Without looking at what they passed, I imagine he is talking about something similar to a clause that was rejected- cake decorators and whatnot unable to refuse service for gay marriages, while no such law covers said cake decorator from refusing service to a traditional couple.
I would like to see that clause, as there is a significant chance you're misinterpreting it as protecting homosexual couples specifically and not just protecting against discrimination based on orientation as a whole.
Regarding "looking at what they passed",
here it is. I just read it. There's nothing about it that is remotely discriminatory toward anyone of any religion or sexual orientation. In fact, it expands the state legal code to be
more accepting of the decisions of those of different religious organizations/affiliations.
Still, I'd really insist that prisoners should never be allowed to communicate with one another, at least not privately. They can talk to vistors on the phone or something.
Depriving someone, potentially for years, of any opportunity to talk to their peers except for visitors on the phone, constitutes rather cruel treatment.
Two or more criminals talking to each other basically constitutes conspricy
This is a joke, right? You really think two criminals talking to each other means they
must be conspiring to commit more crimes? Really?
They should be rehabilitated and never, ever want to do anything to come back to prison For this to work, prison must be intolerable, even for hardened individuals who actually thrive in a cut-throat place like today's US prison system. If it means they have to miserable, powerless and really bored for their entire sentence.
You are not going to "rehabilitate" people by causing them severe psychiatric distress. That is completely backward and counterproductive. If you make people feel miserable, powerless, bored, and out of touch with their fellow man, they will be
less likely to become inclined to be productive members of society, and less able to become so even if they want to.
I believe incredible boredom is probably more effective at reforming a criminal, then the brutality and humiliation that characterizes the prison system right now.
I doubt anyone here is going to defend the prison system as it is now, but your baseless assumption that effectively torturing them by forcing them to live in miserable, stagnant, socially-deprived conditions for extended periods of time will actually cause them to become
better members of society and not worse, is just laughable. On its face, it's absurd to me that engaging in a practice as alienating and cruel as locking someone up away from other people for years in decidedly miserable conditions will somehow cause them to become rehabilitated. All that would do is alienate them from society even more, cause them to be more embittered against the system, diminish their ability to get along productively with their fellow man, exacerbate existing psychiatric problems while probably causing new ones, and completely fail to address whatever problems resulted in them landing in prison to begin with.
You
do not reform people by making them feel powerless and miserable. That's how you
break people. That's how you turn them into gibbering, neurotic (or even psychotic) wrecks. You're making assertions that you've apparently pulled from nowhere, that go completely against basic psychiatric principles, and that are being sufficiently argued against by everyone present. This is getting ridiculous.