Well, this is another issue you can take up with James Madison, and with the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Free Exercise clause.
Perhaps I’m jaded by working “within the Beltway” (i.e., in DC), but all these arguments that the Indiana law has nothing to do with discrimination against gays are nonsense. Something that quacks like a duck is probably a duck. It’s definitely not an elk.
And while the law in Indiana may be similar in some ways to laws in other states, it is different in one crucial respect: it is being passed NOW. It’s pretty clear that this is a big difference.
How about this example of a possibly good application of this law: that nutty preacher who threatened to burn a Koran goes into an Islamic bookstore and says, “I’d like to buy a Koran so I can burn it.” The store owner refuses to sell it to him, and he sues, alleging that he is the victim of religious discrimination, and that the store has violated the public accommodation law.
My youngest is only a HS sophomore, but Rose-Hulman and Purdue are off his list because of this. RH was an early #1 for him after talking to admissions counselors at his school. Going to Arkansas was never considered.
A few years ago in Minneapolis the Muslim Somali cab drivers (which were a large percentage of the Twin Cities cabbies) were refusing to carry people with dogs, even assistance dogs, or people carrying alcohol. They said it violated their religion. I believe they were given a warning and said that they would be fired unless they carried such passengers. I don’t know what has happened since. The story has been out of the news. But clearly cabs, as public accomodations, should not discriminate on who they pick up because it offends the religion of the driver. As I recall, no one filed suit against a cab company though. I think it was handled by the cab companies working with the city.
" I don’t think we have to choose. We can be concerned about all of those things. If I were LGBT I wouldn’t tell myself “well, at least they aren’t throwing me off a roof” every time someone told me to get out of their store/restaurant/bakery/wedding venue. "
Has this actually happened ?
Have any LGBT people actually been told to get out of any such establishments ?
This is a sincere question.
As far as Muslim cab drivers refusing service to those with dogs or transporting alcohol, my feeling is that if you work for yourself, I suppose you should be allowed this under the law, but you would have to understand that your choice of career would be severely impacted if you only chose to take customers that abide by the restrictions you place on them
I live in Michigan.
Michigan does not have capital punishment.
I don’t believe in capital punishment either.
Therefore, as of now, I refuse to travel to or do business with any vendor that is located in a state with capital punishment. I will not send my child to school in a state that has capital punishment.
tatinG: "
. Cardinal Fang: Regarding your point #3 on sincerely held religious beliefs. This bothers me also. Why should oe person be allowed to eat peyote buttons and another person be jailed for it? Why should one person be allowed to possess eagle feathers and another be fined for it?. Or one group be exempted from Social Security, ACA (the Amish) and everyone else has to comply? It seems to be a direct collision of freedom of religion versus equal application of the laws."
Because we have laws on the separation of church and state.
Church and state laws get really complicated. Watch and see - some anti-gay (or anti whatever they want to be) people suddenly find religion so they can use these laws in order to discriminate. Or develop a religion that lets them smoke pot, or engage in prostitution, or whatever and claim religious protection.
Don’t understand why legislators and a governor who ordinarily want to attract business and encourage economic growth would take an action that, predictably, would so thoroughly undermine the state’s economy. All moral arguments aside, it makes absolutely no business sense.
129 - Yes, but what is a 'church'? What are religious beliefs? The Supreme Court has said it will not get into such disputes. I could be a church of one.
Which is exactly why there should be one set of laws for everyone. Either smoking peyote is against the law or not. Either possessing eagle feathers is against the law or not. I remember asking a law professor why the Amish got special exemptions, such as for sending their children to school only as far as eighth grade. He couldn’t come up with anything other than ‘there are special rules for the Amish’. And I understand that to comply with all these rules would impact their way of life. Still, as a country that believes everyone should be treated equally, these double standards trouble me.
No surprise that some folks will use this law as a sword rather than a shield. In another case where Muslims sought to assert religion as a justification for receiving preferential treatment, Somali refugees in Seattle tried to sue their employer for not providing extended employee breaks so they could take time to pray. Investigation revealed that the employer (this being Seattle) had offered all kinds of accommodation to the Somali’s beforehand, but the employees kept using religion to the extent of severely disrupting the owner’s business operations.
TatinG, the case involving the Amish, the Yoder case as I recall, is a bit more complicated than that. That ruling just doesn’t apply to the Amish. School authorities don’t investigate Romani (“Gypsy”) truants either, after the children reach a certain age.
Well, if you’re a person who believes that the market can take care of social problems, this is consistent, I guess.
We’re also a country that believes strongly in individual liberty, including religious liberty. Some of the most difficult legal situations inhabit the area of conflict between liberty and equality interests, and this is one of them.
And let me add this, which I hope is the opposite of political: if you look at situations in which liberty and equality interests are at odds, there is no consistency as to which “side” is being championed by liberal vs. conservative people–it changes depending on the specific issue, which I think testifies to how strong the tension between these ideals is.
I disagree with ruling out a state’s colleges because of this. Seems silly to me. I completely disagree with this legislation if it has the impact we fear, but the reality is that it will not impact many people- especially college students.
I was wondering about the NCAA tournament. For example, the men’s final four is in Indiana. Uconn is not playing…but if they were…how would,they get there? Our governor has prohibited state funding to Indiana.
And the UConn head coach is not attending the final four…and my guess is he usually would be.
Next year, the women’s final is supposed to be in Indiana, and there is already an uproar about it.
Folks planning conventions are doing so several years out. The economic impact of this won’t be completely felt immediately.
The Arizona issue I referred to earlier was an immigration issue, I believe. When my kid relocated to AZ in 2010, convention business was WAYYYYYY down,mand on,y has picked up in the last couple of years. The recently vetoed bill (governor vetoed it) was more related to this one. But I believe the governor of AZ knew what the impact would be on their convention and tourism industry…having already experienced boycotts of their state.
I’m glad it seems silly to you, MOWC. But as a queer woman, given the choice, I’m not spending my money in a state where I can be legally discriminated against and where they’re working to strengthen rather than tear down those discrimination policies.
@lje62 - yes, people have been “thrown out” of business establishments because of being gay. There was a court case in New Mexico that was decided recently about this and may have spurred on the laws in Indiana and Arkansas.
So Arkansas governor won’t sign his legislature’s bill in it’s currant form. I’m sure Walmart decided this for him. Of course, I wouldn’t be surprised if they override his veto.
The state doesn’t have to be perfect. Better works.
What Indiana is doing is a major turnoff. I wanted one of my kids to look at Indiana University. I applied for hIm…with his permission.
If he was applying Now…forget it. There are other choices.
I think an economic boycott is what the state deserves.
I hope people who support the law aren’t watching tv, listening to music, taking certain medications, buying certain companies products, etc because if you don’t want to sell to certain groups, you shouldn’t be buying either.
Freedom is a funny thing… Freedom to discriminate means you are taking away another person’s freedom.
