Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Let’s Face It, Republicans Are Cowards On Religious Liberty (But Voters Aren’t)
The Federalist ^ | 04/02/2015 | David Harsanyi

Posted on 04/02/2015 12:22:35 PM PDT by SeekAndFind

The GOP’s capitulation on religious liberty was as swift as it was predictable.

Republicans have talent for courting just enough controversy to generate prodigious amounts of negative press but at the same time not doing enough to accomplish anything meaningful. And few things in this world rattle your run-of-the-mill Republican more than some ginned-up outrage over “discrimination” or “bigotry.” The media’s deliberate distortion of the intention, reach, and history of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act—not to mention pressure from corporations like Apple and Walmart—was more than enough to do the trick.

What excuse does Mike Pence have for flubbing a simple question about discrimination on national television last Sunday? What’s his excuse for pledging to “fix” a law that’s already straightforward, innocuous, and ubiquitous? He’s not alone, of course. When Arkansas legislators passed the same bill by a wide margin (what the media calls “controversial”), Gov. Asa Hutchinson threw it back to lawmakers and asked them to rework it to guarantee that make-believe concerns of his MoveOn.org-mimicking son could be “fixed.”

I hope you’ll excuse me, my faithful friends, but if this is your leadership you are screwed. By claiming that RFRA bills can be “fixed,” Republicans are only corroborating the false impression that these bills allow wanton discrimination against gay patrons. By claiming that you can fix this, you are only pretending that there is a compromise available that would make it OK for Christian business owners to refuse participation in gay weddings. None exists. You will be hounded until you are made to coexist.

So, politicians can make cogent and compelling argument for why RFRAs—the most rational and genuine comprise available—are needed and why preserving religious liberty is itself an exercise in tolerance, or they can surrender. I bet on the latter. Even though surrender would be premature.

(Excerpt) Read more at thefederalist.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: firstamendment; homosexualagenda; religiousliberty; republicans; rfra
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-34 next last

1 posted on 04/02/2015 12:22:35 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Most Republicans are cowards, period.


2 posted on 04/02/2015 12:25:26 PM PDT by mulligan (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
"Republicans have talent for courting just enough controversy to generate prodigious amounts of negative press but at the same time not doing enough to accomplish anything meaningful."

Pretty much sums them up. If you're gonna get beat up for something, you may as well actually do the thing you're getting beaten up for.

3 posted on 04/02/2015 12:26:20 PM PDT by Sans-Culotte (Psalm 14:1 ~ The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I am no longer registered Republican and quite frankly I don’t trust any politician.
Freegards
LEX


4 posted on 04/02/2015 12:32:18 PM PDT by lexington minuteman 1775
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

This issue is not one of religious liberty.
There is no more fundamental human right than the right to freely choose with whom we will associate. The freedom to choose with whom we will deal and trade. If we are not free to freely choose with whom we associate, then there is no freedom. Yes, we have the right to discriminate based on race, color, creed, ethnicity, national origin, sex, sexual proclivity, political persuasion, looks, astrological sign or whatever.
What kind of person would want others to be forced under penalty of law to deal with them? If anybody chooses not to associate for me socially or commercially I respect their decision. It is their right. No hard feeling, no animosity, hatred or ill will.
The only way that a large and increasingly diverse nation can survive is for people to be free to associate as they choose. Coercing people to associate against their will only lead to resentment, animosity and increased friction between groups. Force is an ugly and destructive thing. Peace and social harmony can only come from respecting the rights of others.
If we have to always resort to “religious freedom”, then we won’t even have that much longer. So small and cowardly. What makes anybody think that this one, lone right will be respected when every other fundamental right has been eroded away? Religious rights will become the obvious target. We need to stand up for our rights and for freedom. If people are not free to choose with whom they will associate and trade, why should they be free to worship as they choose?


5 posted on 04/02/2015 12:33:16 PM PDT by all the best
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

GOPe - We’ll stand on our principles, right up until anyone challenges us, then we’ll capitulate.


6 posted on 04/02/2015 12:33:32 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Cowardly to the point it merits nothing but utter contempt.

I can’t believe I used to rag on the French.

The current GOP makes the French look like steel-spined warriors.


7 posted on 04/02/2015 12:34:31 PM PDT by greene66
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: all the best

The fight you are talking about was already lost in the 60s and not even a small minority seems willing to fight it again, even if you may be correct on principle. The last guy who even hinted at that issue was Rand Paul, and he immediately got tagged as a racist for it and had to back down.


8 posted on 04/02/2015 12:35:20 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

They’re cowards on just about everything.


9 posted on 04/02/2015 12:36:57 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mulligan
Most Republicans are cowards, period.

There's no one left for the majority to vote for. The republicans are worthless. Why bother wasting the time to vote? Vote for what?

It's time for Divine intervention. I wonder who's going to rise up to save this country before it's too late and every American suffers - even the useful idiots on the left who helped destroy it. They won't be able to escape what they've done either. They're going to suffer the horrors just like everyone else.

10 posted on 04/02/2015 12:37:10 PM PDT by concerned about politics ("Get thee behind me, Liberal")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

This is what happens when liberals take over a party...liberty becomes inconvenient.


11 posted on 04/02/2015 12:39:16 PM PDT by RginTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

http://www.gofundme.com/MemoriesPizza


12 posted on 04/02/2015 12:40:40 PM PDT by gaijin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

You are correct the fights was lost in the 60s’

One only has to look at this link and their rules from back the 60’s and see how far they have become.

http://www.uhuh.com/nwo/communism/comgoals.htm.

However if we had more Ted Cruz who has just articulated very well what religious freedom is then we could reverse this.
As for Paul , well he has not said a word about protecting religious freedom, probably because he does not careless and wants the homosexuals to vote for him.


13 posted on 04/02/2015 12:41:23 PM PDT by manc (Marriage =1 man + 1 woman,when they say marriage equality then they should support polygamy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: concerned about politics

Imagine Bush v Hillary.

What is the difference between them> Nothing. Common core, drugs, illegals, abortion, homosexuality.


14 posted on 04/02/2015 12:42:20 PM PDT by manc (Marriage =1 man + 1 woman,when they say marriage equality then they should support polygamy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

RINO’s are cowards, because they never truly cared about this issue to begin with. They only pretended to care to get conservative votes.

It’ EASY to stand firm when you actually believed in what you said you believed in to begin with.


15 posted on 04/02/2015 12:43:49 PM PDT by TexasFreeper2009 (Obama lied .. the economy died.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

So far Cruz is supporting the good guys.


16 posted on 04/02/2015 12:44:54 PM PDT by stevem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stevem

Cruz has never let us down. He always says what he thinks, fearlessly.


17 posted on 04/02/2015 12:50:31 PM PDT by alstewartfan (You're a worn-out face in all the hangout places Where the lost souls congregate. Al Stewart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: mulligan

Exactly. The author shouldn’t just limit this to gay marriage. On immigration, spending, Obamacare and a bunch of other issues, they cave over and over.


18 posted on 04/02/2015 12:52:35 PM PDT by Opinionated Blowhard ("When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: manc
Imagine Bush v Hillary.

That's why the MSM is protecting Bush right now. They know if Bush wins the primary, the republican voters will be home watching a good movie on election day rather than voting for ....nothing.

The left is well aware of this. The dumbass republican politicians just don't get it. They have no idea what's going on in the real world. They believe everything they read in the media - the left wing media! I mean, DUH!

19 posted on 04/02/2015 12:54:55 PM PDT by concerned about politics ("Get thee behind me, Liberal")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: manc

Yeah, but the guy I responded to wasn’t talking about religious freedom, but a different issue that is only tangentially related to it. He was talking about freedom of association, which used to mean that you could choose not to do business with anyone, for any reason. It doesn’t mean that anymore, since the 60s and the civil rights laws and court rulings that came down.

Most people still think that you have that right, even putting up signs like “we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone”, but that right has been stripped from us, and if you tried to assert it, you would lose in court bigtime.


20 posted on 04/02/2015 12:55:07 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-34 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson