The SB 101 (Religious Freedom Restoration) Thread

[eatsnopaste]

Seems like this bill just makes it legal to run your business as you see fit. The Govt has stuck their nose into everyone's business way too deep.
I see this as giving a business owner the freedom to run his business as they see fit.
IF a customer isn't welcome in one shop I'm sure they'll be welcome in another.

Yeah, and if not the next one then the next, Hey! why can't they just get their goods and or services from one of their "own kind" just leave us good Christians alone! SEPARATE BUT EQUAL

 

[hoosierdoc]

Indiana subreddits throwing a ****-fit, demanding impeachment of Pence. Petitions going up as well for his impeachment.SalesForce says they will no longer send business to IN.Kneejerks all around.

Do they know this language is nearly identical to the 1993 federal law passed by the dems?

 

[Dead Duck]

Does this mean I can't sue my gunsmith for refusing to work on my Hi-Point?

 

[Blackhawk2001]

Listened to Gov. Pence on the Greg Garrison show. He said the federal RFRA doesn't apply in states which do not have a comparable law (which sounds like what mrjarrel said upthread). I suspect this will head off some of the LGBT activism that's forced some small business owners out of business elsewhere and other than that it won't have a whole lot of impact.

 

[Bfish]

Listened to Gov. Pence on the Greg Garrison show. He said the federal RFRA doesn't apply in states which do not have a comparable law (which sounds like what mrjarrel said upthread). I suspect this will head off some of the LGBT activism that's forced some small business owners out of business elsewhere and other than that it won't have a whole lot of impact.

You would be correct, it has already started in the media...

Pence signs bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers - CNN.com

 

[PistolBob]

Indiana subreddits throwing a ****-fit, demanding impeachment of Pence. Petitions going up as well for his impeachment.

SalesForce says they will no longer send business to IN.

Kneejerks all around.

Uh...doesn't Salesforce employ about a thousand people in Indianapolis now? Didn't they take over Exact Target?

 

[PistolBob]

I still say a business owner has the right to refuse service to anyone, for any reason, or no reason at all.

My motto - "If you have the money, we probably have the time."

 

[MisterChester]

Uh...doesn't Salesforce employ about a thousand people in Indianapolis now? Didn't they take over Exact Target?

That's correct.

 

[jamil]

And yet, Indiana has just created a "protected class" with this legislation.

Nothing like making stuff seem like more than it is. The CRA created more than a dozen protected classes. The religious class is already a protected class in that sense. WTF are you whining about?

They certainly have created a protected class. The religious. This law does not extend to anyone who is secular, nor to people with sincerely held political beliefs that would refuse service. It's only for the people who adhere to particular religious based beliefs. They are protected from non-existent "persecution".

You know, really I wish every class of person were protected from the persecution established by the CRA as public accommodation. People have a right to be *******s. And people have a right to choose not to associate with *******s. If a business owner refuses to do business with you for any reason, if you don't like the reason, please, by all means tell him he's an ******* and move on.

I'll tell you what. When the sky falls, even a little, you grab a piece of it and send it to me as proof that the sky fell. Then maybe I'll be all upset right along with you.

No, it didn't. That would be the US constitution. If you are so opposed to protection of religious freedom, I urge you to begin the process to amend the constitution, to revise the First Amendment.

As was mentioned upthread "free exercise" isn't an absolute right. But this law doesn't cause sky-fall either.

What this bill does is legitimize discrimination and makes it government sanctioned.

Well that's an overreaction.

Listened to Gov. Pence on the Greg Garrison show. He said the federal RFRA doesn't apply in states which do not have a comparable law (which sounds like what mrjarrel said upthread). I suspect this will head off some of the LGBT activism that's forced some small business owners out of business elsewhere and other than that it won't have a whole lot of impact.

In other words, people should calm down. It's not as big a deal as the progressive libertarians want it to be. It's rather yawnworthy.

 

[eldirector]

And SalesForce has been doing business with "religious freedom" States, and the Federal Government, for DECADES. NOW this is a problem? Hypocrites....

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Salesforce won't travel to Indiana over religious freedom law

Salesforce.com Makes A Stand Against Bigotry - Forbes

 

[JollyMon]

And SalesForce has been doing business with "religious freedom" States, and the Federal Government, for DECADES. NOW this is a problem? Hypocrites....

The only difference I can find is the definitions of a "person" and how it relates to the law....

 

[hoosierdoc]

And SalesForce has been doing business with "religious freedom" States, and the Federal Government, for DECADES. NOW this is a problem? Hypocrites....

Yep. They can take their business elsewhere. And GenCon. We'll be just fine.

they will be running out of places to do business soon enough.

 

[eldirector]

Yep. They can take their business elsewhere. And GenCon. We'll be just fine.

they will be running out of places to do business soon enough.

I wonder if SalesForce will be closing their offices in Florida, Illinois, or DC any time soon? I mean, those employees have been OUTRAGED for YEARS or even DECADES.

 

[hoosierdoc]

I wonder if SalesForce will be closing their offices in Florida, Illinois, or DC any time soon? I mean, those employees have been OUTRAGED for YEARS or even DECADES.

Good to see the conservative bastion Connecticut was already on board too. ESPN will probably move.

 

[JollyMon]

The difference between other states and IN, is the definition of a person..... Remember in AZ and the big stink about their amendment to their RFRA that was eventually vetoed by Brewer....its because they wanted to make the bill look like how Indiana does.

 

[jamil]

I wonder if SalesForce will be closing their offices in Florida, Illinois, or DC any time soon? I mean, those employees have been OUTRAGED for YEARS or even DECADES.

Well, an honest, curious press would ask that.

 

[dusty88]

The difference between other states and IN, is the definition of a person..... Remember in AZ and the big stink about their amendment to their RFRA that was eventually vetoed by Brewer....its because they wanted to make the bill look like how Indiana does.

Explain

 

[rw02kr43]

I got on their twitter and asked that. I'm patiently waiting for a response.

 

[JollyMon]

The difference between other states and IN, is the definition of a person..... Remember in AZ and the big stink about their amendment to their RFRA that was eventually vetoed by Brewer....its because they wanted to make the bill look like how Indiana does.

Explain

Arizona's SB 1062 would have revised its current RFRA (41-1493.01) by expanding the definition of person in the article from "a religious assembly or institution" (so basically churches and religous institutions) to also include "any individual, association, partnership, corporation, church," "estate, trust, foundation or other legal entity .... This was veto's by brewer..... http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/51leg/2r/bills/sb1062p.pdf

What Indiana passed

Sec. 7. As used in this chapter, "person" includes the following: (1) An individual. (2) An organization, a religious society, a church, a body of communicants, or a group organized and operated primarily for religious purposes. (3) A partnership, a limited liability company, a corporation, a company, a firm, a society, a joint-stock company, an unincorporated association, or another entity that: (A) may sue and be sued; and (B) exercises practices that are compelled or limited by a system of religious belief held by: (i) an individual; or (ii) the individuals; who have control and substantial ownership of the entity, regardless of whether the entity is organized and operated for profit or nonprofit purposes.

Thus IN took it much further