Let's clear a few things up about the Indiana Religious Freedom Law

[Ravi]

This is the aftermath of the couple who refused to do the wedding cake for a gay marriage. They refused based on their religious beliefs. They were subsequently brutally attacked and sued. They lost everything.

We are a nation that respects religious freedoms. That case should have never been allowed to happen. And this law is a response to that incident.

^another example of ridiculous lies being repeated.

They were brutally attacked and did lose everything. We have to respect all Citizens' rights. Even when we don't agree with particular stances. This law is an inevitable end-result of many years of persecution against people of faith.

They weren't attacked. They choose, of their own free will, to close the bakery because their actions caused people to stop buying from them. They have yet to be fined or punished in any way, shape, or form.

 

[Jarhead]

Why does the OP ignore the answer to his question.

It's the tactic perfected by PoliticalChic. It's the old RWnut tactic based on the premise that you can't prove me wrong unless you get me to admit I'm wrong.

That explains a lot. I've noticed that right wingers will post the same false information repeatedly.

What I posted is 100% accurate. I read the law. Completely. And I discussed the law with a NY State judge who is my brother in law. The law allows one to defend himself/herself in a court of law if he/she is accused of discrimination...using religious freedom as the defense. One must be able to prove that it was an infringement on ones religious freedom.

It DOES NOT allow for discrimination. It allows for a defense....and that defense must be proven.

READ THE LAW

 

[paulitician]

This is the aftermath of the couple who refused to do the wedding cake for a gay marriage. They refused based on their religious beliefs. They were subsequently brutally attacked and sued. They lost everything.

We are a nation that respects religious freedoms. That case should have never been allowed to happen. And this law is a response to that incident.

^another example of ridiculous lies being repeated.

They were brutally attacked and did lose everything. We have to respect all Citizens' rights. Even when we don't agree with particular stances. This law is an inevitable end-result of many years of persecution against people of faith.

They lost a court case, fair and square. They lost business due to market forces, fair and square.

Well, hopefully more States will remedy injustices like that. They could have had their cake made elsewhere. They should have respected the business owner's religious beliefs and rights.

 

[Jarhead]

This is the aftermath of the couple who refused to do the wedding cake for a gay marriage. They refused based on their religious beliefs. They were subsequently brutally attacked and sued. They lost everything.

We are a nation that respects religious freedoms. That case should have never been allowed to happen. And this law is a response to that incident.

^another example of ridiculous lies being repeated.

They were brutally attacked and did lose everything. We have to respect all Citizens' rights. Even when we don't agree with particular stances. This law is an inevitable end-result of many years of persecution against people of faith.

They weren't attacked. They choose, of their own free will, to close the bakery because their actions caused people to stop buying from them. They have yet to be fined or punished in any way, shape, or form.

they WERE punished by their actions by the public.

There is no need for "protection" laws......the people sort it out.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Why does the OP ignore the answer to his question.

It's the tactic perfected by PoliticalChic. It's the old RWnut tactic based on the premise that you can't prove me wrong unless you get me to admit I'm wrong.

That explains a lot. I've noticed that right wingers will post the same false information repeatedly.

What I posted is 100% accurate. I read the law. Completely. And I discussed the law with a NY State judge who is my brother in law. The law allows one to defend himself/herself in a court of law if he/she is accused of discrimination...using religious freedom as the defense. One must be able to prove that it was an infringement on ones religious freedom.

It DOES NOT allow for discrimination. It allows for a defense....and that defense must be proven.

READ THE LAW

How can it not allow for discrimination if someone ends up being discriminated against because the defendant used this law to argue that the discrimination was legal?

 

[paulitician]

This is the aftermath of the couple who refused to do the wedding cake for a gay marriage. They refused based on their religious beliefs. They were subsequently brutally attacked and sued. They lost everything.

We are a nation that respects religious freedoms. That case should have never been allowed to happen. And this law is a response to that incident.

^another example of ridiculous lies being repeated.

They were brutally attacked and did lose everything. We have to respect all Citizens' rights. Even when we don't agree with particular stances. This law is an inevitable end-result of many years of persecution against people of faith.

They weren't attacked. They choose, of their own free will, to close the bakery because their actions caused people to stop buying from them. They have yet to be fined or punished in any way, shape, or form.

Yes, they were 'punished' for expressing their religious beliefs and convictions. They're the victims. It's vital we protect all citizens' rights.

 

[NYcarbineer]

This is the aftermath of the couple who refused to do the wedding cake for a gay marriage. They refused based on their religious beliefs. They were subsequently brutally attacked and sued. They lost everything.

We are a nation that respects religious freedoms. That case should have never been allowed to happen. And this law is a response to that incident.

^another example of ridiculous lies being repeated.

They were brutally attacked and did lose everything. We have to respect all Citizens' rights. Even when we don't agree with particular stances. This law is an inevitable end-result of many years of persecution against people of faith.

They lost a court case, fair and square. They lost business due to market forces, fair and square.

Well, hopefully more States will remedy injustices like that. They could have had their cake made elsewhere. They should have respected the business owner's religious beliefs and rights.

And the black people can always go to the other restaurant, we know, we've heard it all.

 

[NYcarbineer]

This is the aftermath of the couple who refused to do the wedding cake for a gay marriage. They refused based on their religious beliefs. They were subsequently brutally attacked and sued. They lost everything.

We are a nation that respects religious freedoms. That case should have never been allowed to happen. And this law is a response to that incident.

^another example of ridiculous lies being repeated.

They were brutally attacked and did lose everything. We have to respect all Citizens' rights. Even when we don't agree with particular stances. This law is an inevitable end-result of many years of persecution against people of faith.

They weren't attacked. They choose, of their own free will, to close the bakery because their actions caused people to stop buying from them. They have yet to be fined or punished in any way, shape, or form.

Yes, they were 'punished' for expressing their religious beliefs and convictions. They're the victims. It's vital we protect all citizens' rights.

No they were punished for violating an anti-discrimination law.

 

[Mertex]

The Indiana law and the Fed law are not the same....no matter how you slice it, the homophobes are just trying to protect themselves by carving a law that allows them to discriminate. Funny, their religion does not allow them to bake a cake for someone whose lifestyle they don't like, but it allows them to be hateful and rude to people whose lifestyle they don't like....guess their Jesus told them it was okay to hate.



First, it explicitly states that for-profit businesses – and not just individuals – have a right to the free exercise of religion. As The Atlantic points out, the federal law has no such language, nor do 17 of the 19 existing state RFRA statues. In fact, Louisiana and Pennsylvania exclude businesses from being protected by RFRA.

Second, the Indiana law makes explicit that for-profit business’ free exercise of religion is a defense against discrimination claims made not just by the government but also by private parties, something that is murky in the federal law.

So the claim that Indiana’s new law is just the same as a bunch of existing laws is off base.

That claim is also disingenuous and phony in a much simpler way, and so is the claim that that RFRA laws are not being used to try to justify discrimination.

Indiana religious freedom law is different and here s why - DecodeDC Story

Stop lying, it's over. Go home.

Ha, you're delusional, like always. Idiot Republican governor screwing his own state....

Anti-Gay Indiana Law Backfires

Indiana s Religious Discrimination Law Is Backfiring So Badly Other States Are Rethinking Theirs - PopCrunch

Salesforce won t travel to Indiana over religious freedom law

Still have not learned how to read?

It's apparent you haven't.

 

[NYcarbineer]

This is the aftermath of the couple who refused to do the wedding cake for a gay marriage. They refused based on their religious beliefs. They were subsequently brutally attacked and sued. They lost everything.

We are a nation that respects religious freedoms. That case should have never been allowed to happen. And this law is a response to that incident.

^another example of ridiculous lies being repeated.

They were brutally attacked and did lose everything. We have to respect all Citizens' rights. Even when we don't agree with particular stances. This law is an inevitable end-result of many years of persecution against people of faith.

They weren't attacked. They choose, of their own free will, to close the bakery because their actions caused people to stop buying from them. They have yet to be fined or punished in any way, shape, or form.

Yes, they were 'punished' for expressing their religious beliefs and convictions. They're the victims. It's vital we protect all citizens' rights.

No, they acted out on a religious belief that the law had made illegal to act out on.

 

[Darkwind]

It is a naked attempt to motivate the Dem base. Nothing more than that.

Actually, it is their plan on taking out the Indian Governor from the Presidential race.

 

[Mertex]

this law is a desperate attempt to appease the fringe right..

Spoken like someone who has no fucking clue what the law says or what it actually does.

Do you deny that the law allows legal discrimination with religion as the only needed excuse?

Only an idiot thinks that. Then again, look who's making the claim.

Then what does the law do? What is its purpose?

Be specific and give specific examples.

You've already been told a hundred times. Apparently you still can't read.

Is that your deflection? Lame.

 

[Darkwind]

This is the aftermath of the couple who refused to do the wedding cake for a gay marriage. They refused based on their religious beliefs. They were subsequently brutally attacked and sued. They lost everything.

We are a nation that respects religious freedoms. That case should have never been allowed to happen. And this law is a response to that incident.

^another example of ridiculous lies being repeated.

They were brutally attacked and did lose everything. We have to respect all Citizens' rights. Even when we don't agree with particular stances. This law is an inevitable end-result of many years of persecution against people of faith.

They weren't attacked. They choose, of their own free will, to close the bakery because their actions caused people to stop buying from them. They have yet to be fined or punished in any way, shape, or form.

Yes, they were 'punished' for expressing their religious beliefs and convictions. They're the victims. It's vital we protect all citizens' rights.

No, they acted out on a religious belief that the law had made illegal to act out on.

The Constitution makes it illegal for government to make a law against the free exercise of religion and the speech that goes with that free exercise.

 

[paulitician]

This is the aftermath of the couple who refused to do the wedding cake for a gay marriage. They refused based on their religious beliefs. They were subsequently brutally attacked and sued. They lost everything.

We are a nation that respects religious freedoms. That case should have never been allowed to happen. And this law is a response to that incident.

^another example of ridiculous lies being repeated.

They were brutally attacked and did lose everything. We have to respect all Citizens' rights. Even when we don't agree with particular stances. This law is an inevitable end-result of many years of persecution against people of faith.

They weren't attacked. They choose, of their own free will, to close the bakery because their actions caused people to stop buying from them. They have yet to be fined or punished in any way, shape, or form.

Yes, they were 'punished' for expressing their religious beliefs and convictions. They're the victims. It's vital we protect all citizens' rights.

No they were punished for violating an anti-discrimination law.

And that was an injustice. That's why these new laws will happen in many more States. We have to respect all citizens' rights even when we don't agree with particular stances on issues.

 

[NYcarbineer]

^another example of ridiculous lies being repeated.

They were brutally attacked and did lose everything. We have to respect all Citizens' rights. Even when we don't agree with particular stances. This law is an inevitable end-result of many years of persecution against people of faith.

They weren't attacked. They choose, of their own free will, to close the bakery because their actions caused people to stop buying from them. They have yet to be fined or punished in any way, shape, or form.

Yes, they were 'punished' for expressing their religious beliefs and convictions. They're the victims. It's vital we protect all citizens' rights.

No, they acted out on a religious belief that the law had made illegal to act out on.

The Constitution makes it illegal for government to make a law against the free exercise of religion and the speech that goes with that free exercise.

Can a religion practice human sacrifice in the US, protected by the Constitution?

 

[NYcarbineer]

^another example of ridiculous lies being repeated.

They were brutally attacked and did lose everything. We have to respect all Citizens' rights. Even when we don't agree with particular stances. This law is an inevitable end-result of many years of persecution against people of faith.

They weren't attacked. They choose, of their own free will, to close the bakery because their actions caused people to stop buying from them. They have yet to be fined or punished in any way, shape, or form.

Yes, they were 'punished' for expressing their religious beliefs and convictions. They're the victims. It's vital we protect all citizens' rights.

No they were punished for violating an anti-discrimination law.

And that was an injustice. That's why these new laws will happen in many more States. We have to respect all citizens' rights even when we don't agree with particular stances on issues.

Has Colorado repealed its law? Is there any significant movement to?

 

[paulitician]

This is the aftermath of the couple who refused to do the wedding cake for a gay marriage. They refused based on their religious beliefs. They were subsequently brutally attacked and sued. They lost everything.

We are a nation that respects religious freedoms. That case should have never been allowed to happen. And this law is a response to that incident.

^another example of ridiculous lies being repeated.

They were brutally attacked and did lose everything. We have to respect all Citizens' rights. Even when we don't agree with particular stances. This law is an inevitable end-result of many years of persecution against people of faith.

They lost a court case, fair and square. They lost business due to market forces, fair and square.

Well, hopefully more States will remedy injustices like that. They could have had their cake made elsewhere. They should have respected the business owner's religious beliefs and rights.

And the black people can always go to the other restaurant, we know, we've heard it all.

Oh Gawd, and now the loony Race-Baiting. No one has argued serving black people goes against their religious beliefs. When or if they do, i'll bite on your Race Bait.

 

[Mertex]

this law is a desperate attempt to appease the fringe right..

Spoken like someone who has no fucking clue what the law says or what it actually does.

Obviously you don't either. Looks like Pence doesn't either. He was caught looking pretty dumb when questioned by Stephanopoulos.

Gov. Pence of Indiana Can t Answer a Yes or No Question Allegiance

 

[Darkwind]

They were brutally attacked and did lose everything. We have to respect all Citizens' rights. Even when we don't agree with particular stances. This law is an inevitable end-result of many years of persecution against people of faith.

They weren't attacked. They choose, of their own free will, to close the bakery because their actions caused people to stop buying from them. They have yet to be fined or punished in any way, shape, or form.

Yes, they were 'punished' for expressing their religious beliefs and convictions. They're the victims. It's vital we protect all citizens' rights.

No, they acted out on a religious belief that the law had made illegal to act out on.

The Constitution makes it illegal for government to make a law against the free exercise of religion and the speech that goes with that free exercise.

Can a religion practice human sacrifice in the US, protected by the Constitution?

False equivalency.

Refusing to make a cake creates no physical harm. Will you allow the state to dictate what values everyone MUST have?

 

[Mertex]

Republicans are so dishonest. Why don't they just come out and say they hate gays and want them dead? Be who you are. People will respect you a lot more if you publicly follow your convictions.

gop wants gays dead - Google Search

Religious people are so used to hiding behind veils of obscurity...

Leftists are so used to living in a haze of ignorance.

We're not the ones that watch FAUX News 24/7..........