[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Israel Attacks Iran, Report Says - LIVE Breaking News Coverage

Earth is Scorched with Heat

Antiwar Activists Chant ‘Death to America’ at Event Featuring Chicago Alderman

Vibe Shift

A stream that makes the pleasant Rain sound.

Older Men - Keep One Foot In The Dark Ages

When You Really Want to Meet the Diversity Requirements

CERN to test world's most powerful particle accelerator during April's solar eclipse

Utopian Visionaries Who Won’t Leave People Alone

No - no - no Ain'T going To get away with iT

Pete Buttplug's Butt Plugger Trying to Turn Kids into Faggots

Mark Levin: I'm sick and tired of these attacks

Questioning the Big Bang

James Webb Data Contradicts the Big Bang

Pssst! Don't tell the creationists, but scientists don't have a clue how life began

A fine romance: how humans and chimps just couldn't let go

Early humans had sex with chimps

O’Keefe dons bulletproof vest to extract undercover journalist from NGO camp.

Biblical Contradictions (Alleged)

Catholic Church Praising Lucifer

Raising the Knife

One Of The HARDEST Videos I Had To Make..

Houthi rebels' attack severely damages a Belize-flagged ship in key strait leading to the Red Sea (British Ship)

Chinese Illegal Alien. I'm here for the moneuy

Red Tides Plague Gulf Beaches

Tucker Carlson calls out Nikki Haley, Ben Shapiro, and every other person calling for war:

{Are there 7 Deadly Sins?} I’ve heard people refer to the “7 Deadly Sins,” but I haven’t been able to find that sort of list in Scripture.

Abomination of Desolation | THEORY, BIBLE STUDY

Bible Help

Libertysflame Database Updated

Crush EVERYONE with the Alien Gambit!

Vladimir Putin tells Tucker Carlson US should stop arming Ukraine to end war

Putin hints Moscow and Washington in back-channel talks in revealing Tucker Carlson interview

Trump accuses Fulton County DA Fani Willis of lying in court response to Roman's motion

Mandatory anti-white racism at Disney.

Iceland Volcano Erupts For Third Time In 2 Months, State Of Emergency Declared

Tucker Carlson Interview with Vladamir Putin

How will Ar Mageddon / WW III End?

What on EARTH is going on in Acts 16:11? New Discovery!

2023 Hottest in over 120 Million Years

2024 and beyond in prophecy

Questions

This Speech Just Broke the Internet

This AMAZING Math Formula Will Teach You About God!

The GOSPEL of the ALIENS | Fallen Angels | Giants | Anunnaki

The IMAGE of the BEAST Revealed (REV 13) - WARNING: Not for Everyone

WEF Calls for AI to Replace Voters: ‘Why Do We Need Elections?’

The OCCULT Burger king EXPOSED

PANERA BREAD Antichrist message EXPOSED

The OCCULT Cheesecake Factory EXPOSED


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Religion
See other Religion Articles

Title: Indiana religion law is Jim Crow of our time
Source: Cincinnati.com
URL Source: http://www.cincinnati.com/story/opi ... on-law-jim-crow-time/70617014/
Published: Mar 29, 2015
Author: Ryan Messer
Post Date: 2015-03-29 04:44:12 by Willie Green
Keywords: None
Views: 28941
Comments: 127

The arguments for Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act arguments are strikingly similar to the arguments for racial discrimination some 50 years ago. Then, the nation debated whether it was right and just for someone to be barred from service at a lunch counter because of the color of his or her skin. Astonishingly, here we are again, having to combat arguments that it should be legal to bar someone from the same lunch counter based on the gender of the person they love.

Let’s tell it like it is: The so-called Religious Freedom Restoration Act is the Jim Crow legislation of our time. Today, African-Americans are protected from discrimination of this kind – and that’s exactly how it should be in the Land of the Free. Alas, LGBT people enjoy no such protection under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, but at least always had trusted their home state legislatures and governors not to turn on them.

I take this personally because, as of Thursday, my family and I are not protected from discrimination when we visit family and friends in the state of my birth. This is real and wrong and grieves me deeply.

The passage of this discriminatory legislation brings back painful memories in Cincinnati of a charter amendment, commonly known as Article XII, that prohibited City Council from passing any ordinance that would have granted LGBT people equal protection under the law. It was a sorry moment in our city’s history – one in which an entire class of people was singled out for non-protection.

The city’s image was damaged throughout the country, and the economic impact was significant, with conventions being canceled and prestigious companies choosing not to do business in our city. I was a resident of Cincinnati at the time, and the passage of the charter amendment created a cloud over the city that ultimately contributed to my decision to leave. I wasn’t alone. Many people I knew moved to cities that they viewed as more welcoming: Chicago, Atlanta, San Diego. I moved to New York.

Fortunately, the citizens of Cincinnati rediscovered their essential instinct for justice and repealed Article XII, and I moved back as soon as I could. Cincinnati now is seen as one of those welcoming cities – one dramatically different from what it was. Did we fall into the dream that the rest of American had taken that journey with us? If so, we’ve had a rude awakening.

Now I have to question where in Indiana my family can go without discrimination. Can we visit the Indianapolis Children’s Museum? Will a hotel turn us away? Would we be allowed to buy a cupcake at a bakery? If you can, put yourself in our shoes for a moment you can see how unsettling and infuriating this situation is.

Maybe the good people of Indiana will come back to their senses as the good people of Cincinnati did some years ago. While they’re pondering what they’ve done, we Cincinnatians should contact the convention organizers who have announced they will pull their meetings out of Indiana and let them know that they are heartily welcome in the Queen City.

We should work with the business leaders who have decided not to expand in Indiana and let them know that they are very welcome to locate in our Ohio and Kentucky counties. And we certainly should let all the talented Hoosiers who happen to be LGBT know that they are welcome to live, work, love and play here.

Indiana may have lost its sense of justice and good sense for a while but the rest of us understand the human and business cases for diversity and inclusion. Let’s cash in on the progress we’ve made in Cincinnati and elevate our status as a city that welcomes diversity of all kinds and declines to discriminate against any of our citizens.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 2.

#2. To: Willie Green (#0)

The Religious Freedom Restoration Act(RFRA) of 1993 is a federal law aimed at preventing laws that "substantially burden" a person's free exercise of religion. The bill was introduced by then Congressman Chuck Schumer in the House ,and Senators Orrin Hatch and Ted Kennedy in the Senate ,and passed by a unanimous U.S. House and a near unanimous U.S. Senate .It was signed into law by Bill Clinton.

It was ruled constitutional at the Federal level ;but SCOTUS ruled it did not apply at the state level . That is why some states have taken the initiative to pass their own laws.

Specific to the RFRA says that government can't deny free exercise of religion unless there is a compelling government interest ,and it finds the least burdensome way to deny it. “Government shall not substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability".

Like the Federal law and some state laws that have already passed ; the law would have courts apply the standard of “strict scrutiny” when free exercise claims are made, meaning that when someone asks for a religious exemption from a law the government must demonstrate that it has a “compelling interest” in denying that claim, and that it has advanced that interest by the “least restrictive means.” The 3 tests applied are : -the religious belief has to be sincerely held, and not just a pose to make a point.

-the state interest in overriding the religious belief has to be compelling.

- the action taken by the state has to be the least intrusive that still satisfies the compelling state interest.

As an example ;these tests were applied in the Hobby Lobby case involving Obamacare and contraceptives ,and the result was a win for Hobby Lobby.

Now 19 states already have similar laws to what Governor Pence has signed . Some of them are very "blue " states (Illinois ,Connecticut ,Rhode Island ). The question is ,why wasn't the passage of laws in those state subject to the same stink that is going on in Indiana ? Could it be that Pence is a potential Presidential candidate ?

Another 11 states have judicial precedents that constitute a RFRA policy in their courts. RFRA cases have gone favorable to those laws because they don’t protect ad-hoc discrimination on any basis.

No it is not Jim Crow at all . Jim Crow laws compelled businesses to discriminate . Indiana's law like the other 19 laws passed at the state level does not permit discrimination at all ,but would not burden an individual or a business to partake in any way in a religious ceremony they find objectionable . In other words ,a Christian bakery could not deny service because someone was gay. However ,if they did not want to be associated or participate in a gay "marriage" ,they would not be compelled to provide the "wedding " cake.

tomder55  posted on  2015-03-29   7:18:52 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 2.

#3. To: tomder55 (#2)

Indiana's law like the other 19 laws passed at the state level does not permit discrimination at all ,but would not burden an individual or a business to partake in any way in a religious ceremony they find objectionable . In other words ,a Christian bakery could not deny service because someone was gay. However ,if they did not want to be associated or participate in a gay "marriage" ,they would not be compelled to provide the "wedding " cake.

That bears repeating, tomder. Long live the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

out damned spot  posted on  2015-03-29 07:59:08 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: tomder55, out damned spot (#2)

In other words ,a Christian bakery could not deny service because someone was gay. However ,if they did not want to be associated or participate in a gay "marriage" ,they would not be compelled to provide the "wedding " cake.

Nor could it be compelled to provide a Jewish wedding cake, nor an African-American wedding cake...
Nor would a so-called "Christian" restaurant/banquet hall be compelled to provide facilities for Jewish or African-American weddings either...
And since the Pope isn't really a true, "born again" Christian, I suppose it would be OK to refuse service to Catholics as well...

Mike Pence is the David Duke of Indiana.

Willie Green  posted on  2015-03-29 08:54:30 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: tomder55 (#2)

The Religious Freedom Restoration Act(RFRA) of 1993 is a federal law aimed at preventing laws that "substantially burden" a person's free exercise of religion. The bill was introduced by then Congressman Chuck Schumer in the House ,and Senators Orrin Hatch and Ted Kennedy in the Senate ,and passed by a unanimous U.S. House and a near unanimous U.S. Senate .It was signed into law by Bill Clinton....

Thanks for the (ironic) historical backdrop, Tom.

Now 19 states already have similar laws to what Governor Pence has signed.

And are the homo-fascists now going to boycott those states as well??

Some of them are very "blue " states (Illinois ,Connecticut ,Rhode Island ). The question is ,why wasn't the passage of laws in those state subject to the same stink that is going on in Indiana ? Could it be that Pence is a potential Presidential candidate?

Hmmmm....

Liberator  posted on  2015-03-29 10:30:13 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#52. To: tomder55, Willie Green (#2)

The Religious Freedom Restoration Act(RFRA) of 1993 is a federal law aimed at preventing laws that "substantially burden" a person's free exercise of religion. The bill was introduced by then Congressman Chuck Schumer in the House ,and Senators Orrin Hatch and Ted Kennedy in the Senate ,and passed by a unanimous U.S. House and a near unanimous U.S. Senate .It was signed into law by Bill Clinton.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/STATUTE-107/pdf/STATUTE-107-Pg1488.pdf

107 STAT. 1488 PUBLIC LAW 103-141—NOV. 16,1993

Public Law 103-141 
103d Congress

An Act

To protect the free exercise of religion.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives 
of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

     This Act may be cited as the "Religious Freedom Restoration 
Act of 1993".

SEC. 2. CONGRESSIONAL FINDINGS AND DECLARATION OF PURPOSES.

       (a) FINDINGS.—The Congress finds that—
            (1) the framers of the Constitution, recognizing free exercise 
       of religion as an unalienable right, secured its protection in 
       the First Amendment to the Constitution;
            (2) laws "neutral" toward religion may burden religious 
       exercise as surely as laws intended to interfere with religious 
       exercise;
            (3) governments should not substantially burden religious 
       exercise without compelling justification;
            (4) in Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990) 
       the Supreme Court virtually eliminated the requirement that 
       the government justify burdens on religious exercise imposed 
       by laws neutral toward religion; and
            (5) the compelling interest test as set forth in prior Federal 
       court rulings is a workable test for striking sensible balances 
       between religious liberty and competing prior governmental 
       interests.
       (b) PURPOSES.—The purposes of this Act are—
            (1) to restore the compelling interest test as set forth in 
       Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398 (1963) and Wisconsin v. 
       Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972) and to guarantee its application 
       in all cases where free exercise of religion is substantially 
       burdened; and
            (2) to provide a claim or defense to persons whose religious 
       exercise is substantially burdened by government.

SEC. 3. FREE EXERCISE OF RELIGION PROTECTED.

       (a) IN GENERAL.—Government shall not substantially burden 
a person's exercise of religion even if the burden results from 
a rule of general applicability, except as provided in subsection 
(b).
       (b) EXCEPTION.—Government may substantially burden a per-
son's exercise of religion only if it demonstrates that application 
of the burden to the person—
            (1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest;
and
            (2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compel­
ling governmental interest.
       (c) Judicial Relief.—A person whose religious exercise has 
been burdened in violation of this section may assert that violation 
as a claim or defense in a judicial proceeding and obtain appropriate 
relief against a government. Standing to assert a claim or defense 
under this section shall be governed by the general rules of standing 
under article III of the Constitution.

SEC. 4. ATTORNEYS FEES.

       (a) Judicial Proceedings.—Section 722 of the Revised Stat­
utes (42 U.S.C. 1988) is amended by inserting "the Religious Free­
dom Restoration Act of 1993 " before "or title VI of the Civil Rights 
Act of 1964".
       (b) Administrative Proceedings.—Section 504(b)(l)(C) of title 
5, United States Code, is amended—
            (1) by striking "and" at the end of clause (ii);
            (2) by striking the semicolon at the end of clause (iii) 
and inserting ", and"; and
            (3) by inserting "(iv) the Religious Freedom Restoration 
Act of 1993;" after clause (iii).

SEC. 5. DEFINITIONS.

       As used in this Act—
            (1) the term "government" includes a branch, department, 
agency, instrumentality, and official (or other person acting 
under color of law) of the United States, a State, or a subdivi­
sion of a State;
            (2) the term "State" includes the District of Columbia, 
the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and each territory and 
possession of the United States;
            (3) the term "demonstrates" means meets the burdens of 
going forward with the evidence and of persuasion; and
            (4) the term "exercise of religion means the exercise of 
religion under the First Amendment to the Constitution.

SEC. 6. APPLICABILITY.

       (a) IN GENERAL.—This Act applies to all Federal and State 
law, and the implementation of that law, whether statutory or 
otherwise, and whether adopted before or after the enactment of 
this Act.
       (b) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Federal statutory law adopted 
after the date of the enactment of this Act is subject to this Act 
unless such law explicitly excludes such application by reference 
to this Act.
       (c) RELIGIOUS BELIEF UNAFFECTED.—Nothing in this Act shall 
be construed to authorize any government to burden any religious 
belief.

SEC. 7. ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE UNAFFECTED.

     Nothing in this Act shall be construed to affect, interpret, 
or in any way address that portion of the First Amendment prohibit­
ing laws respecting the establishment of religion (referred to in 
this section as the "Establishment Clause"). Granting government 
funding, benefits, or exemptions, to the extent permissible under 
the Establishment Clause, shall not constitute a violation of this 
Act. As used in this section, the term "granting", used with respect 
to government funding, benefits, or exemptions, does not include 
the denial of government funding, benefits, or exemptions.

Approved November 16, 1993.

nolu chan  posted on  2015-03-29 19:02:21 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 2.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com