Indiana Governor Stands By 'Religious Freedom' Law But Promises Fix
Nichy
Explorer
has any of you been following this story? thought?
A new Indiana law that has set off a firestorm of criticism and threats of boycotts should be repealed or revised, says Indianapolis Mayor Greg Ballard, whose city is hosting the NCAA men's basketball tournament's Final Four this weekend.
Around mid-day Tuesday, Gov. Mike Pence said the controversial legislation will be clarified instead of being annulled. He added, "We'll fix this and we'll move forward."
Titled the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the law has drawn protests from critics who say it allows businesses to refuse service to gays and lesbians. Mayor Ballard tells NPR's Steve Inskeep that those who support the law are "missing the bigger trend."
He added, "Everything changes over history. We have to get to a certain point where we have that balance."
Those remarks came after Steve asked Ballard about renewed support for Indiana's new law that has come from potential Republican presidential contenders, including Jeb Bush.
Update at 11:12 a.m. ET: Governor: 'I Stand By The Law'
"I was pleased to have signed it, and I stand by the law," Gov. Mike Pence said at a news conference Tuesday. But Pence also said his state's legislature will clarify the law, saying, "We'll fix this and we'll move forward."
Pence said the new legislation could come sometime this week.
Asked if he had expected a backlash like the one his state has experienced, Pence said of the law, "I just thought it was an appropriate addition to Indiana's statues."
"When this erupted last week... I was taken aback," he said.
He later added that the bill had been hit by a "smear" that mischaracterized it as a license to discriminate.
Pence also repeatedly blamed the media for what he called its "reckless" handling of the story. But he also said that he's pleased that the reporting has recently improved.
Original post continues:
Ballard says that while the law might be seen as acceptable on its own terms, when it's combined with Indiana's lack of legal protections against discrimination based on gender identity and sexual orientation, "then it has a problem." He suggested that people outside the state might not understand the situation.
"The business community is very vocal about this, as they should be," Ballard said on Morning Edition. "And so many other people have been standing up and saying, you must change the direction of all of this."
The mayor's actions come as Indianapolis prepares to host the NCAA Final Four this weekend, and its championship game next week — high-profile events that have increased the focus on the law.
"It really is hurting the definition of the state, and by definition almost, the city also," Ballard says of the new law. "And we just can't have that. We spent 30, 40 years building up this reputation as a great convention city, as a great sports event city. People love coming here. And we just can't have that hurt as much as it has been hurting."
The mayor said of his Republican colleagues at the state house, "Sometimes, they're having trouble understanding the breadth and the depth of what's happening here."
On Monday, Ballard called for the law to be either repealed or for Indiana to adopt protections for sexual orientation and gender identity. Indianapolis has also asked the state legislature to exempt the city from the new law, with Ballard signing an executive order titled a "Declaration of Non-Discrimination."
Republican leaders in Indiana say that repealing the law isn't an option – but they said Monday that they're working on legislation to clarify the law and ensure that it doesn't allow people or businesses to discriminate against gays and lesbians.
But Senate Minority Leader Tim Lanane disagrees with that approach, reports Indiana Public Broadcasting's Brandon Smith.
Lanane said:
"My mother used to tell me if you bring home a bag of potatoes and you've got a rotten potato in there, you throw it out. You don't let it contaminate the rest of the bag. And I think that's what we have here — and unfortunately it's our reputation that's being tainted."
Mayor Ballard says that any attempts to refine Indiana's laws must include provisions that make sexual orientation and gender identity a protected class. "There's just no getting around that right now," he says.
When he signed the bill into law last week, Gov. Mike Pence said that his state isn't alone in enacting its version of the law, citing a U.S. statue and laws in Kentucky and Illinois.
As the Two-Way noted over the weekend, "Although the law is similar to a federal one and those in 19 other states, sexual orientation is not a protected class in Indiana, leaving the door open for discrimination, critics say."
The Indianapolis Star is devoting its entire front page to the issue Tuesday, with an editorial running under the huge headline, "Fix This Now."
At least two states — Connecticut and Washington — have announced that they're boycotting Indiana over the law, forbidding state-funded travel to the state.
And in Republican-controlled states such as Georgia, Arkansas, and North Carolina, the backlash in Indiana has prompted leaders either to consider tweaking their versions of similar legislation or to back away from it entirely.
In other signs of fallout, Apple CEO Tim Cook wrote in The Washington Post that laws like the one in Indiana are "very dangerous." Companies with roots in Indianapolis, such as Eli Lilly, Anthem, and Angie's List, have also spoken out against the law.
The men's basketball teams in the Final Four that'll be played in Indianapolis this weekend include Duke, which issued a statement Monday saying:
"Duke University continues to stand alongside the LGBT community in seeking a more equal and inclusive world, and we deplore any effort to legislate bias and discrimination. We share the NCAA's concern about the potential impact of the new law, and will be vigilant to ensure that our student-athletes, supporters, and indeed all citizens and visitors are treated fairly and with respect."
Comments
AMERICA WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK ARE YOU THINKING - !??!
@federica yep, sometime I have to look at the calendar make sure we are still in 2015, some of the law from our government makes no sense...
Anyone here will tell you I am not prone to swearing or using profanities - but that just leaves me absolutely stunned.... I mean....
REALLY - ?!
You should see some of the law they passed according to women health and abortion... is crazy
Arkansas has a similar law in the works. I think it was signed already, actually. Despite them being technically part of America, I hold no allegiance with the bible belt, lol. I don't know how they think they can pass such a law, and I assume it'll be challenged and disposed of like similar laws others have attempted to pass.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/28/us-usa-arkansas-bill-idUSKBN0MN2JP20150328
North Carolina is also considering something similar. The bible belt...where they protect chosen and delusional beliefs over the civil rights of people.
States in that area often threaten to secede. I would be ok if they did. But, on the plus side, the rest of the mostly sane states are dragging them into the century. SCOTUS in theory should pass a national "no more banning gay marriages" decision in a couple months and then all these idiot states won't have a choice in the matter. If I remember right, both Indiana and Arkansas had their gay marriage bans challenged...and lost. They aren't happy about it and want a way to attempt to preserve their beliefs in some way. It won't last. 2 years ago my state was the 12th state to legalize gay marriage. We're now over 30. That tide has shifted, finally.
There are times I have to agree with what my dad used to say:
"The only good thing to have come out of the USA since the '50s, is the Potomac River...."
I've been following it.
The first thing that occurs to me is why some "Christians" are so worried about their rights. You can practice Christianity (or for that matter, Buddhism) totally within yourself. I currently live in Colorado Springs, Colorado. There aren't many communities with more church-oriented and conservative Christian churches. Everyone seems free to go to church and practice their religion. Their panic seems to be that everyone doesn't have the same faith that they do. It mystifies me, but it is not unique to Christianity.
I think what's happening is that the times are changing, and when there are such shifts it's certain interest groups that feel the most vulnerable, even if it is mostly within their own imaginations.
Here in Canada we have a bill going through that is giving judges the power to break the law in order to defend against anything that might be related to terrorism.
It has no more to do with terrorism than the US Religious freedom law has to do with freedom.
Both are simply power grabs riding atop the public's tendencies to pander to the adversarial when uncomfortable with anything.
It's pretty hard to generalize the US. There are so many pockets of cultures scattered all over, that it's hard even to generalize a state, much less the entire country. Our high level of diversity is a wonderful thing, but at the same time it causes a lot of our conflict. In some areas, the pockets of the majority have enough power to elect officials that make bizarre laws. But they don't stand for the entire US by any means, and they don't necessarily even reflect all the people of that state. I feel sorry for the people living there who are constantly swimming against that tide. But at the same time, high fives for them to staying and trying to bring change rather than simply leaving for a state where they'd already have those rights.
All caused by people wanting others to see and do things their way rather than just working on themselves.
My 12 year old likes to boss around his 6 year old brother. The 12 year old will say "Calvin, no standing on the chair" when just 5 minutes before I told that 12 year old to stop standing on the chair. Then I tell him "When your behavior is perfect, then you can worry about telling someone else how to behave." The other day, his response after a minute was, "But mom, that's not even possible. No one can behave perfectly all the time. Then that just leaves us working on ourselves all the time." Precisely. He finally understood, lol.
As I wrote on FB yesterday, this kind of nonsense makes it hard for someone like me to be religious.
I consider myself a religious person. I love Buddhism. I love going to mass at Catholic and Orthodox churches. I'm interested in the poetry and mysticism of Sufism. I find that religion enriches my understanding of life. But the intolerance and oppressiveness of many who call themselves religious makes it hard for me to fully immerse myself in my spirituality and to be open about. I'm embarrassed, frankly, to be associated with people who think being gay is a sin and/or try to restrict women's reproductive rights.
Another thing that really annoys me is how many religious people in the West, particularly Christians, complain about how they feel persecuted, saying that it's hard to be openly religious these days because of growing secularism. Sure, there are a lot more people who are vocal about their issues with religion these days; but can you blame them? Just look at our history. If anyone is persecuted and oppressed in our society besides the poor (and Native Americans), it's the non-religious, women, and the LGBT community. And most of the persecution the religious do experience usually comes at the hands of other religious (e.g., Protestants vs. Catholics, etc.).
This country is still predominately a Christian nation. According to Pew, 78% of people in the US self-identify as Christian. The evidence is everywhere. It's on our money. It's in the Pledge of Allegiance. It's witnessed in the National Day of Prayer and every law banning same-sex marriage and restricting women's access to abortions and contraception. And despite their actions, most politicians profess to be Christian because it's damn near political suicide to be anything else (especially atheist). From a 2010 ABC News article:
The fact is, it's almost always those of religious faith who try to impose their ideas and morals onto the rest of society, not vice versa. Nobody's trying to force those against it to enter into a same-sex marriage; but those against it feel it's perfectly OK to impose their beliefs about marriage onto the rest of the country through gay marriage bans (and anti-sodomy laws before that). Nobody's trying to force religious people to have abortions or use contraception if they're against it; but it's religious people and institutions who are actively trying to limit women's access to both.
Don't get me wrong, I believe that a person should have the freedom to practice their religion as they see fit so long as it doesn't infringe upon the rights and freedoms of others. I want to be free to explore and express my faith (or lack thereof) in whatever way I choose. But let's face it, these kinds of laws are more about legalizing discrimination than protecting religious freedom. Instead of more Religious Freedom Restoration Acts protecting religion from society, what we really need is a Freedom From Religion Act to protect society from religion.
Perhaps your very best writing.
Indiana Shut Down Its Rural Planned Parenthood Clinics And Got An HIV Outbreak
Laura Bassett
Posted: 03/31/15 12:17 PM ET Updated: 4 hours ago
Scott County, Indiana, the center of an exploding HIV outbreak, has been without an HIV testing center since early 2013, when the sole provider -- a Planned Parenthood clinic -- was forced to close its doors. The clinic did not offer abortion services.
The Scott County clinic and four other Planned Parenthood facilities in the state, all of which provided HIV testing and information, have shuttered since 2011, in large part due to funding cuts to the state's public health infrastructure. Those cuts came amid a national and local political campaign to demonize the health care provider. Now, the state is scrambling to erect pop-up clinics to combat an unprecedented HIV epidemic caused by intravenous drug use.
The fact that Scott County was "without a testing facility until a few weeks ago is a glaring example of the kind of public health crisis that results when prevention and testing are left unfunded," said Patti Stauffer, Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky's vice president for public policy.
Indiana's GOP-led state legislature was one of the first to declare war against Planned Parenthood in 2011, when it passed a bill that defunded the family planning provider because some of its clinics offer abortion services. A federal judge later blocked that law from going into effect, but the state has continued to slash various sources of funding to Planned Parenthood at a time when the cost of operating a medical facility continues to rise.
In 2005, Planned Parenthood of Indiana received a total of $3.3 million in funding from government contracts and grants. By 2014, that funding had dropped to $1.9 million. Five of Planned Parenthood’s smaller clinics in the state -- the health centers in Scottsburg, Madison, Richmond, Bedford and Warsaw -- were unable to keep up with the growing technology costs that were necessary to remain competitive as a medical provider. All five clinics that were forced to close had offered HIV testing. None had offered abortions.
Even without five of its clinics, Planned Parenthood's HIV testing in Indiana has been increasing each year. Overall, the provider's 25 remaining clinics in Kentucky and Indiana gave more than 8,000 HIV tests in 2014, about 1,000 more than the previous year. And the numbers would certainly be higher if the five shuttered clinics in Indiana had been able to continue to operate.
Stauffer said if the Planned Parenthood facilities in Scottsburg and Madison, both in southwest rural Indiana, had received the funding they needed to stay open, they could have been a vital resource in preventing the current HIV outbreak.
"We applaud the state’s public health officials in acting to address this epidemic, but we also encourage our legislators to adequately fund public health efforts to protect all Hoosiers from future health crises from HIV and other devastating outcomes," said Stauffer.
Indiana Gov. Mike Pence (R) has warned that the HIV outbreak amounts to an epidemic. Last week, he broke with previous policy to create a temporary needle-exchange program to stem the tide. His office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
George Takei: Boycott Indiana
03/30/15 07:41 AM—UPDATED 03/31/15 11:44 AM
By George Takei
My husband Brad and I like to spend our holidays in the White Mountains of Arizona. There’s a small town called Show Low where we’ve passed many a merry Christmas. We’ve been regulars at the July 4th parades there, entertained friends and family over the years, and consider it our home away from home. But last year, it was very nearly going to be impossible for us to travel back to Arizona in good conscience. You see, at that time, Arizona was on the verge of passing a bill that would have made us feel entirely unwelcome.
“I have called for a boycott of Indiana … not only to send a clear message to Indiana, but also to help stop the further erosion of our core civil values in other parts of this country.”
GEORGE TAKEI
The so-called “Religious Freedom Bill” would have allowed proprietors of establishments open to the public to refuse to serve customers if doing so would violate the “sincerely held” religious beliefs of the owner. On the surface, the proposed law seemed like a neutral way to protect the First Amendment rights of business owners.
But beneath that surface lurked a dangerous and divisive effect, granting hotels, bars and restaurants the right to refuse to serve LGBT persons and couples such as Brad and me, simply because our love did not comport with the religious views of the owners.
But thanks to pressures upon the governor’s office in days before she was set to sign the law, and in the face of a boycott of the state by tourists and the NFL, which threatened to move the Super Bowl to Pasadena, Gov. Jan Brewer ultimately decided to veto the law. Tolerance and equality won out that day.
Although we faced and defeated that challenge, many similar fires began to rage across the nation. A similar law went into effect in Mississippi not long after, and another measure in Arkansas is about to slip quietly into place there. And just this past week, Gov. Mike Pence of Indiana signed that state’s “Religious Freedom” bill, despite strong opposition from all manner of corporate citizens, religious leaders, and even athletic organizations, such as the NCAA.
Gov. Pence shamelessly pandered to the right wing of his party, perhaps because he is eyeing a run for the White House, or perhaps because he simply does not understand that bigotry, cloaked as religious protection, is still bigotry.
I have called for a boycott of Indiana by companies, conventions and tourists, not only to send a clear message to Indiana, but also to help stop the further erosion of our core civil values in other parts of this country. Indeed, bills like those passed in Mississippi and Indiana are now pending in many other states. Their backers seek to convey to LGBT people that our human rights are not inviolate, and that we may, and will, be treated as second-class citizens. That is what lies at heart of this issue; those are the values at stake.
I myself am a Buddhist, not a Christian. But I cannot help but think that if Christ ran a public establishment, it would be open to all, and He would be the last to refuse service to anyone. It is, simply put, the most un-Christian of notions.
So let us be clear what this is really about: divisive politics. The far right has lost the war over marriage equality, and quickly. It now has staked out a new ground and shrouded itself ostensibly within the ambit of the First Amendment – for who can deny that we ought to give religious freedom its full and fair due? It seeks refuge in the recent, and regrettable, U.S. Supreme Court opinion in Hobby Lobby, which appeared to open the door for exceptions to “government regulation” in the name of protecting religious beliefs.
Taken too far, such laws carry with them the corrosive effect of intolerance, and they harken back to the days where people like Brad and I could not marry, not because of our gender, but because of our race. I was born in a time where such laws against the mixing of races were viewed as the natural extension of God’s will, and I know how powerfully oppressive and insidious they can be. Some fifty years ago, it was not so uncommon for interracial couples to be shunned and turned out.
“The days are over where some may be denied a seat at the table simply because of who they are – or in this case, whom they love.”
We live in a pluralistic and civil society, where our social contract demands we sometimes relinquish individual liberties in the name of a more just and open society. This means that while we are all entitled to our religious beliefs, the extent and impact of those beliefs, and what we may impose because of them, stops at the tips of our noses. This also means we must learn to respect and, yes, even love our neighbors, despite our differences.
I cannot help but think of Pope Francis going out of the Vatican to wash the feet of non-believers, setting an example for us all: Our differences in beliefs do not truly separate us, or elevate us over others. Rather, they highlight the rich tapestry that is humanity.
The doors of a school or a restaurant or a business, held open to the public, must be open to all. The days are over where some may be denied a seat at the table simply because of who they are – or in this case, whom they love. We cannot, and must not, march backward from where we have come.
George Takei is an actor, social justice activist, social media mega-power and star of the upcoming Broadway musical “Allegiance.”
The definition of a pervert :
'Someone who is "obsessed" with the sexual actives and or orientation of others and what goes on in the privacy of their own home-that it keeps them awake at nights worrying about it' One can't get any more perverted than that...
Just to put one thing in perspective, in my lifetime -- which is longer than that of most of you -- the progress that has been made toward what I'll call freedom and personal freedoms in this country is remarkable. And while we should be disappointed with bumps in the road, we should remind ourselves that amidst the challenges, the road still pushes forward.
We've gone from something few of you actually remember -- separate Black and White water fountains and hotels and restaurants and schools, to the not uncommon reality of interracial dating and marriage. We've gone from overwhelming non-acceptance of gay culture to the point where a majority of the citizenry accepts it at some level.
We still get hung up over freedom of expression. Depending on our POV, we may approve of someone burning the American flag, but disdain someone displaying the confederate flag...or vice-versa.
And as we move along we have -- as a culture -- resorted to anger -- on both sides -- as a way of getting our way. Which, is not a very Buddhist attribute. I'm afraid a big part of our problem in discussing issues in this nation dates back to "60 Minutes" and their "Point, Counterpoint" segment. It's become a need to win on every issue, and we have forgotten how to compromise. And we don't even realize anymore when we do that. Most Democrats (and I am a Democrat) have forgotten what Barack Obama (whom I voted for and supporting his campaign, twice) said to the Republicans just days after becoming President. This is a paraphrase, but a very close one: "Hey guys, we won." In other words, we won, and now we will have our way. And it's been downhill ever since.
sometimes I get very frustrated and hopeless to see such a thing happing... Why can they worry about the people well being, like create job, fix the road... something for the greater good.
Too easy.... Doesn't get them noticed in headlines....
lol true... I wonder if the media only reported good things will all the bad thing stop happening around the world... are we a projection of our news outlet?
Indiana has been noticed in the headlines alright. Sports teams, concerts, even expanding businesses have canceled their plans to do business in the state. A couple of states have banned state-funded travel to Indiana for their politicians, colleges, and so on. Even someone so stupid as to put forth this law wasn't looking for those kinds of headlines. Bravo. Grateful for all the lessons they are learning right now by losing so much for their stupidity. I hope the people of the state don't suffer for the decisions of their elected officials, but I hope they choose wiser next time as well.
The media shows us the bad because that is what we clamor for. Ambulance chasing, rubber necking, whatever you want to call it. We love tragedy and scandal.
http://www.pewforum.org/2009/04/27/faith-in-flux/
That seems a tad bit misleading. Changing from Catholic to Protestant or Protestant to different Protestant is not what I would call "changing religion". It's just a change from one denomination within Christianity to another.
In general, I agree, though I think there can be some very major shifts between one version of Christianity and another. I mean there is a big difference despite a shared foundation between the liberal Lutheran church I grew up in, and the Amish. Or orthodox Christians. Or the most strict Roman Catholics. When I was an adult, my mom changed from Lutheran to Catholic, and it was so foreign (and still is) that yes, I would consider it somewhat of a change of religion. The things they focus on are vastly different and their rituals and so on as well.
Idiots...as far as the eye can see...nothing but idiots.
The mindset of the modern American right wing conservative is a fascinating thing to observe in action. If it didn't have such dire real-world consequences, it would be a farce. As it is, we're watching a tragedy. This stupidity in Indiana is typical. Every day, heck every hour seems to bring a new piece of idiocy. I swear, I expected yesterday for Gov. Pence to declare this was the most elaborate April Fools Day joke ever conceived and don't we feel gullible for believing he'd sign something like this.
For instance, recently a small pizza shop in that state made the news because the owner claimed (on Fox News, of course) that one of those gays could come in and buy a pizza, but she would refuse to cater to a gay wedding because it would be saying she supports gay marriage and that's against her beliefs.
Now, there are several questions this immediately raises for anyone not suffering from idiocy. First, are there couples, gay or straight, that actually want a pizza joint to cater their wedding? I've never seen a sign on any pizza shop that says "we also cater weddings". I've never been to a wedding where the reception banquet consisted of a couple dozen pizzas and maybe some cheezie breadsticks. So does it really matter if this particular shop owner has strong views about gay marriage?
And what does this person mean by catering, anyway? If I order a couple dozen pizzas and ask to have them delivered at a certain time and place, is that catering? How about if I order them and agree to pick them up myself. Is that OK then?
And let's face it. You're a mom and pop pizza joint, someone comes in and wants to order a thousand dollars worth of pizza, and you turn them down "because I don't believe in gay marriage"? Apparently, this shop owner doesn't believe in running a business or making a profit, either. When their shop fails, it's not because they're being persecuted for their religious beliefs; it's because they're too stupid to run a business right.
Anyway, as you can see, I alternate between amused at the clown act and terrified about what this means for us as a society if this sort of idiocy continues to run our government.
I don't understand why IN or AR are insisted on these laws anyhow. Even without them, discrimination against gay people is perfectly legal. Heck, it's not even illegal on a federal level right now. Sexual orientation is not a protected status in most states. So, while the laws got tons of press (and I definitely don't support the laws) they don't really actually change much of anything.
However, North Dakota was at the same time pushing for adding sexual orientation into their protected status list. But, there was no one there to pressure them or threaten to leave the state (and despite being a fly-over state, they have one of the most robust economies in the US and have many large corporations that have offices there) the house shot it down yesterday. ND likes to retain their right to discriminate against gay people.. Pressure on them could have made a difference there. It makes no difference in IN or AR. But no one was paying attention because it's not as good of a news story, of course. People love to fight and shove against something, but seem to struggle to work towards something.
I do wonder if the pizza joint asks all those straight couples whom they cater weddings for (lol) if the wife was a virgin before they got married.
I have an African American acquaintance, who is a Christian, and admitted she thought Christians ought to have the religious freedom to deny business and services to people that violate their moral code. She's my age, and fully cognizant of how discrimination has affected her life. But to her, this ISN'T discrimination, it's not the same kind, anyway, because it is religious in origin.
I want to ask, SINCE WHEN does a bad thing become a good and acceptable thing because it is claimed to have a religious origin? What is so special about a religious moral code anyway?
This is what I see; a child naturally pushes their parent's limits, and are 'rewarded' for their efforts when parents give in. OK, Chuckie, five more minutes on the Wi, now stop your screaming." Christians (in general) have been similarly 'rewarded' over the years, as they manipulate and blur the separation of church and state.
I'm with Cinorjer (reading between the lines, he is as gobsmacked as I am), amazed at the sense of entitlement it takes to say "I won't cater my pizzas for a gay wedding, but it's not discrimination!"
In what UNIVERSE is this not discrimination?
We need to back off and take a long look at how we've indulged Christianity and religion as a whole. We need to ask ourselves why we indulge and 'protect' the sanctity of their 'beliefs' just because they are 'beliefs', aren't we soooooo tolerant? They are taking advantage of this liberal indulgence right in front of our faces.
I'd say the same for any religion or group attempting to exploit our oh so liberal and 'understanding' indulgences.
What about if it was a gay Mafia wedding and they made the pizza shop an offer they couldn't refuse? Would they be swimming with the anchovies instead of delivering pizza?
Another article of interest, along similar lines "religious freedom"...
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/04/court-rules-favour-teaching-yoga-schools-150404001714944.html
"Yoga taught in a public school is not a gateway to Hinduism and does not violate the religious rights of students or their parents, an appeal court in the US state of California has ruled.
An appeal court in San Diego on Friday upheld a lower court ruling that tossed out a family's lawsuit that tried to block Encinitas Union School District from teaching yoga as an alternative to traditional gym classes."
Yoga is pure masochism and should be banned everywhere.
Yes, it's almost a universal truth that people consider their right to act on their own "deeply held moral beliefs" as sacred, but have no trouble seeing those other people's deeply held moral beliefs as the discrimination it is.
Yeah, I don't see why religious beliefs should get a free pass.
It's all fear of punishment of God. They are afraid if they support something against their religious code, they won't go to heaven and will be run down by Jesus on his white horse. It would be funny if it weren't so harmful to consider that this is the ONE thing they have latched onto and they ignore all the other stuff in the bible. They wouldn't refuse to serve an out-of-wedlock pregnant woman at her wedding, I bet. I also find it idiotic that they are basically saying "We'll serve you if you come in as an individual, but if you come in with your partner to pick up some pizzas for your wedding, we won't serve you." So they are ok with gays, but not gay marriage...which I'm pretty sure isn't what the bible says anyhow. They are just trying to backtrack and make it sound less bad, except they sound more stupid.
Thankfully, I live in one of a few states that not only protects sexual orientation as a class, but business as well. So you cannot refuse to do business with, or accept a contract (as catering usually involves a contract) from someone in a protected class.
I think this is wider than that.
This is all just the nature of humanities adversarial views where folks derive their identity through a "them verses us" mentality.
It needs no logic or spiritual belief for it's basis if it aids in maintaining the barrier between self and others.
Challenging such views threatens the very basis of identity itself.
Dukkha.
Yes, on another level it is much deeper and wider. But if you talk to them, that is what they think is the problem and the reason they don't move past it-fear of a vengeful God. Why they can't see treating people poorly is probably much more risky than serving pizza at a gay wedding (like that even happens, lol) is a little strange, but yes, it helps uphold their us versus them mentality. They just don't realize they hold that mentality and will deny it until the cows come home and go back to their religion as the only justification.
When issues such as these come up, it helps me if I look at the "big picture". We don't even know for sure how we got on this earth, why we are here, etc...you know, the meaning of life type stuff, but we (and by we I mean humans in general, not we on this forum) don't hesitate to divide people into groups and discriminate against them for nonsense differences. Sad really. the human condition I suppose.
Humans are what humans are.
I live in Indiana so I've been following this (I really don't have a choice, its everywhere). I think its great that basically nobody in Indiana is actually backing it up. We started a window sticker that Indiana businesses can buy to post up in the front of their store that says something along the lines of "We accept everyone regardless of blahblahblah" and all of the profits from the stickers are going into a fund to protest the law. Pence is not a very nice person I don't think.
@karasti: I figured there was some 'core fear' feeding into this utterly ridiculous position some Christians have taken. For this to have become something for the gov to sign means folks dished out tens of thousands of dollars.
Are this well-to-do folks that afraid Jesus will condemn them if they DON'T use their 'riches' in this manner?
It's not like I've witnessed any Christians of this ilk openly admit they get behind these kinds of social policies to save their own asses from an eternity burning in Hell. But if that is the case, more or less . . . it's more than an 'us versus them' as @How puts it, it's the state of their mortal soul they believe is on the line. That is some scary stuff, and people are genuinely terrified of that. What 'sense' can they be talked into, for instance? It's more than us vs them, it's about burning in Hell.
Here's the latest "incident", although it is in a different state, of the mindset:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/02/18/doctor-discrimination-baby/23642091/
Disgusting behaviour, I'm amazed the law allows doctors to get away with this.
...So... let's get his straight:
The child is a product of a male sperm and female ovum connecting - so far so good.
The doctor was chosen as one to treat this child - a product of a normal origin, gestation and birth...
It's the child who is being registered with a doctor....
but the doctor won't take the child on as a patient - because it has 2 mothers.
Logic, please....? Anyone....? Any...one....? No?
Thought not.
Well, I heard the 2 mothers interviewed today, and they said the explanation the doctor gave them was that she couldn't relate to the "whole family" (my words), so a different doctor was assigned the case.
Clearly, intelligence does not equal logical.
But here's the important point (in my view): it isn't just about pizzas for weddings, gay wedding cakes, etc. It is about far more serious matters that will continue to pop up because these religious nuts think they can use their freedom of religion as an excuse for ANY DAMN THING they want to do. After all, that's exactly the same mindset they had about slavery. This is nothing new.
@Hamsaka my experience is that yes, that is exactly what they are afraid for-their soul. And some are genuinely afraid for the souls of the "sinning gays", but not most. This comes from many conversations I had while our state was working against a gay marriage amendment a few years ago. I was on a local volunteer group to keep it from passing, and we did calling every week to homes around Minnesota. I talked to hundreds of people. That was the main reasoning given, and they were genuinely afraid of the possibilities. And generally speaking, we aren't nearly so serious about our religion in MN as many other states are. After all, we did shoot down the amendment and pass gay marriage law the following year. But that battle in bible belt states? There's no way it'll go without the feds being the ones to say they have no choice. And in that case like in AR and IN, then they will attempt to regain control of their souls in other ways, like bills that allow them not to serve gay people even if they can't control whether they are allowed to get married.
And 'our' part, as non-religious nuts, has been (if we are liberally inclined) to overcompensate for our disgust at this kind of religious nuttism and pride ourselves in how 'tolerant' we are (of stupid, senseless, superstitious-based excuses for being hateful). I'll admit it.
This whole issue has knocked me off center. I haven't felt this kind of outrage since I started meditating and actively being a Buddhist. I can't find much in the way of temperance in here anywhere, when it comes to this 'religious freedom protection' crap.
It's up to the rest of us nuts to speak out in reason and logic exactly WHY and HOW religious ideology can't be used as an excuse for bad behavior!
When the owner of Memories Pizza got on TV and said "We reserve the right to discriminate -- but we aren't discriminating!" I'll bet that went down very smoothly with 75% of people listening. "Oh, of course, they really AREN'T discriminating, of course, she just said they aren't discriminating!"
It brings to mind when I recently went through a Sam Harris phase, and watched him debate various secular liberals about the 'Islamic threat'. The liberal secularists REFUSED to accept that 'religion', specifically Islam, had anything to do with the suicide-murders and general atrocities going on with, erm, Muslims. "It's socioeconomic, it's our (US) fault for slapping up so many military bases/supporting Israel/blah blah blah" but NOOOO, it's not religion, now shush, that's just not nice to say." It's been un-PC to hold religious ideology as 'responsible', and certain religious groups have taken advantage of that. Sam Harris has been called an Islamophobe, a racist, a sexist, has been accused of suggesting we drop a nuclear bomb on Islam, and all kinds of stuff -- by the secular liberals. They claim Sam Harris has cuddled up to the Religious Right (who happen to be saying the same things about Islam, but for different reasons) and is, indeed a fascist.
I haven't heard anyone protesting this Religious Freedom nonsense as "Christophobes" yet. Maybe they'll come up with a term similar to 'n*****-lover' for straight, but LGBTQ supporters?
I don't know if there is a way to use logic with them. They need the people that matter to them-their church leadership-to step up and teach them how to apply the love and compassion portion of Christianity to their lives actively and how to support gay people in their lives and in the world without condemning them. Some churches do this. But others do not, obviously notably the Catholic church. They condemn gay people in church services on a daily basis. "love the sinner, hate the sin!" except they leave it at that and expect people to know how to apply it and clearly it's gone way off the deep end. Even though the Pope has brought a very different view to the Church, most Americans in particular are not accepting his beliefs and just continue to go their own way with no redirection from their church leadership on a local level. They are taught from the top down that it is not only ok, but preferable to discriminate against gays in order to protect them (the gay people) and themselves from damnation. Most of them aren't going to listen to logic from the rest of us. The Church is quietly supporting the hatred of gay people. Again, this is in my experience. I'm sure it varies but I've seen it many times in Catholic churches in MN and ND when I have gone with my mom and my husband's family to services.
The only thing that seems to change their minds is when someone very close to them comes out...and they are presented with the choice of accepting and loving their loved one, or letting them go for their faith (they often see those as the only choices they have). Some choose their faith and disown their loved ones. But others choose their family, actually choose to learn, and then turn into activists themselves and most of the time, they change churches. It's like an awakening for them, and it very much seems like that is exactly what it is. Kind of like in Indian Jones and he Temple of Doom where he is under the curse of the scary bald guy and Shortround waves the torch at him and says "Indy, I love you!" and he snaps out of it. Once they get to that point, there is no going back and they see clearly where they went wrong in their beliefs. But it has to be experienced and not just talked about.
The thing to try to remember when the blindness of the people start driving you nuts is that they're not the enemy. These are people doing what people have done ever since we threw rocks at that other tribe that talked funny and didn't tattoo themselves properly. And besides, their cave is better than ours and they don't deserve it.
Individually, we can be great, caring, enlightened people. Collectively, we have the morals and behavior of a tribe of monkeys. The problem has always been, how do we get people to live up to the ideals we are supposed to embrace?
To me, this is what the Bodhisattva ideal is supposed to be about. Humanity as a whole is petty, vindictive, biased, and violent. Life is brutal and cheap. It always has been that way. And perhaps because of this, as a species we have conquered the world in a few thousand years. When it comes to pure survival in chaos, those are the traits that best allow you to survive when life is on the line.
But life isn't just about survival of the most brutal. We have compassion and empathy. We will sacrifice our own lives for a stranger in the right circumstances. We create and respond to beauty and some of us cherish knowledge and truth for its own sake, while others try to burn the books that disturb their cherished beliefs.
This is the world that Buddha looked out at. The biggest mystery in his life to me is why he didn't just shrug his shoulders, say, "Eh, that's the way people are." and go back to solitary meditation.
Bodhisattva Vows for a modern age.
People are vindictive assholes, I vow to cherish them anyway.
People are too stupid to come out of the rain, I vow to give them umbrellas.
People deserve a swift kick in the ass, I vow to extend a helping hand.
People don't want my help, I vow to help them anyway.
LOL love your new vows, @Cinorjer. That's pretty much it
It's hard when our perception causes us to see that people clearly need help but they don't want it, and in fact the more you try to help, the more they dig in their heels and solidify their beliefs. So, I think sometimes at least for the time being, the only answer is to shrug and say that is how people are and go back to meditation.
@Cinorjer
People are vindictive assholes, I vow to cherish them anyway.
People are too stupid to come out of the rain, I vow to give them umbrellas.
People deserve a swift kick in the ass, I vow to extend a helping hand.
People don't want my help, I vow to help them anyway.
I get your frustration with "people" but I would suggest adding an addendum to your vows, just to guard against compounding one's own spiritual hubris.
People are vindictive assholes. Where am I a vindictive asshole?
People are too stupid to come out of the rain. Why am I wet?
People deserve a swift kick in the ass. Do I know where my ass is tonight.
People don't want my help. Where don't I want to help myself?
@karasti said:
I will get behind this (what I put in bold) from personal experience. My sister's family (four daughters and H) had been members of a Southern Baptist church for years, that is until she found her third 'daughter' pretending to be a boy online, and then the whole story came flooding out. It's been almost 3 years, and her son has been on hormone and psychological therapy and the whole family everything has changed -- including my sister becoming an advocate for LGBTQI (and so forth) youths.
I know it's self centered of me, but I want to ask her what it was like to allow yourself to be 'changed' like that. Some of it is that she'd been very judgmental of me and my children over the years (not that we gave it much energy, considering the source) but now she's suddenly The Advocate, and I'm glad she is, very proud of what it took for her to get with the program, so to speak. But there is a sneaky savage little self that wants to see her SQUIRM for the time she sent me Rush Limbaugh's latest book for Christmas (still chaps my ass, oops I'm a Buddhist) and scolded my daughter (who was spending the summer with her ten years ago) for hanging out with a girl who 'looked like a lesbian'. Pffft. Can someone say "GET OVER IT?" please? grumblegrumblegrumble . . .