Indiana Senate Bill 101, titled the Religious Freedom Restoration Act,[1] is a law that mandates that religious liberty of individuals and corporations can only be limited by the “least restrictive means of furthering a compelling government interest.”[2] The bill has been controversial. Opponents of the law claim that is targeted against LGBT people and other groups. The bill is similar to the controversial Arizona SB 1062 vetoed by Governor Jan Brewer in 2014, which expanded Arizona’s existing RFRA to include corporations.[3][4]
The bill was approved by a vote of 40-10[5] and on March 26, 2015, Mike Pence signed SB 101 into law.[6] The law’s signing was met with widespread criticism by such organizations as the NCAA, Tim Cook, CEO of Apple, the gamer convention Gen Con, and the Disciples of Christ. Technology company Salesforce said it would halt its plans to expand in the state.
Pence is speaking now. He started off his speech by comparing himself to Clinton. What a nerve. He has probably spent a good portion of his life spitting on Bill Clinton.
Pence continues to make excuses. He says he and the general assembly will craft legislation that makes it clear that businesses don’t deny services to anyone. Then why have the law?
Meanwhile, Gov. McAuliffe has told Indiana corporations to come to Virginia. I like a guy that sees opportunity.
Governor Dan Malloy of Connecticut has put in his bid for Democratic Party Idiot of The Year. He has been crapping all over Indiana for its passage of their Religious Freedom Restoration Act and has even signed an executive order banning travel of public employees and public school athletic teams to Indiana. It looks like no one told him that Connecticut has had an RFRA since 1993, written and passed after SCOTUS declared that the federal RFRA did not apply to the states.
Ignorance and lies. Unbelievable………………..Not.
Is it enforced? Obviously it isn’t a big deal. Virginia has some form of one also. It isn’t enforced, at least not now. I would say that wasn’t all that ignorant.
There are RFRA laws and then there are RFRA laws.
@ Wolve (#55)- I know what the law is, but I don’t know what happened in Indiana that caused it to be necessary. I don’t know what its purpose was. That was my question. We know from statements from the Governor and the law’s sponsors in the legislature over the past few days that the law is not intended to permit a denial of service to any gays or any other particular group. What is it intended to do?
My guess is that either these new comments from the Governor are disingenuous or that the law initially was intended to be an empty tease, a political wedge-issue inflamer, intended to fire up a certain voting element over nothing.
The SCOTUS case Wolve refers to concerned use of peyote in religious ceremonies by Native Americans. The Indiana statute goes a bit beyond that.
Well, it’s over. NASCAR is unhappy with Indiana.
Anyone else find it odd that Indiana ranks FOURTH a in the USA in gambling revenue. Gambling? I think there is something in the bible about that.
“Honest to Goodness” Indiana.
I don’t find it odd at all. My brother who lives in Indiana is an avid blackjack player. He is always going off to some casino.
4th? Wow. Gambling. Imagine that. What does the old testament say? How about the NT?
I can imagine the first case that will come up with this law (before the fix) –
Where a Christian man refuses to sell a product to a Christian woman because she is living in sin. And this is the ‘law’ that the man will stand behind. He will also stand behind the ‘law’ as he says that the woman should be submissive to him to dismiss the rape claim.
UGH. This sickens me. The weaker vessel needs to take some lessons from Lorena.
“Please wrap your atheist brain around that concept and stop posting ridiculous comments about eating shrimp, altar sacrifices, female menstruation, and the like.”
The prohibitions against homosexuality are also Old Testament.
As you know. You can’t face up to what’s real here. Please wrap your brain around the fact that the Bible as written and presented is ridiculous, and one has to process it selectively for it to be taken seriously, even in the context of faith.
Or one can look at it as the holy book of ancient people who were not only trying to explain their own existence in the world but also the hereafter.
I don’t diminish it by placing it in its proper context, I don’t think. I certainly am not going to allow some zealot to cherry pick through the book and select various passages to control me or others without a huge fight.
So correct me if I’m wrong here but… if someone goes into a Muslim bakery and requests a cake with a picture of the profit Muhammad on it and the baker refuses that baker should get sued?
Is that what we are saying here? I know that this is aimed mostly at Christians but for arguments sake choose a different religion. If a Muslim caterer refuses to cater a gay wedding do we still have the same outrage?
I don’t think that is what is being said at all. I don’t think pictures of deities have anything to do with reality.
Or the other side of that coin, if a Muslim is driving a cab in your city, can they disallow pasengers to transport wine in their car? Or screen any grocery bags to keep pork out of their cab? Or refuse service to “Jews”?
Or can a pharmacist employed by Walgreens or CVS refuse to fill a rx for birth control pills…..
@Rick Bentley
It’s already happened Rick, and I never saw any outrage from the left. If I remember correctly there was a Muslim Target employee who refused to scan any pork products in the checkout line. There was another story about a Muslim Costco employee who refused to scan any pork or alcohol. What did Costco do? The reassigned that employee to a position in which they would not have to come into contact with pork or alcohol. What happened next? Costco was sued for religious discrimination.
The selective outrage seems to be aimed squarely at Christians here. I’m just curious if there would be the same level of outrage if a Muslim baker refused to bake a cake with a picture of the profit Muhammad on it?
You are making my head hurt. Anyone can be sued. Bet the muslim didn’t win either.
Why does anyone expect their religious peculiarities to be catered to on the job? If you can’t work on Sat. for religious reasons, don’t apply for a job that has Sat hours. Either that or tell your employer during the interview. I freaking hate people who are always trying to make an issue out of their differentness also. That would be like me going to work for an Hassidic owned camera shop and then bitching because I had to work on Sundays.
@Rick Bentley
In order to force a private individual to take some action that conflicts with his/her regligous beliefs, there has to be a overwelming general public interest in requireing the action. The Muslim cab driver or resturant server is not the equivelent of the Muslim baker or photographer. Can a doctor be required to perform an abortion and sued if that service is denied on the basis of a religous objection? Should thre
Again, the issue here is whether there is still a place in this country for the practice of religious belief and whether individuals can be coerced into abandoning the practice of those beliefs – in order to mainstream a groups secular agenda.
No, doctors do not have to perform abortions nor do they have to perform any other medical procedure unless they are employed by a facility that requires certain procedures.
So Jackson … presumably the guy’s lawsuit will be thrown out of court. Unless these types of laws go into effect.
I do feel strongly that Muslim cab drivers should have to transport wine, Muslim women should have to show their face for ID photos, etc. I always get worked up about the idea that someone’s religious belief should exempt them from following the law.
On your direct question about the Muslim baker, I say give him a pass on that, and actually give bakers a pass on any type of customized cake they don’t want to make. Which is different from just providing a cake.
Totally agree, across the board.
“In order to force a private individual to take some action that conflicts with his/her regligous beliefs, there has to be a overwelming general public interest in requireing the action.”
I’ll go along with the doctor not performing abortions; I’ll let cake decorators not have to write customized messages they don’t like. But if it inhibits the doctor’s career or the baker’s career, that’s certainly on them.
So says you. If it has not yet happened it will, but it is only an example. We need to balance religious liberty, freedom of assoication and anti-discrimination and if doctors really are somehow protected on the basis of conscience, then why not the baker, photogrpher or the pizza store, when not engaged in general public activity, but instead are engaged in private purchasing decisions – like a wedding
Yes, I say they do not have to perform abortions. Stop showing your ignorance on the subject.
Do you think abortions are just performed everywhere?
Not Mr.Bentley. Middleman.
You don’t know what they believe and don’t believe.
There is a small business in Walkerton, Indiana, called Memories Pizza. It is owned and operated by a family which is religious to the point of having Bible verses displayed in the pizzeria. The family announced that they supported the Indiana RFRA. They stated that their establishment will serve anyone who comes in to eat bar none. But, because of their strong religious beliefs and conscience on the issue, they cannot agree to cater a same-sex wedding. These are American citizens living in the United States of America under the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Today the Memories Pizza is closed. For how long is not clear. The reason: a wave of death threats against the owners. The police came to stand guard, but apparently the threats are such that it was decided to take the family, staff, and any customers out of potential harms way.
Now look what you’ve done, LGBT supporters. Shame on you.
It is against the law to issue death threats.
So all LGBT supporters are to blame for threats against these people?
Who is tacky enough to want a wedding catered by a pizza place anyway? Why did they have to say anything in the first place? They were looking for trouble, it sounds like.
This is probably oiff topic, but since it came up …
I was raised Christian and was a believer until i was 19.
Since then, to present, I consider myself a rationalist, who values logic and empiricism.
I’m not really that hard core about it; I’m less strident than i once was and less strident than many. But I do like to poke at religious people. Seems fair game to me; seems we’re here to communicate different perspectives. Mine is that religion is, more or less, a person’s failure to deal with what’s real.
Thank you for clarifying.
I’m calling BS on the Memories Pizza story. I doubt that they’ve been threatened in such a way that they actually need to close or live in fear.
And … I see that they are in fact raising money on GoFundMe, on the basis that they’re living in fear. Of homicidal homosexuals.
@Scout
Cripes, man, how many times do I have to explain to you about giving someone standing in court to use sincere religious beliefs to defend their actions?
Where did it come from in Indiana? I don’t know those specific details, but I suspect that a continual flow of LGBT bully stories about forcing people of faith to violate that faith played a role. The woman with the bakery in Seattle. Another recent case in Arizona. Federal attempts to force the Little Sisters of the Poor to the wall over contraceptives. And just maybe the SCOTUS decision on Hobby Lobby provided an impetus to add a RFRA to the Indiana books.
And now we get to see the real hate campaign full of lies, led by the LGBT bullies using their media and Hollywood allies and joined by cheapshot politicos looking for votes no matter what it takes — even death threats against the owners of a small pizzeria in Walkerton, Indiana.
I have been bullied by more right wing Christians than I have homosexuals. I also have never been thrown to the ground by homosexuals.
And you live in the age of the internet bullies?
I think you will find that, when someone proposes to build a local casino, the strongest protests usually come from the evangelical churches and congregants.
So much for another attempt to divert from the LGBT bully boys.
I think Mr. Bentley doesn’t know beans about the New Covenant as explained in the New Testament. Yet he keeps right on rambling with his phobia about religion.
Go through the New Testament and show me where Christ refers to marriage as anything but a union between a man and a woman.
What’s even more funny is how loud so-called religious people become when it comes to gays and contraception but how silent they are when asked a simple question. Not a lecture, but a question, and I’ll ask it directly to you, Wolve, since you chose to pipe up: Can one pick and choose which biblical teachings to follow, depending on the politics and the personal biases of the follower?
And it’s even funnier how Wolve has confused my comment on not being religious with my being a “non-believer.” I wonder if he even knows the difference…
I’ve seen some of the internet tripe pouring out of the bully brains of the LGBT crowd and their Left wingnut supporters against that little pizzeria in Indiana. Lies. Vile hatred. Disgusting. Very sad.
I find it funny that anyone can claim to have the true interpretation of the Christian Bible. Think of all the different denominations -and their varying sects – that make up Christianity and claim to be the one and only proper interpreters of the New or Old Testaments.
And what rube eats pizza at their wedding reception…
Really? You admitted to not being religious and not pretending to be. So, I saved you from having to discuss something about which you must know little. You should thank me for saving you from yourself. Unlike last time.
Once again, the issue here is religious freedom and the RFRA in Indiana. Try to keep on track, old chap.
What makes these current RFRA laws different from the federal version is allowing religious beliefs to be assigned to corporations and companies and providing the same protections as individuals have. Slippery slope, that, for obvious reasons. It seems that the same folks who are the most afraid of Islam are more than willing to introduce Christianity into the marketplace and politics. If you insist on going down this path you may regret it.
Once again, an attempted diversion. This has nothing at all to do with religious denominational differences over Biblical interpretation. It IS a question of religious liberty in this country and the right of an individual whose chosen faith has specific proscriptions from being forced to participate in events which are anathema to his personal faith. It allows that individual to argue his case before a court in a fair test of argument and counter argument. Plain and simple.
“Why did they have to say anything in the first place. They were looking for trouble, it sounds like.”
Yes, for Christians to speak up about what they believe and do or do not support is a real no-no. Cant do that. Might draw death threats from the internet loonies, and that would be their own fault.
Sort of like some pro-choice lady at an abortion clinic demonstration getting treated roughly by a counter demonstrator. That pro-choice lady should have stayed home. Sounds like she was just looking for trouble, no?
Actually where I got roughed up was sitting at a vender’s table at the state GOP convention when Ollie North was running.
Then I got roughed up by a thug escorting patients. Sprained wrists and ankles. I wasnt demonstrating or talking to anyone.
Christians and people are free to express their opinions. Its the how and where I might have a problem with. If beating me up is part of someone’s religious expression then they can expect some blow back in the form of my fist.
Lets take the pizza people. What’s the likelihood that they will be asked to caqter a wedding with 2 grooms on the pizza? Not likely at all. So why make a proclamation over a sensitive issue? They were being stupid and incendiary.
No, no one has the right to make death threats. That individual should be arrested. However, I am not feeling real sorry for Mr. Gotta express myself pizza man.
Which groom gets to hold the pepperoni? Sticks or coins?
Wolve, by “last time” do you mean when you got caught in your own BS about Reagan’s reasoning in providing weapons to terrorists? And then claimed to be way too important to respond? THAT last time?
Since you seem really confused again, I’ll say it s l o w l y- being not religious and being a non-believer are two different things. Someone can believe in God and still not partake in organized religion. You should try it sometime- you could think for yourself and not be imprisoned by some book written many years ago by ordinary men that can be interpreted many different ways.
Anyone who thinks the Indiana RFRA law has anything to do with religious freedom is as lost as Wolve is. This is clearly an effort on the part of the Christian right to keep up the fight against gay marriage. Everyone else in the country has moved on- public opinion is overwhelmingly ok with gay marriage now, but the right wants to foist their views on the rest of us. These laws are just more examples of the Republicans continuing to pander to the 10% of the population who want the U.S. to be a Christian theocracy.
@middleman
Ha! You still going on about Iran-Contra after showing you knew zip about the subject? That zinger must have hurt far more than I thought.
Hilarious, middleman. You seem to have some strange idea that I have an obligation to debate with you whenever you call me out. You’ve just got to get over that ego problem, old chap.
Hmmm. So, You are a “believer” who dismisses the Christian Bible and devises your own personal religion? Diesm perhaps? You’ll get no guff from me on that. Your business. Myself, I am a self-proclaimed pietist who left organized religion but not the Holy Scriptures. You, apparently, just have to try to denigrate me for it Why is that? Why the slams?
Well, all the more reason not to debate the intricacies of my personal faith with yourself. You dismiss it out of hand. Waste of time. More reason comes out of your subsequent post. You’re digging into the old lib bag of tricks to come up with “theocracy.” Does that mean you wish to ban Christians from the public forum and deny them their right of advocacy for public policy subject to constitutional limits as decided by the courts? It’s okay for you to advance your ideas, wherever you may get them; but I must be silent. Cool. The American Way in 2015.
Sorry. Deism.
Wow. This is about religion? Happy Easter
Wolve, Christ (assuming he was real, and that his thoughts were recorded in any accurate way) had nothing to say about homosexuality. For all you know, he was gay and Judas was a jilted lover.
(Christ was very clear, by contrast, about divorce. He said, don’t do it. Now there’s a natural Defense of Marriage Act for you).
(If he was even real … which is by no means certain. The supposed facts of his birth and early life seem derived from preexisting god-myths, particularly Horus.)
The gay stuff is mostly in the Old Testament, which were apparently the early ramblings of a deluded God, later revised.
The references and possible references to homoseuality in the New testament are summarized here – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_the_New_Testament#Romans_1:26-27
Admittedly there are a few references to it in the New Testament, and it is frowned on by the (non-Christ) authors. HOWEVER, I URGE YOU TO CLOSELY EXAMINE THE CONTEXT.
That context is that the authors are primitive and insane. They tell us (more than once, rather consistently) that homosexuality is an affliction leveled by God on people who worship “false idols”, i.e. other Gods. By this logic every non-Christian nation should be aflame with homosexual passion. (Unless God got tired of doing that at some point).
The sum total of the New Testament “teachings” is to lump homosexuals in with adulterers and those who “worship other Gods”. So i suppose that if Memories Pizza wants to be consistently Godly, they should not sell to adulterers, nor divorcees, nor Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, etc.
Oh, stop it, Mr. Bentley, I am not interested in your atheist hatred. Pluck up your courage and go jump on the Muslims about Allah and Muhammed.
Well Leviticus famous for his condemnation of homosexuality also forbade eating pork. No ham for Easter?
Catholic Church is okay with divorce to manage custody and property. It’s remarriage they’re against. It may be splitting hairs but the Baltimore Tribunal advises that.
No hate. Just grown up talk about what the Bible really says. If it’s bat-s*** crazy, it’s bat-s*** crazy.
You don’t need to join some Bible study group, or peruse the original Aramaic? texts, to figure out what they’re saying. They’re saying that homosexuality is some type of affliction, leveled by God, as punishment for worshipping other Gods. They say it in very plain language.
Do i find it amusing that anyone can take the Bible seriously? Yes. Is this “hate” or “hate speech”? No. I hate the sin of turning your brain off, not the person.
Tweet by Jess Dooley, girls’ golf coach at Concord High School in Elkhart, Indiana: “Who’s going to Walkerton, IN, to burn down memories pizza with me?” Suspended from the school. Police investigation. Hatred so intense that it was stupidly put on a tweet. A high school coach no less — someone charged with caring for our children. Crazy sh*t like that has caused a family to close up shop and go into hiding.
Shame on this country.
No, shame on Jess Dooley. I had nothing to do with issuing a threat. Why shame on this country?
I’m reading that so far Memories Pizza has taken in $305,000 in donations.
For the record, IMO that tweet is abhorrent and that teacher should lose their job, unless it can be demonstrated that it was heavy sarcasm, in which case a suspension would be warranted.
Spare me your Christophobia, Mr. Bentley. It is boring.
The New Covenant escape you too, Lyssa?
Apparently the new covenant escaped all the gay bashers. That is our point.
Nah, I’m Catholic. We don’t read the bible remember? I did study Augustine at length. And I’m Irish Catholic – raised to consciously to form my conscience and that I’m Catholic in spite of the church.
New Covenant – Was that the thing in the Indiana Jones movie where the Nazi got blinded?
Ah, I shouldn’t be silly about it. here’s a description – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Covenant
It’s this really labored concept that attempts to explain how the Old Testament God could be real, but why all the bat-s*** crazy stuff in the Old Testament can be safely ignored. Except, of course, in the state of Indiana as one sees fit.
The original covenant called for constant animal sacrifice and death to idoloters. The new one calls for us to profess faith, no animal sacrifice needed. And somehow all the variety of strange primitive rules in the Old Testament get swept away too. We can eat shrimp, marry non virgins, women can menstruate in peace … hip hip hooray.
But then … why can’t two guys marry? And eat pizza? And still go to heaven, hand in hand?
Do you know, Wolve? Has God told you? Directly, or indirectly?
Wolve, there are gay Christians – https://www.gaychristian.net/faq.php
They make what seems to me a valid argument that the Bible condemns gay sex, but not same-sex attraction.
In theory two men or two women can get married but be celibate. It sounds olike the guys who populate gaychristian.net would be the kind of guys who would do this.
So does this really all just come down to sodomy, as usual?
Yeah, I remember that, Lyssa. Mrs. W just returned from Holy Thursday Mass. Recommend sarc notations around future references to Leviticus. I should have put a smiley face after my own remark. Sorry.