{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
4/4/2014 3:21:54 AM
33
Mississippi Religious Freedom Restoration Act signed into law
[url=http://www.wlox.com/story/25156994/mississippi-religious-freedom-restoration-act-signed-into-law]So much for Separation of Church and State.[/url]
[quote]Governor Phil Bryant signed the controversial Senate Bill 2681 into law Thursday as LGBT supporters gathered in Jackson to protest the bill. Mississippi lawmakers passed the final version of the bill Tuesday that says state and local governments cannot put a substantial burden on religious practices.
"I am proud to sign the Mississippi Religious Freedom Restoration Act today, which will protect the individual religious freedoms of Mississippians of all faiths from government interference," said Bryant. "Mississippi has now joined 18 other states to defend religious freedoms on a state level."
[b][u]Members and supporters of the LGBT community are concerned the bill will open the door to discrimination against gay people and other groups. Opponents of the bill say the discrimination could also be directed towards ethnic minorities and other religious groups.[/b][/u]
Supporters claim the bill mirrors the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act that was signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1993.[/quote]
Opinions?
-
6 Replies[Quote]It wouldn't allow business owners to refuse service based on the customer's sexual orientation, religion, or any other ideology. It would protect them from carrying out services that might otherwise conflict with their own ideology, however. The law specifically prevents a customer placing a "substantial burden" on the owner's beliefs. Serving food to a gay guy isn't a substantial burden. However, a gay couple owning a print shop, under this bill, would be able to deny service to the Westboro Baptist Church if they asked to have them print "fags go to hell" signs. This right is essentially recognized by half of the states, and the federal government. All this bill does is amend a loophole found recently where the business owner can only use this defense when it involves the government. Meaning, that gay couple would have had to print the signs lest they face a lawsuit from WBC. So when you see articles that say anything along the lines of the bill being anti-gay, or anything along the lines of refusing service based on personal bias, that's poor journalism.[/quote]
