Indiana Gov. signs law allowing businesses to refuse service to gay customers.

[JeffreyS]

Ahh the Religious liberty argument or how to mask your discrimination.

For Senator Bilbo, however, racism was more that just an ideology, it was a sincerely held religious belief. In a book entitled Take Your Choice: Separation or Mongrelization, Bilbo wrote that "[p]urity of race is a gift of God . . . . And God, in his infinite wisdom, has so ordained it that when man destroys his racial purity, it can never be redeemed." Allowing "the blood of the races [to] mix," according to Bilbo, was a direct attack on the "Divine plan of God." There "is every reason to believe that miscengenation and amalgamation are sins of man in direct defiance to the will of God."

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2014/02/26/3333161/religious-liberty-racist-anti-gay/

Just remember when your religion is hate you can't expect it to be alright in public.

[I-10east]

The well known review website Angie's List (based outta Indianapolis) cancelled it's 40 million dollar headquarters expansion because of this Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

http://www.indystar.com/story/money/2015/03/28/angies-list-canceling-eastside-expansion-rfra/70590738/

[I-10east]

Washington Post: '19 states that have 'religious freedom' laws like Indiana's that no one is boycotting'.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/03/27/19-states-that-have-religious-freedom-laws-like-indianas-that-no-one-is-boycotting/

[copperfiend]

Washington Post: '19 states that have 'religious freedom' laws like Indiana's that no one is boycotting'.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/03/27/19-states-that-have-religious-freedom-laws-like-indianas-that-no-one-is-boycotting/

Arizona caved to pressure last year and did not sign the bill into law. Indiana did and is facing the consequences. Angie'e List is just the beginning. Wait until the NCAA pulls a future Final Four or the NFL pulls the Super Bowl. Pence will cave in too.

[finehoe]

Washington Post: '19 states that have 'religious freedom' laws like Indiana's that no one is boycotting'.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/03/27/19-states-that-have-religious-freedom-laws-like-indianas-that-no-one-is-boycotting/

From the text of the Indiana bill:

Chapter 9. Religious Freedom Restoration
Sec. 1. This chapter applies to all governmental entity statutes, ordinances, resolutions, executive or administrative orders, regulations, customs, and usages, including the implementation or application thereof, regardless of whether they were enacted, adopted, or initiated before, on, or after July 1, 2015.
Sec. 2. A governmental entity statute, ordinance, resolution,
executive or administrative order, regulation, custom, or usage may not be construed to be exempt from the application of this chapter unless a state statute expressly exempts the statute, ordinance, resolution, executive or administrative order, regulation, custom, or usage from the application of this chapter by citation to this chapter.

The purpose of this language is to insert a "religious exemption" into every law, regulation, statute, ordinance, etc. at every level of government, including state educational institutions and "a body corporate or politic." Now one could assume that if challenged against Indiana's Civil Rights Act a state court would rule in favor of the Civil Rights Act; likewise for a challenge against the federal Civil Rights Act that applies to the states. But, that is an assumption rather than an assurance codified in the RFRA.

As a counter example Texas RFRA Sec. 110.011 specifically exempts religious freedom claims under "federal or state civil rights law." The Texas legislature was sound enough to determine for itself that the state had a greater interest in preventing discrimination against certain classes than protecting religious freedom. Indiana on the other hand has decided to leave that up in the air and possibly to the courts.

[finehoe]

[T]he Indiana statute has two features the federal RFRA—and most state RFRAs—do not. First, the Indiana law explicitly allows any for-profit business to assert a right to "the free exercise of religion." The federal RFRA doesn't contain such language, and neither does any of the state RFRAs except South Carolina's; in fact, Louisiana and Pennsylvania, explicitly exclude for-profit businesses from the protection of their RFRAs.

    Second, the Indiana statute explicitly makes a business's "free exercise" right a defense against a private lawsuit by another person, rather than simply against actions brought by government.

www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/03/what-makes-indianas-religious-freedom-law-different/388997

The first point carries it beyond SCOTUS interpretation of the federal RFRA in the Hobby Lobby case as covering "closely held" corporations, but not all for-profits. And the second means Indiana isn't just protecting religious folk against the all-powerful government, but against the very targets of their discrimination.

[Jimmy]

So many things to say.  I hope people saw Governor Pence on This Week yesterday.  If not, check it out:  http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/indiana-gov-mike-pence-controversial-religious-freedom-law/story?id=29985752

Actually, the video I was looking for is here: http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/video/gov-mike-pence-religious-freedom-law-29987447

And I would remind folks that this is nothing new, even in Jacksonville.  Kim Daniels filed her own Religious Freedom bill back in 2012 when she was afraid the HRO would pass.  That was 2012-296.  Her bill was 2012-377.  It's disingenuous to say there's no connection between these measures and LGBT rights.  Are our memories so short?

Bill pledging religious freedom protection headed to Jacksonville Council
Anti-discrimination proposal brings up the issue of rights of the religious.

Legislation being introduced Tuesday to Jacksonville's City Council could open a new front in ongoing talks about protecting the rights of the religious.

First, the city needs some agreement on what those rights are.

"The free exercise of religion is hereby recognized in the City of Jacksonville," reads an ordinance (2012-377) that Councilwoman Kimberly Daniels is sponsoring. Invoking the state and U.S. constitutions, the bill promises "there shall be imposed no burden whatsoever upon the religious beliefs of people of faith including, but not limited to places of public accommodation, in religious worship or in the use of religious facilities, in matters of employment and in the rental of real property."

Chunks of that sentence — about public accommodations, employment and property rental — echo fears religious conservatives have declared about losing rights because of a separate bill (2012-296) written to ban discrimination based on sexual orientation.

http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2012-06-07/story/bill-pledging-religious-freedom-protection-headed-jacksonville-council

[Jax native]

I question what would happen when Rastafarians in Indiana  decides to practice this "religious freedom" while smoking marijuana as their "religious activities may dictate? 

[coredumped]

I question what would happen when Rastafarians in Indiana  decides to practice this "religious freedom" while smoking marijuana as their "religious activities may dictate? 

They'd be charged/arrested for breaking both federal and state law.

There's no law that protects the LBGT community in IN right now, which is why this can pass - it doesn't conflict with an existing law (federal or state) since LBGT's are a "protected class" light Race, Sex, or Religion.

[vicupstate]

^^ As far as Kimberly Daniels goes, she was probably just trying to make JAX less hospitable for people possessed by Demons, than attacking the LGBT community.  I don't think you should force a hotelier for example, to open their doors to demonic forces. 

[finehoe]

I don't think you should force a hotelier for example, to open their doors to demonic forces.

[Chaz1969]

Portraying Indiana's RFRA as benign legislation identical to the "bipartisan" federal law isn't just inaccurate It is a part of the right's larger role in promoting the narrative of Christian persecution to support the passage of a number of state RFRAs now being considered in states across the country. Expect to see wingnuts continue to misrepresent RFRA as a harmless law protecting "religious liberty" while ignoring the fact that these bills are actually the product of powerful anti-LGBT organizations lobbying to legalize anti-LGBT discrimination.

That hits the nail on the head.  Since the 2010 elections, the Right has changed state laws throughout this country to add God and Guns whenever possible.

[vicupstate]

I guess NC wants some of this action too.

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/politics-government/article16956950.html

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/editorials/article16511249.html#/tabPane=tabs-b0710947-1-2

[finehoe]

Many religious conservatives object to the civil rights model for looking at this issue on grounds that sexual orientation is a matter of "choice," not nature, a position that fewer and fewer people accept the more they get to know LGBT folk. But at bottom, their scriptural objections to homosexuality are no stronger than the scriptural objections to racial integration cited so often in defense of Jim Crow. And like them, the current efforts to identify Christianity with homophobia will look ludicrous and shameful in a generation or less. So when we are told these poor innocent conservative religious folk "just" want their consciences respected, and that means a zone of sanctioned discrimination must be created for them, the proper answer isn't to dismiss religious liberty as a legitimate concern, but instead to ask: does your liberty really require a right to discriminate, and to disobey laws others must obey? It's the self-definition of the right to discriminate that's so dangerous here, and so tempting to bigots.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal-a/2015_03/religious_liberty_and_the_dama054868.php

[vicupstate]

Embattled Indiana Gov. Mike Pence (R) took a second crack at trying to "clarify" his state's controversial new "religious freedom" law, the Indianapolis Star reports.

Pence concluded "we've got a perception problem" and said "it will be helpful to move legislation this week to amend the law to make it clear that it does not give businesses the right to deny services to anyone."

http://politicalwire.com/2015/03/31/pence-will-amend-religious-freedom-law/