Quote:
Originally Posted by pbear19
I've pondered this a lot this week. To me, the difference is the timing of most of those other states' laws, and the impetus behind the Indiana law. I've researched the would-be motives behind the Missouri law (which is about 12 years old), and it had nothing to do with local businesses or being allowed to refuse service to anyone. It was about how zoning laws impacted churches, and whether non-Christian religions were getting the same treatment as Christianity.
To the best of my knowledge (which, I'll admit, is limited since I have only spent a relatively small amount of time looking at this from a national perspective) Indiana is unique in its timing and its motives. 13 of those 19 at least have been in place over 10 years. Our society has changed a LOT in those 10 years, and LGBTQ rights is a hot topic now when it wasn't then.
Also, to the best of my knowledge (again, limited), no other states have been using their RFRAs to discriminate. They use them to prevent being discriminated against, which is a HUGE difference.
|
Indiana's law is notably different in that it extends the alleged protections to for-profit businesses. The others cover individuals and non-for-profit organizations. The Hobby Lobby decision at the SCOTUS level has cleared the path for this; now a for-profit business can have an exercise of religion. That's some serious bullshit.
That said, the law has very little support on the ground in many parts of the state, and rather than boycott Indiana, it would be nice if progressives in other states would support the progressives here rather than paint the entire state as evil.
Threaded Mode
