Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest
I find it interesting that we have commenters podting here saying how bad Indiana is for passing this law while residing in a State the has the EXACT same law! Where is the protest in Florida? There is a federal law that is the same. Where is the protest? If people read the and understand they would understand the law does not give the right to discriminate. It protects individual and business from being forced by the government to violaye their religious beliefs. Anyone remember the Hobby Lobby case? Stop believing what is being spoon fed to you by the liberal media and there would not be this protest.
|
This is factually incorrect. ALL of the other RFRA's (both the Federal one and ALL of the other state ones) are different from the Indiana law in one VERY important area. ALL of the previous RFRA's were specially written to be between individuals and government. The Indiana law contains a provision for the law to be applied between individuals.
The Indiana law differs substantially from the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act, signed by President Clinton in 1993, and all other state RFRAs.
"There are several important differences in the Indiana bill but the most striking is Section 9. Under that section, a “person” (which under the law includes not only an individual but also any organization, partnership, LLC, corporation, company, firm, church, religious society, or other entity) whose “exercise of religion has been substantially burdened, or is likely to be substantially burdened” can use the law as “a claim or defense… regardless of whether the state or any other governmental entity is a party to the proceeding.”
Every other Religious Freedom Restoration Act applies to disputes between a person or entity and a government. Indiana’s is the only law that explicitly applies to disputes between private citizens. This means it could be used as a cudgel by corporations to justify discrimination against individuals that might otherwise be protected under law. Indiana trial lawyer Matt Anderson, discussing this difference, writes that the Indiana law is “more broadly written than its federal and state predecessors” and opens up “the path of least resistance among its species to have a court adjudicate it in a manner that could ultimately be used to discriminate…” "
Source for above quote:
The Big Lie The Media Tells About Indiana's New 'Religious Freedom' Law | ThinkProgress