• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Mike Pence (Indiana Governor) signs Religous Freedom Bill into Law

Status
Not open for further replies.

Kenai

Member
Just need the NFL to say something along the lines of "you aren't ever gonna win the Super Bowl bid again" to join up with the likes of Gencon and the NCAA and such. Empty convention center, empty fieldhouse, empty lucas oil staduim, oh yes, this will go over real well.

I fucking hate this state, so many years of work by so many people trying to make this state more welcoming to everyone and it goes up in smoke thanks to one douchebag governor and his band of cronies.

As someone who lives here: do everything you can to make this state suffer. I can save up enough to move in a few years I hope.
 
The problem with Pence is he was one of the main idiots in the Republican Congress.

He got under 50% of the vote in 2012 in his Governor's race (only won by 3 points) and acts like he is a big Presidential candidate.

A person who was barely elected in 2012 pulls this sort of nonsense?

Err... does he value his office? The opinions on gay marriage are rapidly changing and laws like these hurt more politically these days than they help. If he barely won, he should really be more careful...
 

Kenai

Member
A person who was barely elected in 2012 pulls this sort of nonsense?

Err... does he value his office? The opinions on gay marriage are rapidly changing and laws like these hurt more politically these days than they help. If he barely won, he should really be more careful...

In case you couldn't tell already, this guy and his ilk don't make decisions based on critical thinking, economics, justice, or using a brain at all for that matter.
 

alstein

Member
Good. I don't know if it will make a difference, but good.

It hasn't stopped South Carolina from flying the Confederate flag.

It actually went to Obama once, in 2008. In 2012, for some reason, Indiana, along with North Carolina, went to the GOP.

Because 2008 was the culmination of several years of bad governance by Republicans. NC barely went to Romney and for the next 10-20 years will be a swing state, Indiana might have been a blip.
 

DeaviL

Banned
"Religious Freedom"
They would do good picking up a dictionary, i don't think those words mean what they think they mean.
 
Thanks Skip
Of course!

I hate to admit it, because I'm not a fan of Pence and I know he's got a talk radio background, but he makes a compelling argument in the audio. The fact that it applies only to the government and not private matters, that it has been federal law for 20+ years, the people who voted yes on it back in 1993 at the federal level (that Barack Obama voted yes to the Illinois version...stupid politicians making me question things! I still don't think this was necessary and I worry about the ramifications about this, but I'll be the "normal Joe" who hears this and say, "Well, that sounds good". It could just be sounds good and I definitely need more research and information before I change my mind, but that's just my thoughts.

Someone brought this up in the Q&A scenario: if they wanted to avoid the press backlash, they should have coupled this with "sexual orientation as a protected class" legislation or anti-discrimination protections for those who want to engage in business open to the public in the state. The state absolutely should do either or both, but Pence won't get near that, which sucks.
 

Somnid

Member
Can Atheists refuse service to Christians?

Unfortunately Atheists don't really believe anything in particular so we have no reason to discriminate beyond hard, provable information. Though there are certainly a number of anti-religious people that could test.
 

Cyan

Banned
Someone brought this up in the Q&A scenario: if they wanted to avoid the press backlash, they should have coupled this with "sexual orientation as a protected class" legislation or anti-discrimination protections for those who want to engage in business open to the public in the state. The state absolutely should do either or both, but Pence won't get near that, which sucks.

... that would defeat the purpose.
 

DeaviL

Banned
So if your religion says that it's ok to be gay, is the exclusion from a store an attack on that religious freedom?
 
Of course!

I hate to admit it, because I'm not a fan of Pence and I know he's got a talk radio background, but he makes a compelling argument in the audio. The fact that it applies only to the government and not private matters, that it has been federal law for 20+ years, the people who voted yes on it back in 1993 at the federal level (that Barack Obama voted yes to the Illinois version...stupid politicians making me question things! I still don't think this was necessary and I worry about the ramifications about this, but I'll be the "normal Joe" who hears this and say, "Well, that sounds good". It could just be sounds good and I definitely need more research and information before I change my mind, but that's just my thoughts.

Someone brought this up in the Q&A scenario: if they wanted to avoid the press backlash, they should have coupled this with "sexual orientation as a protected class" legislation or anti-discrimination protections for those who want to engage in business open to the public in the state. The state absolutely should do either or both, but Pence won't get near that, which sucks.

Is this true? It doesn't apply to private businesses? If so what's the point of the law.
 

Furyous

Member
Honest question: What's stopping a business from deny a customer service on the belief that customer is LGBTQ? In other words, this law seems like a way to deny service to anyone because the business owner does not like them.
 
Is this true? It doesn't apply to private businesses? If so what's the point of the law.
His press statement says:

“This bill is not about discrimination, and if I thought it legalized discrimination in any way in Indiana, I would have vetoed it. In fact, it does not even apply to disputes between private parties unless government action is involved. For more than twenty years, the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act has never undermined our nation’s anti-discrimination laws, and it will not in Indiana.
Like I said, that sounds good but could be complete bullshit. Hence my reticence...
 

thefro

Member
Here's the Illinois Law

Here's the Indiana one... has a couple big differences

ec


Remember that Indiana doesn't have a state law against discrimination towards LBGT folks, but many cities like Bloomington and Indianapolis do.
 

Pyrokai

Member
Honestly, I really, really, really, REALLY hope that tonight, Pence sits down at his favorite restaurant, gets all nice and comfy, and when they bring out his menu, it's just a big piece of paper saying "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you", and then the waiter tells him they only serve good Christians, citing this bill as their reason for denial of service.


What would be best is if they say their religion denies the ability to speak to anyone with the last name of Pence by slipping him a note because they believe it's Satanic or something. Just make something up and say that the bill protects this.

So stupid.
 

Piggus

Member
Good job Indiana. Way to vote for this gem of a governor. Have fun getting embarrassed in the resulting lawsuit.
 
Here's the Illinois Law

Here's the Indiana one... has a couple big differences

ec


Remember that Indiana doesn't have a state law against discrimination towards LBGT folks, but many cities like Bloomington and Indianapolis do.
Thanks for this.

What does that highlighted part intend to affect? Something like the Hobby Lobby case, where the government was not a party to the person suing Hobby Lobby but government action was the "substantial burden"? Or does that mean that a private individual can use this as justification for things like discrimination (which, as you say, wouldn't fly in cities that have those anti-discrimination statutes)?
 
Thanks for this.

What does that highlighted part intend to affect? Something like the Hobby Lobby case, where the government was not a party to the person suing Hobby Lobby but government action was the "substantial burden"? Or does that mean that a private individual can use this as justification for things like discrimination (which, as you say, wouldn't fly in cities that have those anti-discrimination statutes)?

That's what I'm getting from it. As another poster pointed out, cities like Bloomington and Indianapolis have anti-discrimination towards LBGT laws. Seems like this was made to get around those.
 

massoluk

Banned
Really man, fuck the Hobby Lobby decision. As we all expected, it gave just enough an excuse for dumb laws like this to go forward.
 
NCAA response to the bill

CBDPcKfUcAAa3z0.png

It's a dark day when the NCAA takes the rational and logical side of an issue.

Of course, it's probably more about making sure their bottom line isn't impacted when butts aren't allowed into seats by a stupid ass law, but for today I'll save the cynicism and give them a pat of the back.
 

jmood88

Member
Just need the NFL to say something along the lines of "you aren't ever gonna win the Super Bowl bid again" to join up with the likes of Gencon and the NCAA and such. Empty convention center, empty fieldhouse, empty lucas oil staduim, oh yes, this will go over real well.
That would be great but will never happen since the vast majority of the owners are extremely conservative.
 

slabrock

Banned
The coward wouldn't even sign the bill publicly. Had to do it behind closed doors away from the public and the press. He's already blaming the media for "misinforming" the public.
 

Smash88

Banned
First firing squads are reinstated, and now this. Seriously something needs to change drastically. It's like going back in time.

As a Canadian, I just don't know what's going on with our neighbor.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom