Indiana Heeds the Rallying Cry of William Wallace

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way...ndianas-governor-signs-religious-freedom-bill

Indiana business owners who object to same-sex couples will now have a legal right to deny them services after Republican Gov. Mike Pence signed a bill known as the Religious Freedom Restoration Act into law.

The legislation, approved by Indiana's GOP-controlled House and Senate, prevents state and local governments from "substantially burdening" a person's exercise of religion unless a compelling governmental interest can be proved.

"The Constitution of the United States and the Indiana Constitution both provide strong recognition of the freedom of religion but today, many people of faith feel their religious liberty is under attack by government action," Pence said in a statement after signing the bill.

Democratic lawmakers, civil liberties groups and LGBT advocates opposed the measure as opening the door to legal discrimination.

"This is a sad day for Indiana. Over the past month, Hoosiers who want our state to be open to everyone filled the halls at the Statehouse. We wrote letters and delivered them in person. We called until they stopped answering the phones. We made it clear that this law will only be used to harm other Hoosiers, and that's not the Indiana way," Freedom Indiana campaign manager Katie Blair said in a statement.

But Gov. Pence insists the bill is not about discrimination.

"If I thought it legalized discrimination in any way in Indiana, I would have vetoed it." he said.

Religion News says: "Supporters of the law say it will keep government entities from forcing business owners — such as bakeries and florists who don't want to provide services to gay couples — from acting in ways contrary to strongly held religious beliefs. Gay marriage became legal in Indiana last year following an appellate court ruling."

However, the law's application could go beyond same-sex couples. During debate on the legislation, state Rep. Bruce Borders cited the example of an anesthesiologist who objected to putting under a woman who was preparing to undergo an abortion.

According to The Indianapolis Star: "The proposal is modeled on a 22-year-old federal law known as the Religious Freedom and Restoration Act. That law played a key role in the U.S. Supreme Court's decision that allowed Hobby Lobby and other closely held corporations with religious objections to opt out of an Affordable Care Act requirement that they cover certain contraceptives for women."

A similar state law was passed by Arizona's Legislature last year but it was vetoed by then-Gov. Jan Brewer.

 

"Indiana wants me...but I can't go back there..."

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/fZL_tZxyBDo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/27/politics/indiana-religous-freedom-explainer/index.html

Is Indiana the first state to implement this kind of a law?

Nope. It's actually the 20th state to adopt a "religious freedom restoration" law, most of which are modeled after the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which President Bill Clinton signed into law in 1993.

But that law passed with the backing of a broad-based coalition and wasn't set against the backdrop of gay rights or the wave of marriage equality laws that have swept the country in recent years.

The law in Indiana, though, as well as the slew of other states it follows, came after an outcry from social conservative circles over incidents where business owners found themselves in hot water after refusing services to gay couples planning to get married.

In addition to those 20 states, legislators in nine other states have introduced similar types of "religious freedom" laws -- bills that either failed to go through in 2014 or are still up for consideration this year.

But Adam Talbot, a spokesman with the Human Rights Campaign, a gay rights group, stressed that those 20 laws are "dramatically different in their scope and effect."

"Calling them similar in this way risks being misleading. Indiana is the broadest and most dangerous law of its kind in the country," Talbot said.

Arkansas' legislature passed an Indiana-style law on Friday, which now heads to the state's governor for approval.

Religious liberty -- and using it to push back against same-sex marriage and other gay rights -- has become the rallying cry for the social conservative movement in the last year as these groups have watched one anti-gay marriage law after the next tumble in the courts.

And standing behind with Pence as he signed the bill were several socially conservative lobbyists, the ones who pushed for the law and are fiercely opposed to same-sex marriage.

One of those lobbyists, Eric Miller, explicitly wrote on his website that the law would protect businesses from participating in "homosexual marriage."

"The only reason these laws have passed is because of same sex marriage. Everybody knows that," Toobin said. The political calculation that states are going to have to make is, is the reward from the religious groups greater than the cost in lost business."

 

It's complicated. As a completely strong advocate of gay rights, it is nevertheless always at the discretion of a business owner to have the right to refuse service to anyone. And the consumer has the right not to patronize any business he/she chooses.

In my own business, I've never turned down anyone based on race, religion, sexual orientation, etc. The only problem I ever have is with a client for whom English is a 2nd language and has a hard time speaking clear English. However, for that client, the easy solution is to have them fill out worksheets rather than discussing their background over the phone (it's actually very rare).

I have turned down a few people who were jerks. Now, what if any one of those individuals were gay? Would I be held to task b/c I discriminated against a gay person, or discriminated against an *******? I guess what you have to do is document those situations- for the 5-6 people I turned down among the 10,000+ I worked with, I wrote detailed notes about why I rejected their business. Just b/c you never know.

It's certainly an interesting question. But based on religious beliefs? Screw that. Heck, I can't even turn down people who I disagree with politically. So, if Basso or Around the World or BigTexxx (gulp) ever came to me for services, I would absolutely, 100% work with them. Now, I must excuse myself to bathe- I feel suddenly very dirty. :grin:

 

Now, this is from a bill under consideration in Virginia:

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of Virginia:

1. § 1. A person seeking to obtain or renew a license, registration, or certificate from the Commonwealth, its political subdivisions, or any agency, authority, board, department, or other entity thereof, shall not be required to perform, assist, consent to, or participate in any action or refrain from performing, assisting, consenting to, or participating in any action as a condition of obtaining or renewing the license, registration, or certificate where such condition would violate the religious or moral convictions of such person with respect to same-sex "marriage" or homosexual behavior.

That clearly allows a business owner to discriminate against GLBT individuals. What the hell is this, anyway, "homosexual behavior"? So, if I go into a business acting gay, I can be discriminated against? It's all such nonsense bull****.