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.

[Minimalist]

Wiccans plan to introduce Indiana to the law of unintended consequences.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2015/04/wicca...e-capitol/

Wiccans say Indiana religious freedom law opens the door to polygamy, nude rituals at the Capitol

Go for it, guys.

[robvalue]

I'm really confused about this religious rights bill.

I don't think they thought it through at all. Fucking morons can't differentiate between "religion" and "mah reelijun".

[FatAndFaithless]

I'm really confused about this religious rights bill.

I don't think they thought it through at all. Fucking morons can't differentiate between "religion" and "mah reelijun".

The federal RFRA was intended to give people some defense against the government encroaching on their religious freedom by "substantially burdening" their ability to free exercise. The proponents of the Indiana state law wanted to expand that ability even to situations where the government isn't involved.

So business owners could refuse to provide service to X person/party or refuse to perform Y action and use the state-RFRA as a defense in court because serving X person/party or performing Y action would be a "substantial burden" on their ability to free exercise.

The state anti-discrimination laws, on the other hand, establish protected classes that cannot be the basis for discrimination (refusal of service, housing, employment, etc), regardless of reasoning. Race, for example, cannot be used to deny someone employment under these laws, even if a business tried to use their religion to justify it.

Without the Indiana RFRA that's been in the news, businesses and employers and housing could already reject people based on being gay, because sexuality isn't a protected class under the state non-discrimination laws. The RFRA didn't give the businesses that right, as they already had that ability.

[Minimalist]

The law is designed to embolden shithead xtians to declare that they are discriminating "for jesus."

[robvalue]

I see! Except I'm even more confused. So in practical terms, it did nothing? Except highlight a bigotry loophole that already existed?

Am I missing something?! Seems like they shot themselves in both feet and the ass!

[FatAndFaithless]

I see! Except I'm even more confused. So in practical terms, it did nothing? Except highlight a bigotry loophole that already existed?

Am I missing something?! Seems like they shot themselves in both feet and the ass!

The motivation does seem a bit....strange-as-fuck. My guess would be they wanted to provide a religious cover to their actions, so if/when they refuse service to gays (or any other non-protected status like hair color, tattoos, etc), they had something to fall back on legally AND religiously.

[Joods]

Wiccans plan to introduce Indiana to the law of unintended consequences.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2015/04/wicca...e-capitol/

Wiccans say Indiana religious freedom law opens the door to polygamy, nude rituals at the Capitol

Go for it, guys.

I should ask my other half about this, since he's Wiccan and all. *Note the DEEP sarcasm in my statement about asking him. He is still Wiccan though.

[robvalue]

FAF: could it be they didn't understand the law as it stood before?

[FatAndFaithless]

FAF: could it be they didn't understand the law as it stood before?

I have no idea, honestly. There are so many potential lawsuits that could be linked with discrimination that they might just have wanted to establish a big bulwark fallback defense for court cases.