post for RFRA panel

Recently, the State of Indiana passes their version of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. It is a rather startling bill to protect people’s religious freedom. It is based on a federal bill (which by the way, many of the original signers have revoked their trust in this bill). However, there are many differences from the Indiana bill. The first difference is that, in order for RFRA to be implicated the government must be involved.

However, the Indiana bill will allow individuals to bring suit. Because (unlike in the federal government, and other states), sexuality is not a protected class, it will allow individuals to discriminate. This makes me feel very uncomfortable, I wonder where the line is drawn, and what else people will be able to discriminate for. For instance, I have blonde hair will people be able to discriminate against me because their religion says it is wrong to have blonde hair (hair color is also not a protected class). As ridiculous as it sounds, it seems possible to me that people could discriminate against me.

It is also makes me feel uncomfortable, as one person pointed out at the RFRA panel, it will be hard to explain this to our children. We must love everyone. We must provide a safe, happy place for everyone, including people that are not exactly like us. This is especially important to confer on to our children.

Now, I would like to attempt to turn my attention to the panel that happened last week.  I have to say, Dr. Ware’s argument that people who are more orthodox have the right to their religion. I hadn’t really thought about it from this perspective, but I do not think he is right. The problem is, when a person opens a business to the public, they do not get to determine who or what that public is. They do not have to break laws (which is why comparing conservative religious bakers to those who will not bake for the KKK a bit problematic), but you do not get to choose your public.  Also, no one has the right to force people to make them things. If an item is not on the menu, or say the restaurant keeps Kosher they do not have to make pork. So I think that arguing “Oh well Jews will be forced to break Kosher, and then spends THOUSANDS on a new stove” is a bit outlandish, no they won’t, breaking kosher is not on the menu. This will hold as long as they server everyone equally.  

Furthermore, there was discussion of the Pizza bakery in Marrian Indiana. Apparently, the fact that they were not in Indianapolis disproves that no one will discriminate against LGBT. Well, we are still in Indiana are we not? Oh okay, so then people in Indiana will discriminate okay great (PS don’t mess with Zoe Post, regarding the Bible).

This bill is so discerning to me. I think it goes too far. I think when we examine the context it seems clear that the bill was intended to allow for discrimination. I think the bill needs to be fixed (if it were me I would attach a bill creating a protected class for sexuality to a bill that no one was paying attention to, but that is just the political strategist in me). Really, I could say so much more about this. I am really disheartened by the course this country seems to be taking, which to me is absolutely backwards.