Indiana Gov. Mike Pence signs controversial 'religious freedom' bill

Butler University President Says Lawmakers Damaged Indiana

The president of Butler University in Indiana is calling on state lawmakers for "immediate action" to fix the "damage done" by passing a license to discriminate law.

www.advocate.com...

Governor Pence appeared on "This Week with George Stephanopoulos" and failed to answer a question posed to him six times as to whether the law would allow for discrimination by Christians against other people.

Beyond insisting that Hoosiers were really nice people and that their only concern was to "strengthen the foundation of the Constitution"? Apparently it was to let everyone know that Pence has been reaching out to business leaders and cooperate leaders to "correct the gross mischaracterization of this law." Because that's the real bottom line.

Pence Defends Indiana Hate Law

You know, people should really not speak when they're not going to add anything productive to the conversation.

Like Governor Pence.

The biggest problem I see with laws like this one as well as the hobby lobby ruling is that well it seems like only the rights that are given to individuals should be extended to businesses not more. For instance, hobby lobby wanted religious protection when it came to providing birth control coverage to it's employees but do we as individuals have the protection when it comes to providing that coverage to our dependents? As far as I know we don't!! We either have to get insurance coverage that is acceptable in the gov't's eyes which means if have that coverage or we have to pay the penalty which thanks to the hobby lobby ruling the businesses don't!

And well if any businesses can deny service to someone based on their religious beliefs, can the employees of that business deny service based on thier's? Or heck when the boss wants his secretary to consistently lie to his wife on his behalf is she legally protected when she refuses to or can she be fired?

How can businesses have more protection than the individuals that the constitution originally sought to protect?

originally posted by: Annee
I think he understands the bill perfectly. With blinders.

This morning, he's vowing to "explain" the bill to the people of Indiana... I guess he thinks they're too stupid to read and understand for themselves. Seems some understand it perfectly...

Indiana Restaurant Owner Already Turning Away Gays

A restaurant owner in Indiana called into a local radio station’s morning talk show to profess his support for the new anti-gay law passed in his home state this week, and even bragged about all the times he has happily discriminated against gay people.

That's religious freedom for you!



Sounds like something Jesus would say... Right?

Seems Pence is getting a ton of backlash. And it has hit the comedy circuits.

Jimmy Kimmel said that thankfully, those in Indianan who will be using this law to discriminate will be displaying signs, so people know...

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

Well, he's already tried to explain away the backlash, and done such a bad job of it while dodging the basic question and lying through his teeth, I don't expect him to do a better job of "clarifying" anything while he refuses to clarify what millions of Americans (and others around the world) clearly know.

It's really pretty simple, if this bill is as he says and NOT intended to discriminate against LGBT people in his state, all he needs to do is sign a bill protecting the rights of LGBT citizens to equal service and rights in his state.

He has refused to do this, or to clarify this bill to do this, and therefore every time he claims it's not about discriminating against LGBT people it CLEARLY IS EXACTLY THAT.

If it was not about that, he would have no problem at all with creating legal protections for LGBT equality in his state.

I remember reading a while back, when the Family Values people were losing the gay rights, marriage equality fight ---- how they intentionally and carefully changed the wording of their spiel by not directly using any anti-gay wording.

This discrimination was carefully crafted, and, of course, Pence knows this.

I've gone on some religious sites to read their opinions. The ignorance is damn right scary.

Some truly believe it is prophesized that accepting gay people is a sign of the end times and God will destroy us if we don't do His bidding,

Twenty states have laws similar to Indiana's. Can anyone tell me why nobody cares about any of them except little ole Indiana's? Sounds like it must have trended on Twitter and now it's the new vogue topic, ala "Stop Kony" and "Hands up don't shoot", and "boko haram". Next week they'll all move on to complain about the next thing Twitter brings to their attention.

originally posted by: jjkenobi
Twenty states have laws similar to Indiana's. Can anyone tell me why nobody cares about any of them except little ole Indiana's? Sounds like it must have trended on Twitter and now it's the new vogue topic, ala "Stop Kony" and "Hands up don't shoot", and "boko haram". Next week they'll all move on to complain about the next thing Twitter brings to their attention.

Who's nobody?

You seem to know about them.

ALABAMA Chief Justice Roy Moore Joins Anti-LGBT Rally in Texas
ARKANSAS Tech CEO Condemns Arkansas’ Discriminatory Anti-LGBT Legislation
CONNECTICUT Transgender Healthcare Advances in Connecticut
GEORGIA Anti-LGBT Georgia Bill Moves Forward, Threatening to Undermine State’s Economic Growth
INDIANA Must Watch: New Video Highlights Pence Dodging Questions About Indiana’s New Law and LGBT Equality
KANSAS Kansas Bill Undermining “All-Comers” Policy Advances to House
NEW YORK Victory for Transgender Health Care in New York

Find out what's happening in your state:

www.hrc.org...

originally posted by: jjkenobi
Twenty states have laws similar to Indiana's. Can anyone tell me why nobody cares about any of them except little ole Indiana's?

Absolutely! It's in the wording. From this post. www.abovetopsecret.com...

The Indiana bill reads: A governmental entity may not substantially burden a person's exercise of religion, even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability...

My state has one of the similar bills. It reads (not exactly, but close enough): A governmental entity may not substantially burden a person's exercise of religion, unless the burden results from a rule of general applicability...

So, in Indiana, the government can't force a business to serve gays, even if the requested services apply to the general public. In other words, a restaurant can't be legally compelled to serve gays, even if it serves the general public.

In New Mexico, the government can't force a business to serve gays, unless the requested services apply to the general public. In other words, a restaurant can't be legally compelled to serve gays, unless it serves the general public.

Does that explain it?

Arkansas Closed for Business Today (March 30), Max Levchin, co-founder of PayPal, CEO of Affirm, chairman of Yelp and Glow, and director at Yahoo!, condemned Arkansas’ discriminatory H.B. 1228

Arkansas Closed for BusinessToday, Max Levchin, co-founder of PayPal, CEO of Affirm, chairman of Yelp and Glow, and director at Yahoo!, condemned Arkansas’ discriminatory H.B. 1228, which, if passed into law, will allow individuals to use religion as an excuse to discriminate against LGBT people and other minorities. On Friday, the measure passed the Arkansas Senate, and will likely be soon on its way to the Governor’s desk. A similar bill was signed into law last week in Indiana. However, corporate leaders from across the country are now taking action against bills like H.B. 1228 that are actively being considered in states across the country.

www.hrc.org...

originally posted by: kevinp2300
Here is a link to the bill and a few articles.
LINK

So, the bill says this:

Religious freedom restoration.

Prohibits a governmental entity from substantially burdening a person's exercise of religion, even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, unless the governmental entity can demonstrate that the burden:
(1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and
(2) is the least restrictive means of furthering the compelling governmental interest.

Provides a procedure for remedying a violation. Specifies that the religious freedom law applies to the implementation or application of a law regardless of whether the state or any other governmental entity or official is a party to a proceeding implementing or applying the law. Prohibits an applicant, employee, or former employee from pursuing certain causes of action against a private employer.

Specifically, one senate amendment (#5) was filed that says this:

Page 1, line 5, after "1." insert " (a) ".
Page 1, between lines 9 and 10, begin a new paragraph and insert: " (b) This chapter does not apply to: (1) IC 22-9-1 (Indiana civil rights law); or (2) any state law or local ordinance that prohibits discrimination on the basis of membership in a protected class. ".
(Reference is to SB 101 as printed February 20, 2015.)

A similar house amendment (#4) was later filed:

Page 4, between lines 3 and 4, begin a new paragraph and insert: " (d) This chapter does not establish or eliminate a defense to: (1) any civil rights law, including, but not limited to, the Indiana Civil Rights law under IC 22-9-1; or (2) a criminal prosecution under state or federal law.
Renumber all SECTIONS consecutively.
(Reference is to ESB 101 as printed March 17, 2015.)

This amendment appears to have passed through the House and Senate based on the bill actions. No amendments appear on the latest version at all, but it can be assumed that this will be part of the law.

It seems as if there was quite a lot of hullabaloo over what appears to be fairly unremarkable legislation.

The similar bill that was before the Georgia Legislature was dropped as well a few days or so ago.

Seems that they decided the revenue from the Atlanta Convention business was worth more than the religious being provided with special rights.

I'd say they came to their senses but ... nyah ... it's GA.

Anti Gay Bill Blocked in Committee

Triple, a new record!

Here's a question: If it's not a discrimination bill, what is it?

Everyone in the US has the right to believe whatever they want. Acting on that belief is not the same.

If your religious belief is "man was born without clothes, therefore I can go without clothes" --- can you?

If your religious belief uses hallucinogenics, is that allowed?

Is "spare the rod, spoil the child" allowed in this country anymore?

So how do Christians get the right to live by God's teachings 24/7 --- which includes not serving gays if you have a business?

What a horrible interview he did. Wow.

This is why we need to vote everyone out of office.

If you can't answer a simple question with simple truth, that means you're lying or have some hidden agenda. Whey do we tolerate this type of doublespeak from our politicians? Just answer the question.

It would be like in:
Family--wife asks...did you take out the trash? And I say...it's a too way street, we should recycle more so we have less trash. LOL
Business...customer asks...How much are your prices? and I say...I'll give you benefits way beyond what you thought you could afford. LOL
School...teacher asks...what is 2 + 2 and I say...shouldn't you be asking what 8 - 4 is? Why do we also have to add? LOL

originally posted by: jjkenobi
Twenty states have laws similar to Indiana's. Can anyone tell me why nobody cares about any of them except little ole Indiana's? Sounds like it must have trended on Twitter and now it's the new vogue topic, ala "Stop Kony" and "Hands up don't shoot", and "boko haram". Next week they'll all move on to complain about the next thing Twitter brings to their attention.

It got so much attention in comparison to other states because a lot of corporations do business there, and a lot of said corporations made a very public stand against this. There was a lot of protest against this bill that was not seen in other states before it.

The only reason this time it's gained so much attention is because people are now paying more attention to this issue.

And welcome to the very notion of social media, the sharing of ideas, communication... why are you so shocked that people are discussing an important issue on social media? Are you equally shocked and surprised that TV stations show TV shows?

originally posted by: amazing
If you can't answer a simple question with simple truth, that means you're lying or have some hidden agenda. Whey do we tolerate this type of doublespeak from our politicians? Just answer the question.

I would like to see wider implementation of the BS Buzzer in political interviews. Perhaps the US can take the lead from one of the best TV shows in the UK, The Last Leg...

And yes, Nick Clegg is the deputy Prime Minister, and he's taking questions on a comedy TV show, and doing a pretty good job of it by all accounts.