if UCONN refuses to attend?

CT Governor Malloy signed an executive order today banning CT institutions of higher education from using state funds to travel to Indiana due to the new controversial Indiana law.

http://www.14news.com/story/28653248/ct-...to-indiana

It will be interesting to see how Emmert responds given how many future NCAA events are to be held in Indiana.

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/...s-lesbians

Well since Connecticut has the same law since 1993, maybe teams should boycutt UCONN. Malloy looks like an idiot by not knowing his state has the same law!


http://dailycaller.com/2015/03/30/conn-g...e-has-too/

(03-30-2015 05:27 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Well since Connecticut has the same law since 1993, maybe teams should boycutt UCONN. Malloy looks like an idiot by not know his state has the same law!

Try again troll. The State of CT does have the same law, but it has also adopted other laws that make it illegal to discriminate based on the Religious Freedom Law.

(03-30-2015 05:32 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 05:27 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Well since Connecticut has the same law since 1993, maybe teams should boycutt UCONN. Malloy looks like an idiot by not know his state has the same law!

Try again troll. The State of CT does have the same law, but it has also adopted other laws that make it illegal to discriminate based on the Religious Freedom Law.

This is true. It says right in the article you linked.

Nah, it works out perfectly for the NCAA. More parity without UCONN!

(03-30-2015 06:46 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  Nah, it works out perfectly for the NCAA. More parity without UCONN!

Nonsense

This isn't about making it difficult for UConn but rather taking the show $$$ elsewhere.

(03-30-2015 05:32 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 05:27 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Well since Connecticut has the same law since 1993, maybe teams should boycutt UCONN. Malloy looks like an idiot by not know his state has the same law!

Try again troll. The State of CT does have the same law, but it has also adopted other laws that make it illegal to discriminate based on the Religious Freedom Law.

Correct many keep repeating the mantra that is the same as what other states have and that is not entirely correct. Many states like Connecticut have state protection against discrimination using the law and many others only offer it to nonprofits not for profit companies and individuals which the Indiana law offers.

Isn't the womens final four in uh...Tampa?

(03-30-2015 07:54 PM)Pirate1 Wrote:  Isn't the womens final four in uh...Tampa?

It's currently 2015. Next year is 2016.

Most states have included some form of civil rights law on their books to include sexual orientation along with race, creed, sex, religion, etc as being free from discrimination.

Indiana politicians passed this bill and the governor signed it into law as a response to the beginning of marriage equality in that state; knowing full well that their state DOES NOT have such an inclusion of sexual orientation as a civil right, and that passing this type of legislation would give bigots, under the guise of religion, the law backed right to discriminate against gays that would be forbidden under similar laws in other states.

If you asked me a few years ago, I'd have told you things like this were something we as a nation began to move past decades ago with the passing of sweeping civil rights laws in the 1960's, that led to the end of white/black entrances, separate drinking fountains and segregated schools. Now we have people trying to turn the clock back on America in a last gasp for relevance and power!

Any time politics is introduced into sports with the threats its a dangerous tap dance. Obviously the left can jump all over issues but the right can do the same with left politics.

Case in point, would be the elimination of the NIT being played in MSG as punishment for Hillary's potential national security issue of using an unsecured server(never a good idea), located in NY, while conducting potentially sensitive data.

(03-30-2015 08:33 PM)IceJus10 Wrote:  Most states have included some form of civil rights law on their books to include sexual orientation along with race, creed, sex, religion, etc as being free from discrimination.

Indiana politicians passed this bill and the governor signed it into law as a response to the beginning of marriage equality in that state; knowing full well that their state DOES NOT have such an inclusion of sexual orientation as a civil right, and that passing this type of legislation would give bigots, under the guise of religion, the law backed right to discriminate against gays that would be forbidden under similar laws in other states.

If you asked me a few years ago, I'd have told you things like this were something we as a nation began to move past decades ago with the passing of sweeping civil rights laws in the 1960's, that led to the end of white/black entrances, separate drinking fountains and segregated schools. Now we have people trying to turn the clock back on America in a last gasp for relevance and power!

I've read this post 3 times, and I'm still stunned at the ignorance on display. Absolutely stunned.

(03-30-2015 06:59 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 06:46 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  Nah, it works out perfectly for the NCAA. More parity without UCONN!

Nonsense

This isn't about making it difficult for UConn but rather taking the show $$$ elsewhere.

I was joking.

(03-30-2015 08:45 PM)sfink16 Wrote:  Any time politics is introduced into sports with the threats its a dangerous tap dance. Obviously the left can jump all over issues but the right can do the same with left politics.

Case in point, would be the elimination of the NIT being played in MSG as punishment for Hillary's potential national security issue of using an unsecured server(never a good idea), located in NY, while conducting potentially sensitive data.

I try to stay away from political mess... But, are you really comparing the civil rights of a entire population of people... To security mistakes made by one person? Maybe I'm missing something?

political grandstanding at its finest.

are there that many businesses in indiana with religious convictions that are so strong that will go to the trouble of finding out the sexual preference of employees from the state of Connecticut and then not take their money.


does any of this make any effing sense.

i hate the offseason

(03-30-2015 09:15 PM)GoHouston Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 08:45 PM)sfink16 Wrote:  Any time politics is introduced into sports with the threats its a dangerous tap dance. Obviously the left can jump all over issues but the right can do the same with left politics.

Case in point, would be the elimination of the NIT being played in MSG as punishment for Hillary's potential national security issue of using an unsecured server(never a good idea), located in NY, while conducting potentially sensitive data.

I try to stay away from political mess... But, are you really comparing the civil rights of a entire population of people... To security mistakes made by one person? Maybe I'm missing something?

I'm comparing the silliness of using sports venues as ammunition for politics. That's what Governor Malloy is doing.

Besides that, I'd love to see just one example of successful civil rights case business have won in Indiana. Any business would lose in courts every time., if they denied service due to race, creed, religion, etc. Businesses open to the public can't deny service period making it a non-issue.

(03-30-2015 09:15 PM)shere khan Wrote:  are there that many businesses in indiana with religious convictions that are so strong that will go to the trouble of finding out the sexual preference of employees from the state of Connecticut and then not take their money.


does any of this make any effing sense.

i hate the offseason

That's the problem... under this law they don't need to find out the sexual preference, they can merely presume it with their religious freedom.

So then what is stopping a true bigot from declining service to a black, latin, or jew and say, oh I thought they were gay? There isn't!

That is why this is such a dangerous peace of legislation.

(03-30-2015 09:51 PM)IceJus10 Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 09:15 PM)shere khan Wrote:  are there that many businesses in indiana with religious convictions that are so strong that will go to the trouble of finding out the sexual preference of employees from the state of Connecticut and then not take their money.


does any of this make any effing sense.

i hate the offseason

That's the problem... under this law they don't need to find out the sexual preference, they can merely presume it with their religious freedom.

So then what is stopping a true bigot from declining service to a black, latin, or jew and say, oh I thought they were gay? There isn't!

That is why this is such a dangerous peace of legislation.

there are already laws that cover civil rights. thats why it doesnt make any sense. if a religious business thinks its okay to create weapons grade plutonium does that possiblilty need to be covered in the current indiana religious law.

add these lines to the law-

line 10. you cannot discriminate against people because of who they screw
line 11. you cannot enhance plutonium

seems absurd to me.


(or enrich uranium or whatever, you get my point. btw i wont be posting for a while i think i just made all of the big brother lists and the black helicopters have been dispatched)

If the NCAA wishes to pull out of Indiana, they also need to pull out of 18 other states who have very similar laws.

(03-30-2015 09:51 PM)IceJus10 Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 09:15 PM)shere khan Wrote:  are there that many businesses in indiana with religious convictions that are so strong that will go to the trouble of finding out the sexual preference of employees from the state of Connecticut and then not take their money.


does any of this make any effing sense.

i hate the offseason

That's the problem... under this law they don't need to find out the sexual preference, they can merely presume it with their religious freedom.

So then what is stopping a true bigot from declining service to a black, latin, or jew and say, oh I thought they were gay? There isn't!

That is why this is such a dangerous peace of legislation.

Playing devils advocate - private business can do whatever they want. You have women's groups that discriminate against men. Is a man going to get hired by them. Is a white guy going to be hired by the naacp? Is a Christian going to be hired by a Muslim church? Because some private business doesn't want to provide flowers for a gay couple is their decision, even if it makes for bad business.