MSNBC host Melissa Harris-Perry was vocal against the governor of Mississippi on Saturday for signing legislation that may protect business owners’ ability to discriminate against LGBT customers.

Last week, Gov. Phil Bryant (R) signed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which says that the state cannot infringe on people’s rights to practice their religion. Harris-Perry stood in solidarity with critics of the law and agreed that the legislation will allow people to discriminate against LGBT people based on religious beliefs.

Harris-Perry also pointed out that Mississippi has already discriminated against the LGBT community by not legalizing same-sex marriage and by allowing gay people to be fired or not hired because of their orientation. Mississippi is also one of 29 states in the country where LGBT people can be evicted on the basis of their sexual orientation or gender identity.

“What you did was to make it even easier than it already was to discriminate against LGBT Mississippians, to deny them services available to everyone else,” said Harris-Perry. “Basically, you gave bigots another avenue to dehumanize their LGBT neighbors.”

Tags: , ,
Like Us On Facebook Follow Us On Twitter
  • LemonnLime

    This is disgusting. If GLBTA Muslims, Jews, Agnostics, etc. use this bill to discriminate against Christians, I wonder just how fast this law would be repealed? I question the legality of this law to begin with but, I see this in the same lights as businesses that wanted to decide what color patrons they serve. I say let the free market do it’s thing! Please let me know that you don’t want my business because of my skin color or sexual orientation. I and others like me will take our disposable income some place else!

    Side note: Thank you for pointing to a TRUE example of discrimination and bigots. No, I don’t want men dressed as women using the women’s bathroom due to personal safety. Does that mean this community should be persecuted and legally discriminated against in housing, business, and employment? Absolutely not!

    Some folks on this site need to learn what it truly means to be a bigot before assigning that word to anyone who disagrees with them and their opinion. Using names to try and shame or guilt people into agreeing with an opinion based on feelings, not legality, makes you as bad as some of the very people advocating laws like this.

  • lemonnlime:

    “Does that mean this community should be persecuted and legally discriminated against in housing, business, and employment? Absolutely not!”

    You can use your transphobic personal safety argument in all of these situations as well. I don’t want to live next door to a transgender person because they might break in while I’m sleeping. I don’t want to work with a trans person because they might try to flash me in my cubicle. Having your pants down in a little room makes no difference.

    Let all business owners serve whomever they please. I don’t want to give a dime to a business that is going to use said dime to try to oppress me. This is what we should have done in the 1960’s– made businesses make positive moves saying they would serve everyone, instead of making it illegal to refuse service to anyone.

    • Me

      “Having your pants down in a little room makes no difference.” that’s one step away from saying everybody is allowed to walk into any bathroom they want & there shouldn’t be any male/female signs on public bathrooms. i’m not for that at all.

    • what about trans people that aren’t read as easily? There are probably already people with penises using women’s restrooms, and yet the world manages to keep turning.

    • or maybe we let business owners decide what kind of bathrooms they want to have and then people of all genders can decide if they want to patronize said businesses.

    • LemonnLime

      You are implying men belong in the women’s bathroom in the first place. In the same way, strangers don’t belong in your home, men don’t belong in the women’s bathroom.

    • what’s the definition of a man?

    • LemonnLime

      Really? Attempts to bend the biological definition of “man” or “male” to your whim are ridiculous. You know that a man is a biological male born with an XY chromosomes. Just as “women” are biological “females’ with XX chromosomes. This is fact. And don’t tell me about all the exceptions; exceptions are not the rule. Even in societies where transgender people are activity part of the culture, like the Fa’afafine of Samoa, they aren’t considered women but rather a third gender of MEN who are raised as women. Only here, do we try to let political correctness change the definition of woman and make vagina a discriminatory word because “not all women have vaginas or ovaries”. Men control everything and now we have men in dresses trying to control and define womanhood? Nonsense!

      This entire debt is just crazy. These debts are like having conversations with religious fanatics. No matter how much you present a logical fact and site examples, they are always going to argue with feeling and belief.

    • So using your own definition, a person with xy chromosomes and no penis would still not be able to use a women’s restroom. But that seems to undermine your argument that it’s about personal safety. Because how is someone without a penis going to rape me?

    • LemonnLime

      Personally, I’m not worried about post-op trans female using the women’s bathroom. I don’t consider them women in the true biological sense of the word but that is a different conversation for another day. I do have a problem with biological men with male anatomy using a women’s bathroom.