Indiana's Religious Freedom law
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
|
Even NASCAR is coming down on Indiana. NASCAR!
http://www.nascar.com/en_us/news-media/articles/2015/3/31/nascar-statement-on-indiana-legislation.html |
Anonymous
Thank you Gov. Pence. Can you tell what the law IS about? You've failed miserably so far. |
Anonymous
Wow. I had no idea. Go, NASCAR! |
Anonymous
Because it's about the first amendment. |
Anonymous
Because of first amendment rights, not because of discrimination |
Anonymous
Wow. Look at that! The hicks y'all denigrate and laugh at on a day-to-day basis now support you, so WOW, that are SO COOL NOW. Disgusting. |
Anonymous
Where is your tolerance, PP? |
Anonymous
I posted the link above, and I like NASCAR. |
Anonymous
No, pookie. This law is about private lawsuits. The first amendment is about the government establishing or prohibiting religious practice. |
Anonymous
|
The First Amendment doesn't grant blanket freedoms to do whatever the fuck you want.
You do not have the right to make libelous or slanderous statements. You do not have the right to make statements representing yourself to be a police officer, or as a licensed professional, et cetera. You do not have the right to make fraudulent claims about goods and services. You do not have the right to threaten to kill or do harm to a person or their property. Et cetera et cetera. Not even if your supposed religion says its OK. |
Anonymous
Does the First Amendment protect polygamy? |
Anonymous
BZZZ. But thank you for playing. In the first place, if it were a 1st Amendment issue then the law would not be necessary, because the 1st Amendment would already protect the activity from government intrusion. So, the 1st Amendment argument fails right there. What's more, knowing how conservatives dislike excessive and redundant regulation, that would mean that you were supporting enacting legislation that is by definition, unnecessary. So, let's assume the 1st Amendment doesn't protect whatever activity the RFRA is intended to protect. The original Federal RFRA and most of the other state-level ones applied only to government action and created a defense to government enforcement. The difference between those laws and the Indiana RFRA, as many commentators have noted, is that it also creates a defense for private causes of action. So when an individual who has been discriminated against files a tort suit against a business owner, the business owner can argue the defense created by the Indiana RFRA. That has nothing to do with government action against the business owner. And this goes further than the poster child wedding photographer / baker. What happens when Chick-fil-A in Indiana decides not to cater events that are contrary to the religious beliefs of its CEO? What happens when Hobby Lobby, now that they are a corporation with religious beliefs, decides to discriminate in Indiana against those who don't share their religion? The Indiana law does not distinguish based on the size of the business involved. Claiming this is a 1st Amendment issue means that you either don't understand Constitutional law or you don't understand the Indiana RFRA. |
Anonymous
Anonymous
Now THAT was funny! Thanks for sharing it. |
Anonymous
|
I haven't followed this closely and I'll be honest -- I'm not pro-gay, which is something I have to keep on the DL living on the east coast. If I own my own bakery or dress shop and don't want to bake a cake for a gay wedding or sell a dress for a lesbian wedding, how can I be forced to do so regardless of what the law says? I mean if the couple comes together and/or announces "we're a gay couple," can't you conveniently say -- oh sorry, we already have 11 other cake orders for that same Saturday and to be honest we don't have the staff to handle another; let me refer you to another nice bakery in town!?
Why does it matter what the law does or doesn't say -- it's easy to do what you want when you have your own business. (I agree that it's not possible if you're an employee -- if you're General Manager at the local Hilton and a gay couple comes to book a hall, you can't really turn them away without fearing losing your job if they suspect the reason and make allegations.) |