we became adults and realized he uses our support of his products to act upon very political issues, he loses credibility as an artist, not gains credibility as a politician.

I get that everyone should be able to have a voice and fame should not saddle that. However, he does not action his voice in spite of his fame, he actions his voice leveraging his fame. Without question, this is abusive of fans; he leverages the fans. Those that love him likely reject the obvious ethical conflict, but most of what Springsteen endorses over the years is entirely ethical relativity. Without question the greatest source of bigotry, intolerance, and loathing is found in his politics, dressed in liberty, fraternity, and equality. Bruce was a radical leftist long before today.

What fools.

Republicans have pissed off women and minorities. The number of young people voting Republican is miniscule. But to take on the boss defending a law that a village idiot could see was nothing more than vindictive partisanship has got to be a bridge too far. Witness the Republican party blow itself up.

Here is your radical leftist and a hero to generations of American.

Edited April 11, 201610 yr by Pinot

Gotta love those Southerners in the US. It's like a different planet down there.

https://youtu.be/cSZfUnCK5qk

Looks like "The Boss" might need to rework his concert schedule in the future.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

From the link provided...

"Lawmakers in seven states are looking to do something similar: Illinois,

Kansas, Massachusetts, Missouri, Mississippi, Tennessee and Wisconsin. "

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/with-north-carolina-seven-other-states-are-considering-restricting-bathrooms-for-transgender-people/

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Horrors!!! Massachusetts, Kansas and Illinois?

They must have had a real influx of bigoted homophobic red neck trailer trash take over their state government lately.

I'm now wondering if all those disenfranchised students at the University of Missouri will consider this a micro-aggression

and refuse to attend classes.

That will teach the university a thing or two.

Gotta love those Southerners in the US. It's like a different planet down there.

https://youtu.be/cSZfUnCK5qk

Looks like "The Boss" might need to rework his concert schedule in the future.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

From the link provided...

"Lawmakers in seven states are looking to do something similar: Illinois,

Kansas, Massachusetts, Missouri, Mississippi, Tennessee and Wisconsin. "

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/with-north-carolina-seven-other-states-are-considering-restricting-bathrooms-for-transgender-people/

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Horrors!!! Massachusetts, Kansas and Illinois?

They must have had a real influx of bigoted homophobic red neck trailer trash take over their state government lately.

I'm now wondering if all those disenfranchised students at the University of Missouri will consider this a micro-aggression

and refuse to attend classes.

That will teach the university a thing or two.

There are homophobic wingnuts everywhere. It's all about the constant fear the Republicans live with.

From the link above:

"As of Tuesday, the center was tracking 49 bills, 32 of which dealt with bathroom access. More than a third (12) of those bathroom bills are still actively being considered (the rest died in committee or were otherwise put on hold)."

These bills will never make it out of committee in states where sanity rules (Democrats in majority).

Only in states where the wingnuts rule do you find bullshit like this has a prayer.

The United States is a country where millions of guns make it it dangerous place to walk down the street, Republicans are concerned with where someone goes to the bathroom. Tch.

By the way...it's spelled "redneck" not red neck.