What's the big deal with this whole Indiana Religious Freedom Restoration law?

[skijunkie55]

Ok, I'm seriously trying to find the rational thinking here from both sides.

Private business: We don't want to be threatened with lawsuits when we refuse service to customers based on our religious beliefs ie. the bakers, photographers, etc who have been sued by gay couples for refusing to participate in their "special day." Apparently there is a lack of gay cake makers and photographers in the US? Government needs to stay out of private business.

LGBT community: You passed a law that allows businesses to discriminate against us!

So here are some hypothetical yet very real situations that could occur if this law gets repealed, which is what the left is pushing for:

1. NAMBLA now wants to hold a social gathering at your gay establishment. They believe pedophilia is perfectly normal, and obviously they are all gay. Who knows, maybe these men haven't even committed a crime but want to talk about their love for children. Why should some archaic laws dictate who you are allowed to love? If the individual consents, they should have that choice. You as a married gay man with kids decide "i don't agree with pedophilia, so therefore I will not allow them to host an event in my establishment!" Based on allowed precedent, lawsuit is feasible.

2. You own a t-shirt shop. Client comes in and wants to have some shirts done with some very strong profane language regarding an issue. He's within his first amendment rights, has appropriate permits for a demonstration, etc. Maybe he's a KKK member, maybe black panther party, LGBT, etc. You believe that God's word simply says "let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth" and therefore do not want your product to carry their message, but you are the only T-shirt shop in town. What's to stop a lawsuit here?

Only posting this because one of my favorite places in West Michigan jumped on the LGBT bandwagon. Unfortunately, I am likely to go down the street now for dinner because they felt the need to hitch their wagon to the wrong pony.
http://woodtv.com/2015/03/30/hopcat-...t-open-to-all/

[RCI1911]

There really is no big deal as far as I can tell. I believe that 19 other states have similar laws. There is nothing in the Constitution about marriage, therefore IMO, the federal government has no right to mandate one way or the other. Leave it to the states. There is however, the First Amendment protecting the freedom of religion. As a Christian I don't agree with what these businesses are doing in the name of Christ even though I believe that homosexuality is wrong, but it is their right to do so. There are so many other people getting married that, Biblically, they could refuse service to yet don't. I know what the old testament says, but I also know what Jesus commanded us to do.

[skijunkie55]

NCAA is threatening to pullout of hosting the tournament there in the future and re-locating HQ.

CT Governor, Washington Governor, Seattle Mayor have issued state-funded travel bans to Indiana.
CEO's are threatening to close up shop and leave.

People WANT this to be an issue because that tiny 1% of society demands it.

[Averageman]

I think most of the hate is being generated by folks on social media who haven't taken the time to actually look at the Law as written.
The idea that we all have rights and as long as I do not impose myself on your freedom's, why should you be allowed to impose upon mine? In other words if I sell you flowers for your home it has no bearing on my religion, if you ask me to sell you flowers for your gay wedding, if my beliefs wont allow me to support gay marriage, then I have the right to refuse service.
Sounds simple to me.
The issue seems to be that if I refuse you service for any reason, then I am imposing on your rights. That simply becomes an issue when your intent comes in to conflict with my religious beliefs.
This isn't in fact a bias based upon your sexuality, it is a bias based upon the commandments or doctrine of ones own personal religious beliefs and practices. Equal freedoms seem to scare the LGBT community.


Well that and it's a cool way for minor celebrities to get some face time on the News.

[GunBugBit]

LGBT people are hysterical that anyone would dare assert their right to not perform a service, like baking a cake, for them.

[brickboy240]

This is a classic case of "careful what laws you write"

Clinton passed this (...with Democratic support) back in the 90s to allow Indians to smoke peyote.

They never guessed that this same law would be used to disallow a person from serving a gay person because this goes against THEIR religious beliefs.

There is nobody "hating" anyone else...that is just bunk.

With all the real problems facing our country...this is a total non-issue that is being whipped up into a controversy.

[sevenhelmet]

Whatever happened to "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone"?

Gub'ment needs to GTFO of this situation, IMO. The "equality" crowd doesn't actually want equality- they want their minority to be put above all others.

It's a tough world to be a white Christian heterosexual male. I'm pretty much the root of all evil.

[nova3930]

I think most of the hate is being generated by folks on social media who haven't taken the time to actually look at the Law as written.

This exactly. All it does is guarantee someone with a religious objection a day in court and requires the gov't have a compelling interest in the law/regulation and that it's the least burdensome method of meeting that interest. Historically, very few court cases brought under RFRA statutes have prevailed over the gov't interest.

Secondly, the same groups that foam at the mouth over a Christian refusing to service a gay wedding, would be abhored if a Jewish or Muslim butcher were required to provide pork sausage for a function.

Thirdly, the attempt is made to parallel this with Jim Crow and refusing to serve blacks at the lunch counter etc etc. They forget Jim Crow was enforced by the gov't and the miss the distinction that people are not refusing to serve gays entirely, they're simply refusing to participate in their wedding.

[skydivr]

This is all pushback on that gay couple (and later the courts) trying to force a baker to bake a cake for them, when there were plenty of other bakers in town who would have been willing to do it. Think of how much hot air would have been saved if the courts had stayed the hell out of it...

[7.62NATO]

There really is no big deal as far as I can tell. I believe that 19 other states have similar laws. There is nothing in the Constitution about marriage, therefore IMO, the federal government has no right to mandate one way or the other. Leave it to the states. There is however, the First Amendment protecting the freedom of religion. As a Christian I don't agree with what these businesses are doing in the name of Christ even though I believe that homosexuality is wrong, but it is their right to do so. There are so many other people getting married that, Biblically, they could refuse service to yet don't. I know what the old testament says, but I also know what Jesus commanded us to do.

Jesus addressed sexual immorality:

What comes out of you is what defiles you. For from within, out of your hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly. All these evils come from inside and defile you. (NIV, Mark 7:20-23)