Reply
Regular Contributor
Posts: 153
Registered: ‎03-17-2015
On 3/31/2015 KellyS said: Or a straight bride doesn't want to buy a dress by a gay designer. Should she be forced to? Where does it end? Grow up people.

Good point!

Respected Contributor
Posts: 11,367
Registered: ‎03-09-2010

8. How does this apply to businesses?

?

<font face="Georgia">This bill provides the same protections to businesses as it does to all Hoosiers. The</font>

federal RFRA passed in 1993 also applies to businesses and the Hobby Lobby case

illustrated its applications to the owners of a private business.

9. Since the federal government passed this already, why is it needed in Indiana?

?

<font face="Georgia">The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the federal RFRA does not apply to state and</font>

local laws

<font face="Georgia">and Indiana’s case law is not clear on these issues.</font>

10.

I’ve heard that <font face="Georgia,Bold">this will clog up the courts with litigation. Is that true?</font>

?

<font face="Georgia">With or without RFRA, people can file any lawsuit they want claiming they should be</font>

exempted from some specific law. The question is whether or not they will win that

lawsuit.

?

<font face="Georgia">RFRA applies in the federal courts and 30 other states, and has not led to a flood of</font>

frivolous lawsuits. When people have filed frivolous lawsuits claiming legal

exemptions under RFRA, they have lost their cases.

11. Do you have an example of where there was a need for RFRA or where it has

been applied?

?

<font face="Georgia">There are numerous examples where the RFRA standard has been applied, including</font>

the following:

1.

A Jehovah’s Witness <font face="Georgia">who lived in Kansas needed a liver transplant; her religion did</font>

not allow blood transfusions. A neighboring state had a non-blood transfusion liver

transplant; however Kansas denied her request to get the out-of-state procedure.

Kansas did not have RFRA.

Since there was no state RFRA, they had to litigate because there was no clearly

applicable legal standard (just like in Indiana). She died in the process. If Kansas had

adopted the RFRA standard, there would have been a clear direction for the state and

the courts.

2. In a 2012 decision, a court ruled that the Pennsylvania RFRA protected the outreach

ministry of a group of Philadelphia churches, ruling that the city of Philadelphia could

not bar them from feeding homeless individuals. The religious rights of the churches

to serve the homeless outweighed the government's interest in health regulations.

3. A Muslim prisoner was asked to shave his beard to comply with prison regulations. It

was against the prisoner’s religion to shave off his beard.

The U.S. Supreme Court used the Federal RFRA to side with the prisoner because the

beard posed no security risk.

4. Obamacare required Hobby Lobby to pay for

employees’ <font face="Georgia">abortion-inducing drugs. The</font>

U. S.

Respected Contributor
Posts: 11,367
Registered: ‎03-09-2010

protections as RFRA: Alaska, Hawaii, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota,

Montana, North Carolina, Ohio, Washington, and Wisconsin.

?

<font face="Georgia">Indiana case law differs from each of these states and the federal government and</font>

legal scholars have labeled the current Indiana judicial review standard as uncertain.

6. How will RFRA impact Hoosiers?

?

<font face="Georgia">The bill has been mischaracterized greatly. Hoosiers will likely not notice any</font>

difference whatsoever, unless the government is overstepping its bounds to restrict an

individual from practicing their religious beliefs.

7. Will I notice a difference? Am I going to start seeing businesses turn people

away?

?

<font face="Georgia">Have you seen a difference in the 30 other states that have RFRA? Have you noticed a</font>

difference since 1993? In 22 years of this standard being applied at the federal and

state level, discrimination has never materialized. When matters of discrimination

have been decided under RFRA, the courts have uniformly held that the state and

federal government have a “compelling interest” in preventing that discrimination.

?

<font face="Georgia">All of our neighboring states, Illinois, Ohio, Michigan and Kentucky, have a</font>

heightened standard of review like the RFRA when considering government actions

that deal with religious rights.

8. How does this apply to businesses?

?

<font face="Georgia">This bill provides the same protections to businesses as it does to all Hoosiers. The</font>

federal RFRA passed in 1993 also applies to businesses and the Hobby Lobby case

illustrated its applications to the owners of a private business.

9. Since the federal government passed this already, why is it needed in Indiana?

?

<font face="Georgia">The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the federal RFRA does not apply to state and</font>

local laws

<font face="Georgia">and Indiana’s case law is not clear on these issues.</font>

10.

I’ve heard that <font face="Georgia,Bold">this will clog up the courts with litigation. Is that true?</font>

?

<font face="Georgia">With or without RFRA, people can file any lawsuit they want claiming they should be</font>

exempted from some specific law. The question is whether or not they will win that

lawsuit.

?

<font face="Georgia">RFRA applies in the federal courts and 30 other states, and has not led to a flood of</font>

frivolous lawsuits. When people have filed frivolous lawsuits claiming legal

exemptions under RFRA, they have lost their cases.

11. Do you have an example of where there was a need for RFRA or where it has

been applied?

?

<font face="Georgia">There are numerous examples where the RFRA standard has been applied, including</font>

the following:

1.

A Jehovah’s Witness <font face="Georgia">who lived in Kansas needed a liver transplant; her religion did</font>

not allow blood transfusions. A neighboring state had a non-blood transfusion liver

transplant; however Kansas denied her request to get the out-of-state procedure.

Kansas did not have RFRA.

Since there was no state RFRA, they had to litigate because there was no clearly

applicable legal standard (just like in Indiana). She died in the process. If Kansas had

adopted the RFRA standard, there would have been a clear direction for the state and

the courts.

2. In a 2012 decision, a court ruled that the Pennsylvania RFRA protected the outreach

ministry of a group of Philadelphia churches, ruling that the city of Philadelphia could

not bar them from feeding homeless individuals. The religious rights of the churches

to serve the homeless outweighed the government's interest in health regulations.

3. A Muslim prisoner was asked to shave his beard to comply with prison regulations. It

was against the prisoner’s religion to shave off his beard.

The U.S. Supreme Court used the Federal RFRA to side with the prisoner because the

beard posed no security risk.

4. Obamacare required Hobby Lobby to pay for

employees’ <font face="Georgia">abortion-inducing drugs. The</font>

U. S. Supreme Court concluded that RFRA entitled the owners to an exemption from

the regulation because the religious accommodation would not require any of the

female employees to do without.

Respected Contributor
Posts: 11,367
Registered: ‎03-09-2010

I suggest people research the truth instead of the opportunistic bashing of the press.

Honored Contributor
Posts: 22,518
Registered: ‎10-03-2011

Nobody is making a law based on religion. The law protects religious business owners from being forced to do something that goes against their religious beliefs. People of faith don't only BELIEVE in their religion, they apply it and LIVE it in their daily lives. No one can impinge on their practice of their religion, it's their Constitutional right. The RFRA is not an anti-gay law. The same law would protect a Jewish caterer who doesn't want to include pork entrees on their menu. States are making their own laws that are similar to the FEDERAL RFRA that Bill Clinton signed into law. Furthermore, where's the boycots and indignation for gay businesses who don't want to service straight customers?

Super Contributor
Posts: 424
Registered: ‎03-26-2010
On 3/31/2015 TaxyLady said:

I stand with Indiana and all the other states that have this law that protect religious organizations from those who want to push their lifestyle onto others and change God's Word.

I think any boycott will backfire. As many people that are opposed to this law there are twice as many that are for it. Those in favor should be voicing their support to the powers that be in Indiana. This state is doing what is right.


I'd expect no less from you.

However the backlash is growing. NASCAR has now joined in.

Respected Contributor
Posts: 11,367
Registered: ‎03-09-2010

Sorry for duplications. I am on my way out the door with not enough time to fix duplication

Super Contributor
Posts: 283
Registered: ‎01-02-2015
On 3/31/2015 chickenbutt said:

I think what really gets to me about this sort of thing, based on some viewpoints that companies or people (whatever) shouldn't have to sell to people they don't want to sell to, or employ, or whatever, is that - why would their religion create such an environment of hatefulness and exclusion?

Why would this religion, that is supposed to be so good and so morally superior, have such awful feelings toward others? THAT is the crux of the problem. If their religion wasn't so exclusionary and to be used as a weapon against others - if their religion was more about loving and caring for their fellow man - this sort of thing wouldn't be an issue. But the fact that it is, is what is so sad and shameful to me.

...and of course...the epitome of hypocrisy.

Super Contributor
Posts: 2,589
Registered: ‎12-16-2012

I've been to the state once and have no intention nor desire to go back, boycott or not. Too bad the NCAA can't pull out right now from the Final Four Venue. My feeling is that if you're in business to sell to the public, you don't get to pick your customers. There may be any number of people that might not meet with your approval, but if your business is open to the public, those customers have a right to go there. No one is asking the owners to change their own lifestyles, and quite frankly, they don't know what goes on behind doors of any of their customers, really, which might give them an eyeful if they only knew. This has to do with commerce, product, demand, and profit, not what the owners' religion is. There is no place for discrimination in a public business. If they want to open a private member only Christian business, then they can do so. Otherwise, they need to offer service to everyone. The next step: a return to segregated eating establishments, drinking fountains, seats on a bus, etc. The governor says this is not about discrimination. Wrong. It has everything to do with it. In fact, that is ALL this is about. Not religious freedom. They can practice their religion in their own personal lives without interference. This is about foisting your religion on others.

Honored Contributor
Posts: 17,588
Registered: ‎06-27-2010
On 3/31/2015 dooBdoo said:

"First they came for the communists,
and I did not speak out because I wasn't a communist.
Then they came for the socialists,
and I did not speak out because I wasn't a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I did not speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I did not speak out because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I did not speak out because I wasn't a Catholic.
Then they came for the "incurables,"
and I did not speak out because I was not weak or sick.
Then they came for the Gypsies, Slavs, the homos--uals, disabled, all the "different,"
and I did not speak out because I was not one of these.
And finally they came for me.
And there was no one left to speak for me."
~Martin Niemöller, pastor and theologian

Since this was buried by several long duplicate posts, repeating.

Few things reveal your intellect and your generosity of spirit—the parallel powers of your heart and mind—better than how you give feedback.~Maria Popova