Politics Why Indiana's Religious Freedom Law Is Such A Big Deal

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Denny Crane

It's not even loaded!
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
73,124
Likes
10,973
Points
113
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/01/indiana-religious-freedom_n_6984156.html

If you’ve been following the controversy over Indiana’s new religious freedom law, you might be confused about what it really says and what it will actually do.

Some people describe the law as a “sword” that would allow discrimination against same-sex couples. Others say it’s a “shield” that would give people more freedom to follow the dictates of their faith.

Some say the law would give businesses more leeway to pick and choose which customers to serve. Others say it won’t make much difference -- that even with the law in place, virtually all businesses will end up behaving just as they would have before.

Some say the statute represents a significant change in the legal landscape, enacted at the behest of the Republican Party’s most conservative supporters. Others say it is strikingly similar to existing laws, including one that Congress passed with overwhelming bipartisan majorities and that a Democratic president, Bill Clinton, happily signed more than two decades ago.

Which one of these statements is correct? All of them.
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/02/us/arkansas-indiana-religious-freedom-hutchinson-pence.html?_r=0

Arkansas Governor Asks Lawmakers to Recall Religious Freedom Bill

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. — Facing a backlash from businesses and gay rights advocates, Gov. Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas on Wednesday called on state lawmakers to either recall or amend legislation billed as a religious freedom measure so that it mirrored a federal law approved in 1993.

Mr. Hutchinson, a Republican, said he understood the divide in Arkansas and across the nation over the question of same-sex marriage and its impact on people’s religious beliefs. His own son, Seth, he said, had asked him to veto the bill, which critics say could allow individuals and businesses to discriminate against gay men and lesbians.

To ensure that the state is “a place of tolerance,” Mr. Hutchinson said, he was considering using an executive order that would seek to balance the “competing constitutional obligations” if the legislature declined to make changes to the bill.

“What is important from an Arkansas standpoint is one, we get the right balance,” he said, “and secondly, we make sure that we communicate we’re not going to be a state that fails to recognize the diversity of our workplace, our economy and our future.”

“This is a bill that in ordinary times would not be controversial,” Mr. Hutchinson said. “But these are not ordinary times.”

(what the hell are ordinary times, fool?)
 
WTF republicans.

You suck as much as the democrats.

How about doing something good for a change? That goes for both parties. I have no hope for democrats, though.
 
I am against any law that takes away our constitution. This law violates that, so I am 100% against it. I suspect this will get eventually changed when activists take this to the Supreme Court. No way it sticks...
 
I'm actually torn on this one

People really probably should be able to use their private property as they see fit. Even if that means bad things like discrimination are possible. That's the downside. The upside is Liberty is protected and advanced.

So some businesses would discriminate. That's a civil matter. Sue them in court and let the justice system figure it out. If they discriminate, people should boycott the establishment and favor the one across the street.

On the other hand, we do have laws against businesses discrimination. With that in mind, this law is completely unjustifiable.
 
People really probably should be able to use their private property as they see fit. Even if that means bad things like discrimination are possible

whites-only.gif
 
I'm actually torn on this one

People really probably should be able to use their private property as they see fit. Even if that means bad things like discrimination are possible. That's the downside. The upside is Liberty is protected and advanced.

So some businesses would discriminate. That's a civil matter. Sue them in court and let the justice system figure it out. If they discriminate, people should boycott the establishment and favor the one across the street.

On the other hand, we do have laws against businesses discrimination. With that in mind, this law is completely unjustifiable.

I get the freedom of religion part, but I think giving a law for a religious discrimination is absurd! As you said, let the people boycott or picket the establishment and allow the market to dictate the outcome. With enough protest, I would suspect the church business would change their tune.
 

I wanted to add that many businesses didn't want to discriminate in the old days. But they were required to by law. Fucking government.

I'm fine with feds telling the states they can't make laws requiring segregation.
 
This goes waaaay beyond discrimination.

What if some dirtbag declares that beating his wife and kids is an exercise of his religious freedom? Forced marriage for underage girls? "Honor" killings? Attacking women for appearing in public without veils?
 
This goes waaaay beyond discrimination.

What if some dirtbag declares that beating his wife and kids is an exercise of his religious freedom? Forced marriage for underage girls? "Honor" killings? Attacking women for appearing in public without veils?
Or wanting religious freedom to wear this!!!!

20948.jpg
 
Without this sort of law...

Should a jewish business be required to make a cake with a swastika on it?

Should a black business participate in KKK ceremonies (like making a cake with a burning cross)?
 
Without this sort of law...

Should a jewish business be required to make a cake with a swastika on it?

Should a black business participate in KKK ceremonies (like making a cake with a burning cross)?

My understanding of things is usually wrong and not good, but as I recall the only reason this law can exist is because homosexuality isn't protected under federal law (whereas discriminating against race is protected against). So without this sort of law... it's still illegal to do the above.

But again, I'm not pretending to be a lawyer played by William Shatner, so I'm probably wrong.
 
Without this sort of law...

Should a jewish business be required to make a cake with a swastika on it?

Should a black business participate in KKK ceremonies (like making a cake with a burning cross)?

In principle I agree with you and Im torn also, but have any of these ever been a problem? Actually has anything ever been a problem with this issue other than denying gay people service? It does bring up the interesting question of where do you draw the line and where does the line even start. Really though business should be in the business of making money, green doesn't discriminate.
 
I don't know why this is a thing. Don't business' have the right to refuse service no matter what anyway? It all seems unnecessary.

The real problem is people get super offended and sue/contact the media when they can just go to another place and be served. It's the business that's losing out on their money anyway.
 
We are now discussing where Government has no fucking business being. I don't give a shit how badly you think you need protection, it will bite you eventually.
Empowering the government to tell you who you must do business with, buying or selling is just silly, and enriching more lawyers.
People must find their support group and the government has no role. If you don't like it where you are, your feet can change your location.
You have a right to pursue happiness, not find it. You have a right to seek friends, not have the government make you one.
No Baker will refuse to sell a cake knowing nothing but you want a cake. You can fuck that up though by insisting he know more than he wishes to know. Who the hell is wrong then?
 
I don't know why this is a thing. Don't business' have the right to refuse service no matter what anyway? It all seems unnecessary.

The real problem is people get super offended and sue/contact the media when they can just go to another place and be served. It's the business that's losing out on their money anyway.

NAH BRO. YOU HAVE TO MAKE ME MY "I LOVE SLUTS" CAKE, BRO.
 
NAH BRO. YOU HAVE TO MAKE ME MY "I LOVE SLUTS" CAKE, BRO.

I think the salient point is that there's a difference between choosing to want an I Love Sluts cake, and being genetically programmed from before birth to want an I Love Sluts cake. I can choose not to honor your choice, but if you can't help but love sluts, I can't discriminate against that.
 
I think the salient point is that there's a difference between choosing to want an I Love Sluts cake, and being genetically programmed from before birth to want an I Love Sluts cake. I can choose not to honor your choice, but if you can't help but love sluts, I can't discriminate against that.

And as one that couldn't help but love Sluts because I was born that way, I expect those to serve me hot slutty blonde girls daily.
 
The Religious Freedom Restoration Act says the government cannot "substantially burden" a person's ability to follow their religious beliefs

It seems Rastafarians have a pretty good case that they should be able to legally smoke marijuana?
 
The Religious Freedom Restoration Act says the government cannot "substantially burden" a person's ability to follow their religious beliefs

It seems Rastafarians have a pretty good case that they should be able to legally smoke marijuana?

Indians get to do peyote.
 
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2015/04/0...t-gay-weddings-was-fabricated-out-of-nothing/

Indiana’s Memories Pizza Reportedly Becomes First
Business To Reject Catering Gay Weddings

Memories Pizza is a nine-year-old shop in downtown Walkerton, Indiana, just a few blocks from John Glenn High School. It’s owned by an openly-Christian couple, the O’Connors, who decorate their shop with mementos of their faith in Christ. So how does a small business in a small town wind up making headlines around the world as the new avatar of Christian bigotry?

Perhaps, you say, they brought this upon themselves, seeking out publicity for their strict biblical views.

Eh…no.

Some cursory internet forensics shows how it happened…or rather, how it was made to happen.

ABC-57 reporter Alyssa Marino’s editor sends her on a half-hour drive southwest of their South Bend studio, to the small town of Walkerton (Pop. ~2,300). According to Alyssa’s own account on Twitter, she “just walked into their shop [Memories Pizza] and asked how they feel” about Indiana’s new Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

Owner Crystal O’Connor says she’s in favor of it, noting that while anyone can eat in her family restaurant, if the business were asked to cater a gay wedding, they would not do it. It conflicts with their biblical beliefs. Alyssa’s tweet mentions that the O’Connors have “never been asked to cater a same-sex wedding.”

What we have here is — as we called in journalism school jargon — “no story.” Nothing happened. Nothing was about to happen.

If I were forced to mark out a story line, it would be this: A nice lady in a small town tries to be helpful and polite to a lovely young reporter from “the big city.”

In other words, Memories Pizza didn’t blast out a news release. They didn’t contact the media, nor make a stink on Twitter or Facebook. They didn’t even post a sign in the window rejecting gay-wedding catering jobs. They merely answered questions from a novice reporter who strolled into their restaurant one day – who was sent on a mission by an irresponsible news organization.

Next: ABC-57 anchor Brian Dorman leads the evening newscast dramatically with this:

Only on ABC-57 News tonight. We went into small towns looking for reaction to the Religious Freedom Act. We found one business, just 20 miles away from a welcoming South Bend…with a very different view.


Alyssa Marino tweets the genesis
of the Memories Pizza scoop.



Notice that his city of South Bend is “welcoming,” but that small-town business is not. It’s very different. That’s why ABC-57 “went into small towns,” as if embarking on a safari to aboriginal lands.

Not only did ABC-57 News create that story ex nihilo (out of nothing), but the next day, the station’s Rosie Woods reported on the social-media backlash against the Christian pizza shop owners.

“Our Facebook page has been blowing up with comments after we aired that story last night,” said Woods.

At this point, even my old Leftist journalism professors would be grinding their teeth and rending their garments.

You see, not only did ABC-57 manufacture the story with an ambush interview, it then doubled-down by making the reaction to the story into another story to give the sense of momentum, as if it were growing at its own impetus. Yet, everything about it is a fabrication.

Memories Pizza didn’t “publicly vow to reject gay weddings” as HuffPo says it. The O’Connors were just, quite literally, minding their own business.

Back in the ABC-57 studio, Rosie Woods read three negative social media comments attacking the pizza shop owners, and then said, “And that’s just one side of this debate that’s heating up as more people and business owners speak up about the law.”

She then quotes one (1) person, the owner of another business, who agreed with the O’Connors. Seems that “just one side of this debate” deserves more attention than the other.


This false Buzzfeed headline has been seen hundreds of thousands of times.

The unnamed ABC-57 editor then sends another reporter door-to-door on Walkerton’s rather depressed-looking main drag, trying to get reactions from other business people about the pizza shop owners. And the story inexorably snowballs onward, with only man’s yearning for truth to propel it.

All of the blog traffic and social media activity led to about 36,000 Facebook shares at ABC57.com on the original Alyssa Marino story less than 24 hours after it aired.

BuzzFeed posted its own inaccurate headline, with the kicker: ”The Internet has unleashed its wrath.”

All of those eyeballs benefit the TV station, which sells advertising on its website. It also helps several young, minor-market reporters who hustled and stumbled their way into the national spotlight. But don’t blame them. Blame the editor.

Meanwhile, over at Yelp.com, more than a thousand “reviews” of Memories Pizza rapidly accumulated, quickly overwhelming the positive comments from actual customers who like the pizza, the hospitality and the small-town charm. Folks who never heard of Walkerton attacked Crystal O’Connor’s business, her morality and her Lord. Many of the remarks included racially charged descriptions of genitalia and sex acts. “Reviewers” also posted pictures of naked men, of Adolf Hitler shouting “Ich habe ein pizza” (I have a pizza), and of Jesus gesturing with his middle finger. Over on Facebook, the restaurant’s 5-star average rating rapidly plunged to one star, as non-customers slammed away at Crystal’s little business.

In Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, a manifesto of political power, Rule No. 12 says, in part:

Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)

The Left doesn’t care who gets hurt, so long as they get what they want. They’re willing — no, they’re eager — to sacrifice a small-town business, and it’s owners.

Lest you think I’m being too dramatic. Late Wednesday, word comes that Jess Dooley, a female coach at Concord High School 45 minutes away in Elkhart, has been suspended after tweeting:

Who’s going to Walkerton, IN to burn down #memoriespizza w me?



Read more: http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2015/04/0...-was-fabricated-out-of-nothing/#ixzz3WH0p1Cx3
 
Ms O'Connor has a right to support the law. Those who disagree have the right to not patronize her business.
 
Ms O'Connor has a right to support the law. Those who disagree have the right to not patronize her business.

All true. It's a good thing that enterprising reporter went out and unearthed that business-owner's latent bigotry and ensured that it was properly publicized, otherwise right-minded, well-meaning residents of Walkerton might have unintentionally supported their evil discriminatory viewpoint by buying their pizza.

Hooray for full disclosure.
 
Straight or gay, who the fuck caters their wedding with pizza?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top