Do we need RFRA laws?

I am all for religious freedom but recent events would indicate such laws are entirely unnecessary.

-A pizza maker tells a reporter that they would not cater a gay wedding ceremony. They get bad press and attacked on Yelp, and even some death threats and the conservative media jumps in and sets up a Gofundme. They raise 860k in a week and millions show their support.

- A florist who was fined $1000 for not providing services to a same sex couple recieved 100k and huge support thanks to conservative media. Not to mention she received free legal support from ADF.

By contrast a baker in Florida who received death threats when she refused to make an anti gay cake has brought in only 13k.

It seems to me there is very little need for such laws. What is the point? If anyone tried to oppress anyone's religious liberties then it looks like the conservative media, conservative lawyers, and thousands of donaters would rush to their aid. Are there even any recent incidents that justify the need for such laws?

CriticalThought said:

I am all for religious freedom but recent events would indicate such laws are entirely unnecessary.

-A pizza maker tells a reporter that they would not cater a gay wedding ceremony. They get bad press and attacked on Yelp, and even some death threats and the conservative media jumps in and sets up a Gofundme. They raise 860k in a week and millions show their support.

- A florist who was fined $1000 for not providing services to a same sex couple recieved 100k and huge support thanks to conservative media. Not to mention she received free legal support from ADF.

By contrast a baker in Florida who received death threats when she refused to make an anti gay cake has brought in only 13k.

It seems to me there is very little need for such laws. What is the point? If anyone tried to oppress anyone's religious liberties then it looks like the conservative media, conservative lawyers, and thousands of donaters would rush to their aid. Are there even any recent incidents that justify the need for such laws?

Click to expand...

the purpose of the RFRAs is to guide the courts to employ strict scrutiny when ruling on a 1st amendment religious exercise cases...

although it's been in the news alot lately as a "conservative thing" ( it's not , but whatever)... they found their birth among Democrats over the issue of native Americans and their religious expressions/rituals.

are they needed?.. well, one would think the 1st amendment would be a good enough guide, but in our purposefully complex legal word, we pretty much need to legislate how some things are handled.

Thrilla said:

the purpose of the RFRAs is to guide the courts to employ strict scrutiny when ruling on a 1st amendment religious exercise cases...

although it's been in the news alot lately as a "conservative thing" ( it's not , but whatever)... they found their birth among Democrats over the issue of native Americans and their religious expressions/rituals.

are they needed?.. well, one would think the 1st amendment would be a good enough guide, but in our purposefully complex legal word, we pretty much need to legislate how some things are handled.

Click to expand...

So could you point out at least one case this decade where an RFRA law was needed? Or is this just a solution in search of a problem?

CriticalThought said:

So could you point out at least one case this decade where an RFRA law was needed? Or is this just a solution in search of a problem?

Click to expand...

why does it have to be in this decade?...it was a solution to a problem... you'd know this had you done even 2 minutes of reading on the matter.

I know you've already made you mind up, but for those whom haven't.. here a starting point.. the wiki page on the subject.

http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_Freedom_Restoration_Act

CriticalThought said:

I am all for religious freedom but recent events would indicate such laws are entirely unnecessary.

-A pizza maker tells a reporter that they would not cater a gay wedding ceremony. They get bad press and attacked on Yelp, and even some death threats and the conservative media jumps in and sets up a Gofundme. They raise 860k in a week and millions show their support.

- A florist who was fined $1000 for not providing services to a same sex couple recieved [sic] 100k and huge support thanks to conservative media. Not to mention she received free legal support from ADF.

By contrast a baker in Florida who received death threats when she refused to make an anti gay cake has brought in only 13k.

It seems to me there is very little need for such laws. What is the point? If anyone tried to oppress anyone's religious liberties then it looks like the conservative media, conservative lawyers, and thousands of donaters [sic] would rush to their aid. Are there even any recent incidents that justify the need for such laws?

Click to expand...

There shouldn't be any need for any such laws.

The First Amendment is quite clear enough regarding freedoms of expression, religion, and association.

It should not ever happen, in this nation, that the legal systems of this nation would be abused in any way that would compel anyone to provide goods or services in support and participation in something that violates their conscience.

However, we have much too often see exactly this sort of abuse take place, and be allowed to stand. What really needs to be done is to remove from public office any person who will not obey the Constitution, and to see to it that they are barred from ever again holding any public office.

Short of that, passing additional laws which reaffirm what the Constitution already clearly establishes is an imperfect solution.

It's nice to see outpouring of public support, and even substantial financial donations for those who have been the victim of such abuses, but it does nothing to mitigate the abuse nor to prevent the abuse from being repeated.

CriticalThought said:

I am all for religious freedom but recent events would indicate such laws are entirely unnecessary.

-A pizza maker tells a reporter that they would not cater a gay wedding ceremony. They get bad press and attacked on Yelp, and even some death threats and the conservative media jumps in and sets up a Gofundme. They raise 860k in a week and millions show their support.

- A florist who was fined $1000 for not providing services to a same sex couple recieved 100k and huge support thanks to conservative media. Not to mention she received free legal support from ADF.

By contrast a baker in Florida who received death threats when she refused to make an anti gay cake has brought in only 13k.

It seems to me there is very little need for such laws. What is the point? If anyone tried to oppress anyone's religious liberties then it looks like the conservative media, conservative lawyers, and thousands of donaters would rush to their aid. Are there even any recent incidents that justify the need for such laws?

Click to expand...

I am not American so I can only comment in general terms. For me, legislation that forces private individuals to act against their conscience is wrong HOWEVER, when they act with their conscience they should not then expect a free pass from the consequences of doing so. I will add that 'consequences' also extends to breaching voluntarily entered into contracts between private individuals and/or private organisations. It is actually problematic for me that inequality of resources might mean that 'financial might will be right' in many cases but, I am prepared to accept the consequences of the principle, even if I don't exactly like some of them. What really annoys me about this is people that claim to be fighting for freedom of conscience who discriminate against people and then effectively want to put a 'gagging order' on those people when they point out the discrimination, the days of the institutional gag are long gone in my opinion.

If there is an overwhelming majority of cases where inequality of access to law or resources means that the above rights are not being given equal opportunity for expression then I might reconsider the principle.

For the hard of thinking I will state categorically that death threats or physical threats of any kind are not acceptable to me.

Isaiah 55:8-9
8 “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,” declares the Lord.
9 “As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts."

DickBanks said:

Isaiah 55:8-9
8 “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,” declares the Lord.
9 “As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts."

Click to expand...

Moderator's Warning:

Please don't necro threads. If you have questions or comments about this mod box, please PM a mod or use the Contact Us button.