wilkes

Why would anyone want to force someone to bake a cake that didn't want to bake a cake for them? And then PAY them for it? Not me. I would go to a bakery that WANTED my business instead of being FORCED to accommodate me. If I find out that a business is anti-Christian or owned by someone that is anti-Christian, then I'm not spending my money there if there is somewhere else to go. Granted, we don't always know how a business owner feels, but in the event that we do then it can and should affect our business relationship.

this n that (view profile)	Posted 10:16 am, 03/30/2015
"I already destroyed this argument in this thread. Only in your BSing liberal hypocrite mind.

Name calling. LOL

"I already destroyed this argument in this thread.

Only in your BSing liberal hypocrite mind.

while RFRAs advanced in previous years were designed to prohibit the government from burdening the religious beliefs of citizens, Indiana's bill would allow individuals to use their religious beliefs to defend themselves in court even if the state is not party to the case. Thus, this would allow a business owner to use their religious beliefs to justify refusing services for a same-sex couple's wedding. As a state law, this would supersede any municipal nondiscrimination laws that protect LGBT people.

And you post a rebuttal from purely liberal site named "think progress" and expect anyone to believe you, or it is unbiased>?

this n that (view profile)	Posted 10:05 am, 03/30/2015
Hey look GW readers,,, the liberals have kicked their ***es into their mouths again. What these ignorant liberals neglected to tell you is this. Bill Clinton signed this into law in 1993.

I already destroyed this argument in this thread.

http://thinkprogress.org/lg...eedom-law/

Hey look GW readers,,, the liberals have kicked their ***es into their mouths again.

What these ignorant liberals neglected to tell you is this.
Bill Clinton signed this into law in 1993.

You remember Bill Clinton don't you? The cheating husband of another corrupt dem. candidate, Hillary Clinton, that wants to replace the corrupt obama as POTUS. The same Bill Clinton who made so many trips with a pedophile down to pedophile island. ANOTHER SCANDAL STILL UNFOLDING`!!!

The same Hillary Clinton now totally against this law that was signed by her cheating husband.
Yep,,, looks like just another crooked liberal hypocrite to me.
How do you see it out there in Go Wilkes reader land>?

Why.... this is even basically the same law in the land of liberals, Illinois, and twenty other states.

And for once I agree with Topsoil. However, I slept well last night, and have energy to spare to point out that Top soil is among the biggest lying hypocrites BSers on Go Wilkes

Top Soil

So what is the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, and what does it say?



The first RFRA was a 1993 federal law that was signed into law by Democratic president Bill Clinton. It unanimously passed the House of Representatives, where it was sponsored by then-congressman Chuck Schumer, and sailed through the Senate on a 97-3 vote.

The law reestablished a balancing test for courts to apply in religious liberty cases (a standard had been used by the Supreme Court for decades). RFRA allows a person's free exercise of religion to be "substantially burdened" by a law only if the law furthers a "compelling governmental interest" in the "least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest."

So the law doesn't say that a person making a religious claim will always win. In the years since RFRA has been on the books, sometimes the courts have ruled in favor of religious exemptions, but many other times they haven't.

If there's already a federal RFRA in place, why did Indiana pass its own RFRA?

Great question. In a 1997 Supreme Court case (City of Boerne v. Flores), the court held that federal RFRA was generally inapplicable against state and local laws. Since then, a number of states have enacted their own RFRA statutes: Indiana became the twentieth to do so. Other states have state court rulings that provide RFRA-like protections. Here's a helpful map from 2014 that shows you which states have RFRA protections (note that Mississippi and Indiana have passed RFRA since this map was made):

The amount of energy necessary to refute bulls**t is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it.

See what I mean GW readers?

This...

Truthseeker911

is a PRIME example of liberal ignorance.

In the first place, I never mentioned, though I probably should have, obama's measurable ignorance on many things.

We can start with the Constitution. Something he only knows enough about to lawlessly break the laws it clearly states.
Then we can mention his thousand failures of foreign policy.. He has no clue about any of that stuff.

Actually though, obama is no one's " president" . He is just a mouth put in place to accomplish certain goals.
He's the guy who turned 5 terrorist loose so he could have his "Rose Garden" moment, disgracing the country uphold a deserter.

You do know I, and many others could fill up this page with obama's ignorance...troops out of Iraq, the rise of ISIS. etc. etc. etc. on and on.
In fact.... obama is simply 6 plus years of failure after failure.

Really people.... has he gotten just ONE important thing right? Has he made even ONE thing better for Americans, as opposed to worse for anyone except ILLEGAL ALIENS?

And how can I fix breakfast for Bigfoot when I've clearly stated on the site.."I've never even seen one".

A brainwashed liberal fool just making her usual idiot statements.

Please provide a good explanation as to why it is OK to discriminate people based on your religious beliefs?

Guess what TnT? Obama IS YOUR PRESIDENT!! Lol he was elected TWO times. All of your inane ramblings will never change that FACT! Go fix breakfast for big foot, I'm sure he's hungry.

Indiana needs to pass a law to try to protect the public from ignorant liberals democrats like this one.

Since you're talking about "ignorance in Indiana"...wonder why no honest truthful liberal was the first to point out this liberal ignorance of a black liberal democrat who was so ignorant she called a 18 month old toddler a racist in public, in front of a mic.

Yes indeed, the ignorance of liberals is confounding.

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2...-a-racist/

You're very welcome.

Truthseeker911 (view profile)	Posted 8:44 am, 03/28/2015
This is a letter sent by legal scholars from Columbia university to the legislators in Indiana http://web.law.columbia.edu...a_rfra.pdf

Basically this Indiana law is just religion undermining our constitution. Just like our forefathers warned us against in their letters stating a need for the separation between church and state. This is why a neutral secular government is a more perfect representation of a free government that a theocracy.

Excerpt from the letter:

In our expert opinion, the clear evidence suggests otherwise and unmistakably demonstrates that the broad language of the proposed state RFRA will more likely create confusion, conflict, and a wave of litigation that will threaten the clarity of religious liberty rights in Indiana while undermining the state's ability to enforce other compelling interests. This confusion and conflict will increasingly take the form of private actors, such as employers, landlords, small business owners, or corporations, taking the law into their own hands and acting in ways that violate generally applicable laws on the grounds that they have a religious justification for doing so. Members of the public will then be asked to bear the cost of their employer's, their landlord's, their local shopkeeper's, or a police officer's private religious beliefs. As we have learned on the federal level, RFRAs do not "open a door" to conversation, but rather invite new conflict that takes the form of litigation. This collision of public rights and individual religious beliefs will produce a flood of litigation, whereby Indiana courts will be asked to rebalance what has been a workable and respectful harmony of rights and responsibilities in a pluralistic society.33

This is a letter sent by legal scholars from Columbia university to the legislators in Indiana

http://web.law.columbia.edu...a_rfra.pdf

koi (view profile)	Posted 4:56 pm, 03/27/2015
Top Soil, why are you attacking me? I am not attacking you. Maybe you need to investigate your own shortcomings. We are speaking of what God says about marriage- nothing else.

I'm not. Just making a point.

Indeed, its all there in black and white, for those who will read and heed
https://www.biblegat...ersion=KJV

Honestly, the ignorance boggles my mind. Who is the Prince of Confusion?