Indiana State Law Still Allows Businesses to Refuse Service Based on Sexuality

[FatAndFaithless]

Read this, thought it was interesting. Basically, the "clarification" of the ridiculous Indiana RFRA+ law is meaningless, because state law allowed businesses to deny service to homosexuals before this bill was ever even drafted, and still allows them to do so. The only thing this clarification says is that businesses can't use this bill in specific as a defense in court, but the state law is still on their side. Many areas in Indiana have local ordinances that do classify sexuality as a protected class, but many other areas do not.

Just some food for thought.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/dispatches/2...ification/

’ve been rather amused watching the goings-on in Indiana. Gov. Mike Pence, scared by the potential financial losses from the backlash against the passage of their new RFRA law, asked the state assembly to amend the bill to add a “clarification” and they are now doing so. And you know what it will change? Not a goddamn thing.

...

Here’s the thing that everyone seems to forget: It was already completely legal for a company in Indiana to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation before this RFRA+ law was ever passed (unless there was a municipality that prohibited it by ordinance; I’m talking about state law). There are absolutely no protections against such discrimination at the state level and there never have been. So if a company wanted to refuse to hire or refuse to serve someone because they thought they were gay, they didn’t need RFRA to give them that right.