The SB 101 (Religious Freedom Restoration) Thread

[Jomibe]

I thought INGO seemed quiet today.

 

[BigBoxaJunk]

There has been an unmeasured amount of legislation created in an effort to reinforce what is already there in the Constitution. IMO these efforts would have been better spent in an effort to insure those in leadership positions in our government were more motivated to obey and enforce that constitution. I'm not saying that our Constitution is perfect. It's not. However, the means to improve and/or correct its flaws were built in. That makes it pretty close.

And, you're commenting under the assumption that the law was drafted and passed by those whose primary goal was religious freedom. I wouldn't say that wasn't their goal, but I'd be surprised if that was the ONLY goal, even if that was the PRIMARY goal.

It's times like these that remind me that, government of the people, by the people, and for the people seems like a great concept, until you really get to know the people.

 

[chipbennett]

Probably, if I chose to do that amount of research. But like I said, I don't agree with the fact that this law should exist. So why should I be interested in doing that kind of research?

So, you're admitting your complaint is really nothing more than argumentum ad ignorantiam? You don't know what the law actually *says*, but you just *know* that, whatever it says, it can be abused?

If you don't know what the law actually *says*, how can you possibly be opposed to its very existence?

Laziness and ignorance are much easier than seeking out knowledge; but at least you can take comfort in the myriad people caterwauling about this law who share your stance.

 

[brotherbill3]

I read 3 pages - here -

I had to quit ... normally I'd skip this here ... I have enough other places to argue against ignorance
and not 'really' participating in our democratically elected bicameral republic form of government

I can't read 18 more pages.
... if I was more motivated here, I'd create a poll ... (idea if you're more motivated)
anyway. In 3 pages (oh and I have #/post per page at double default)

I would wager that only 2 people actually read this 3.25 page bill. ...

if I ruffle feathers - FINE - welcome to freedom (where you ought to be offended at times)
(yes willful ignorance is offensive to me)
if the same / similar has been conveyed - fine I agree and sorry for added the clutter -

From a post I made elsewhere on the WWW:

Well ... I just re read ... outloud ... word for word ... the ACTUAL ENTIRE bill ... as signed into law ... with my wife ... and the following article does a great job of describing what ... IS ACTUALLY ... written in this legislation ... and the FACT ... that this ONLY discusses and limits the GOVERNMENT from placing restrictions on the FREE EXERCISE of religious practices. It DOES NOT cover interaction between individual persons or businesses AT ALL.
PERIOD.


When did we become so afraid of FREEDOM , free association and individuality???
And that we might be offended or offend someone???


Please ... read the bill ... it is ONLY 3 and a part pages.



Link to Article I (re)shared: Hoosier Hullabaloo | PE News

Link (again to bill - in case anyone missed in the OP): Indiana General Assembly, 2015 Session


I find it sad that in a group where we (well some of us) argue for facts and reason in support of our cause -
which largely involves understanding the laws of the state and the proposed legislation that will affect our cause -

we can't seem to read a 3 page bill about some other part of the fundamental freedoms that founded our country.

 

[El-Cigarro]

Why? Because there exist two types of people. Those that are logical and able to make decisions on their own about patronizing a business.

And those that can't, and need to vilify anyone that disagrees with them. Again, I say, fascists.

Don't think I'd want to force anyone to bake me a cake they didn't WANT to. God only knows what they might do to / in it......

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Virtual Rep, Bill.

The acrimony can be explained simply: If you're not for us, you're against us.

I read 3 pages - here -

I had to quit ... normally I'd skip this here ... I have enough other places to argue against ignorance
and not 'really' participating in our democratically elected bicameral republic form of government

I can't read 18 more pages.
... if I was more motivated here, I'd create a poll ... (idea if you're more motivated)
anyway. In 3 pages (oh and I have #/post per page at double default)

I would wager that only 2 people actually read this 3.25 page bill. ...

if I ruffle feathers - FINE - welcome to freedom (where you ought to be offended at times)
(yes willful ignorance is offensive to me)
if the same / similar has been conveyed - fine I agree and sorry for added the clutter -

From a post I made elsewhere on the WWW:

Well ... I just re read ... outloud ... word for word ... the ACTUAL ENTIRE bill ... as signed into law ... with my wife ... and the following article does a great job of describing what ... IS ACTUALLY ... written in this legislation ... and the FACT ... that this ONLY discusses and limits the GOVERNMENT from placing restrictions on the FREE EXERCISE of religious practices. It DOES NOT cover interaction between individual persons or businesses AT ALL.
PERIOD.


When did we become so afraid of FREEDOM , free association and individuality???
And that we might be offended or offend someone???


Please ... read the bill ... it is ONLY 3 and a part pages.



Link to Article I (re)shared: Hoosier Hullabaloo | PE News

Link (again to bill - in case anyone missed in the OP): Indiana General Assembly, 2015 Session


I find it sad that in a group where we (well some of us) argue for facts and reason in support of our cause -
which largely involves understanding the laws of the state and the proposed legislation that will affect our cause -

we can't seem to read a 3 page bill about some other part of the fundamental freedoms that founded our country.

 

[brotherbill3]

Virtual Rep, Bill.

The acrimony can be explained simply: If you're not for us, you're against us.

back at ya. ...

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Swarens: Gov. Mike Pence to push for clarification of ?religious freedom? law

 

[SSGSAD]

I read 3 pages - here -

I had to quit ... normally I'd skip this here ... I have enough other places to argue against ignorance
and not 'really' participating in our democratically elected bicameral republic form of government

I can't read 18 more pages.
... if I was more motivated here, I'd create a poll ... (idea if you're more motivated)
anyway. In 3 pages (oh and I have #/post per page at double default)

I would wager that only 2 people actually read this 3.25 page bill. ...

if I ruffle feathers - FINE - welcome to freedom (where you ought to be offended at times)
(yes willful ignorance is offensive to me)
if the same / similar has been conveyed - fine I agree and sorry for added the clutter -

From a post I made elsewhere on the WWW:

Well ... I just re read ... outloud ... word for word ... the ACTUAL ENTIRE bill ... as signed into law ... with my wife ... and the following article does a great job of describing what ... IS ACTUALLY ... written in this legislation ... and the FACT ... that this ONLY discusses and limits the GOVERNMENT from placing restrictions on the FREE EXERCISE of religious practices. It DOES NOT cover interaction between individual persons or businesses AT ALL.
PERIOD.


When did we become so afraid of FREEDOM , free association and individuality???
And that we might be offended or offend someone???


Please ... read the bill ... it is ONLY 3 and a part pages.



Link to Article I (re)shared: Hoosier Hullabaloo | PE News

Link (again to bill - in case anyone missed in the OP): Indiana General Assembly, 2015 Session


I find it sad that in a group where we (well some of us) argue for facts and reason in support of our cause -
which largely involves understanding the laws of the state and the proposed legislation that will affect our cause -

we can't seem to read a 3 page bill about some other part of the fundamental freedoms that founded our country.

I posted in another thread, 19 Other States, have a "similar" Law. b. c. signed a law back when he was pres. I guess it was ok, THEN, but not NOW !!!!!

 

[Kirk Freeman]

When did we become so afraid of FREEDOM , free association and individuality???

Because the very important people in LA and NYC don't like it!

 

[Thor]

Was at a Town Hall meeting this am with reps Harman, Oder, and Sen Mishler. They discussed a wide range of issues and held this one for last. Sen. Harman did such a good job explaining what this actually does and does not do (and that 31 other states and the Feds actually have the same law) that the two protester plants just got up and walked out without saying a word.

It is educational that the protests only really started after the governor signed the legislation and none of them actually refer to the bill. He said that one of his constituents sent him a 'nice hate mail' and he asked if she had read it including a copy in the response. She said that she didn't understand and was now confused. I'm guessing she went and turned on MSDNC right away to get her head straight again. After all the progressive agenda must progress...opposition is racist, sexist, bigoted and what not.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Because the very important people in LA and NYC don't like it!

Miley Circus lives in Lousiana? I didn't know she was so important....

 

[brotherbill3]

Miley Circus lives in Lousiana? I didn't know she was so important....

Miley needs to get t'work ...

oh LOL sorry - mentail bleach please.

 

[Bartman]

60 pages in, I'm sure to repeat someone else's comments. I'll give the qualifier that I do not oppose gay marriage, nor do I oppose business owners having the right to refuse service to whoever they wish. As others have stated, if that behavior is so contrary to public opinion then surely a free market would put that person out of business in short order.

Some have stated that the RFRA was not needed as Indiana law does not recognize sexual orientation as a protected class. Is it possible that a left leaning judge might to try to legislate from the bench and interpret the law the way that other states have, that freedom against discrimination supersedes religious freedom? IANAL but it seems like the RFRA might be seen as a proactive measure to secure religious freedom against any future anti-discrimination laws against LGBT.

I don't doubt that it's also being used as a political tool by the Republicans, but what new piece of legislation isn't a political tool for the party that sponsors it? And from a purely emotional standpoint, it's understandable that people of faith may feel that their faith is under attack. Some of the more rabidly atheistic opposition: "superstitions" "God and Muhammad are not real. Your hate is." only serve to affirm to the religious right that their faith is under attack. And we have seen in other states, businesses being fined by local governments for refusing to serve. Indiana business owners who may not fully understand the differences in state laws may feel they have a vested interest in seeing their religious rights protected. And if the Republicans can make political hay of it, so be it. I don't see a lot of the LGBT community flocking to support Republicans before this law was written.

While I don't oppose same-sex couples wanting to marry, I do greatly oppose the strong arm tactics being used by the left. The "lavender mafia" term was used and that's precisely the way their tactics strike me. Fall in line and do as you're told, OR ELSE. Given the way LGBT and their supporters are trying to bully, coerce, and shame others into accepting their views makes it impossible to view them as being victimized in any way. Especially given the lack of widespread discrimination in the other states that have a version of the RFRA.

 

[Kutnupe14]

The law is redundant. I can see why people are pissed about it. Regardless of what anyone says, this was based on a gay issue. In effect, Indiana law makers "doubled down" on an already existing law, and because it arose because of a gay issue, people are stating it is directed towards gays. Our idiot law makers should have just rode out the anger, and continued as they always have. And to make us look even worse, Pence is looking like a simpleton for asking for clarification language of the law AFTER he signed it.

 

[olhorseman]

The law is redundant. I can see why people are pissed about it. Regardless of what anyone says, this was based on a gay issue. In effect, Indiana law makers "doubled down" on an already existing law, and because it arouse because of a gay issue, people are stating it is directed towards gays. Our idiot law makers should have just rode out the anger, and continued as they always have. And to make us look even worse, Pence is looking like a simpleton for asking for clarification language of the law AFTER he signed it.

It's not just looks!

 

[D-Ric902]

The law is redundant. I can see why people are pissed about it. Regardless of what anyone says, this was based on a gay issue. In effect, Indiana law makers "doubled down" on an already existing law, and because it arouse because of a gay issue, people are stating it is directed towards gays. Our idiot law makers should have just rode out the anger, and continued as they always have. And to make us look even worse, Pence is looking like a simpleton for asking for clarification language of the law AFTER he signed it.

I dont think he's doing that by himself, there's a little group called legislature that are hiding under their desks.

"no hate in our state"
(unless your the religious one)

on on a side note
http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/chick-fil-thrives-after-embarrassingly-ineffective-boycott

 

[cobber]

When does the boycott begin? Are they going after Chick-Fil-A again while they're at it, since that one went oh so well...?

 

[miguel]

When does the boycott begin? Are they going after Chick-Fil-A again while they're at it, since that one went oh so well...?

My boycott begins as soon as I see a, "We love everyone!" sticker in the window of a business. Two can play the game.

It's their right to post it and mine to reject their POV.

 

[PistolBob]

Will the "We Love Everyone" crowd hire an ex-con? Or will they use their leftist right of selective discrimination to justify their refusal?

Discrimination is not always a bad thing. It separates us from the insects. Take a look around Broad Ripple and count the businesses that are not wheelchair accessible. They obviously hate the handicapped more than they love money.