03-31-2016, 04:49 PM
(03-31-2016, 04:25 PM)GMDino Wrote: Well, you read that much correctly....
How about the rest at the link? The part that references the actual bill and story?
See sometimes there is another link there that can lead someone to another story from another site that is less disregarded by one side or the other.
And sometimes the website linked is just a front for white supremacy which will get laughed at.
(03-31-2016, 04:46 PM)Griever Wrote: because that somehow takes away from the wording of the actual bill
is this one better?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/03/31/mississippis-senate-just-approved-a-sweeping-religious-liberty-bill-that-critics-say-is-the-worst-yet-for-lgbt-rights/
or this one
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/mississippi-senate-passes-sweeping-religious-liberty-bill-n548601
Sure you are both right. Just like the OP linked a measure that removed all anti-discrimination measures from LBGTs in NC.
Look over there: WOLF!!