Posted on 03/29/2015 10:37:35 PM PDT by Steelfish
The White House Doesn’t Like Indiana’s Religious-Liberty Law, but Won’t Say Why It’s Different from the One Obama Supported
by PATRICK BRENNAN March 29, 2015
When Indiana governor Mike Pence signed a religious-liberty-protection statute into law this past week, he probably didn’t expect the activist backlash and accusations that he’d just endorsed or legalized discrimination. In part, that would be due to the fact that dozens of states and the federal government have had similar laws for years and there’s been no epidemic of discrimination against gays and lesbians.
Now, Indiana’s law is not quite identical to the federal law (the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1994) — Josh Blackman is going to expound on this for NR soon — or to state laws, one of which Barack Obama voted for in Illinois as a state senator, but it is quite similar. The White House, which has made its objection to the Indiana law clear, isn’t highlighting differences between the statute Obama supported in the 1990s and the one Pence just signed.
This morning on ABC’s This Week, White House spokesman Josh Earnest said the seeming discrepancy is just because times have changed. “If you have to go back two decades to justify something that you’re doing today,” Earnest said, “it may raise some questions about what you’re doing.”
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
In not one of these articles have I seen what the law is actually about, except that it’s discriminating and violates hate speech laws. Which takes the First Amendment right out of our mouths.
Leftists, constantly moving left. Everyone else stays in the same spot. Soon they are gonna walk off a cliff into the abyss. The logical conclusion to “tolerance” is the acceptance of everything, eventually leftists will realize this, and things like pedophilia will be protected acts. They’ll drag humanity off a cliff with them. Silencing anyone who stands up to oppose the abomination of liberalism.
Of course they hate it. The white hut is filled with flaming homosexuals from the top down.
Heh heh. Thanks for posting this.
Didn't they just go back to the 1930's to justify the FCC's new net neutrality regulations?
-PJ
Also that is a pretty loud dog whistle that “religion” is supposed to go into the closet now.
There are a lot of people who are going to be like, not so fast.
HA HA HA!
What a regime of ignorant liars.
Who gives a $hit what the White Hut thinks, anymore?
It actually concedes that the government MAY restrict religious liberty when a "legitimate" cause is determined. Wonder who gets to determine that cause.
Religious liberty, short of obviously violations of protection of life and safety, should ALWAYS win out.
Religious liberty, short of obviously violations of protection of life and safety, should ALWAYS win out.
I think they're thinking of burkas, and the bombs and weapons that can be carried underneath them.
Sort of like when Obama was elected 6 years ago,now we know he is a traitor determined to get the world blown to pieces,so appropriate impeachment procedures should commence immediately
Hussein should be impeached and incarcerated over what he did to NASA alone! That is a FLAGRANT UNMISTAKEABLE VIOLATION of the 1st!
I shouldn’t have to do business with a transvestite or whatever....anymore than I would do business with the Mafia.
Once dishonest, always dishonest. You can never trust them again.
“Who believes or cares what Obama or the White House has to say on anything?”
We’ll MAKE you care, citizen! Ever heard of the IRS? NSA?
Or the motto of BATFE: “We go where we please and strike where we please”.
That's a far cry from hurting some sodomite's feelings.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.