or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by muppetry

It seems to me that the main motivation was to provide more explicit protection to business entities that might face legal challenges to their refusal to do business with individuals based on their religious beliefs - specifically, in this case, in relation to same-sex marriage and related issues. The recent civil cases brought against photographers and bakers, together with the growing momentum to legalize same-sex marriage were probably the triggers. I actually have no...
That's an interesting question. Doesn't the Establishment Clause simply outlaw legislation that favors one religion over another? This particular bill doesn't appear to do that, at least as far as I can see, and so I'm not clear how it does violate that. What are you seeing that would be in violation?
That's a fine summary - I would not argue with any of it. 
Agreed. But legislation to promote equal rights and prevent discrimination is not intended to change anyone's beliefs, but rather to modify belief-based, discriminatory behavior.
 SECTION 1.IC34-13-9 IS ADDED TO THE INDIANA CODE AS A NEW CHAPTER TO READ AS FOLLOWS [EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2015]:Chapter 9. Religious Freedom RestorationSec. 1. This chapter applies to all governmental entity statutes, ordinances, resolutions, executive or administrative orders, regulations, customs, and usages, including the implementation or application thereof, regardless of whether they were enacted, adopted, or initiated before, on, or after July 1, 2015.Sec. 2. A...
The problem is not your explanation - it is that you now seem to be addressing a different question. I'm not arguing about the pros and cons of a free market per se, that's a quite separate discussion. My original comment was in response to numerous posts, here and elsewhere, asserting that the simple pressures of a free market will prevent discrimination, even if the law allows it, i.e. gays, blacks, or whoever, will either take their business elsewhere or actually move...
OK - so what stopped it from being a free market? And in the civil war through the 1960s period, how did it differ and become a free market? Both those periods were characterized by significant racial discrimination. And if the latter period was a free market, when segregation was widespread, how do you still maintain the argument that a free market will naturally prevent discrimination. I fail to see how you are furthering your argument in the slightest - in fact you seem...
Ah - so are you saying that they did not have the necessary legal protections to enable them to participate in the free market that the rest of the population enjoyed? And no, you don't have to be a socialist to understand that, because I didn't say it. Do I really need to explain that observing that slavery existed in the free market of that time neither requires, nor even suggests, that slavery and the free market are one and the same. No - I think you knew that, and...
So are you arguing that slavery and segregation did not thrive in a free market?
The free-market argument fails catastrophically anyway, by the simple observation that slavery and segregation thrived in a free-market USA before they were outlawed. Segregation was not ended by blacks taking their business elsewhere. 
New Posts  All Forums: