Then you've used a lot of resources and won't get paid or you will get sued. Plus, I imagine that type of performance will get negative comments out to potential customers even more than if you had refused to do business with them in the first place. Tough situation.

 

You may be right. Going the passive-aggressive route is probably not a good response.

I guess the main thing in the Indiana law that is different is protection from lawsuits by the government AND individuals. Most of the states that have these types of laws and the federal regulation is to constrain the government from becoming a burden to the exercise of religion.

 

From what I can tell there really nothing prohibiting declining an interaction for most business type transactions. There are protection 'products' by government rules - the most notable is housing. Another would be mortgages. Government rules require these are offered to the protected classes - race, religion affiliation, age and even family makeup. But the vast majority of services/products are not 'protected' by the government. In the case of housing - you have to be very careful. The person who owned the property I now have as a landlord ran afoul of the government rules and was taken to court. His 'crime' - he targeted students in his advertising. Even this was considered discriminatory according the fair housing laws since targeting one group in advertising implies discriminating against those not targeted just in the approach. But a country club can discriminate based on race - unfortunately, we all know that still happens. It may not be morally right - but it is legal according to the government. Subjective, blatant, even open, discrimination against people is not a crime in most cases. But as pointed out over and over again - it can be bad for business.

 

With the rise of the LGBT movement there is conflict. The rub is that LGBT is not, in most states, a 'protected' class. And since LGBT is in conflict with most traditional religious teachings or interpretations from almost all major religious affiliations this conflict will continue to be something society needs to work through.

 

Except for protected services/products (such as housing) the ability to no-bid - even for blatant 'discrimination' reasons. A tool to combat this 'discrimination' has been lawsuits - at times when the government is a party (Hobby Lobby) and at times at the individual level. The Indiana law is different that it protects individuals against both. Thus, this deprives discriminated groups - currently mainly the LGBT movement - of a tool to force an agenda tactic for compel acceptance.

 

Thus to the key points

 

- Discrimination in business transactions is not a crime or illegal - except for certain products/services for specific protected groups

- Most RFRA laws are meant to constrain government from imposing rules against religious exercise.

- Most RFRA laws do not constrain or prevent lawsuits by individuals.

- LGBT is not a protected class in most states. Those affiliated with this have minimum legal leverage to compel acceptance.

- Individual lawsuits are a tool used to try to compel acceptance. The Indiana law is unique in that it allows for use of the RFRA law to protect against individual actions where the government is not a party to the lawsuit. This takes away a tool to compel acceptance of certain groups.

 

I think there are few 'absolutes' in this issue. Most do not want to see people treated differently or badly due to who they are. But there should be a limit to how much people who have strong convictions should be compelled to support or interact or do things they have issues with. Certain products - again, such as housing and financial functions, should be 'protected', but to compel churches of a specific religious affiliation whose teachings go back hundreds or years to hold ceremonies that are counter to those teachings or to compel those who provide custom, interactive services to engage in things they find issue with is not the best approach, at least if its done with a heavy hand of legal action.

 

We have a society that is evolving - not unlike the 60s with race. It will take time for things to work out to a new 'normal'. Even with matters of race its been 50 years and its not done. So nothing will get fixed or addressed with one law, one rule, one lawsuit. Society is always changing in some manner.

Indiana pizza joint that won't cater gay weddings has now passed the $50 grand mark in donations. I can see a large number of businesses now trying to copy this tactic in the name of "religious liberty." Heck, some of these businesses even might be operating on principle as opposed to putting on the cloak of righteousness in order to scam. Link below.

 

Indiana pizza shop won?t cater gay wedding, gets over &u0024;50K from supporters - The Washington Post

Indiana pizza joint that won't cater gay weddings has now passed the $50 grand mark in donations. I can see a large number of businesses now trying to copy this tactic in the name of "religious liberty." Heck, some of these businesses even might be operating on principle as opposed to putting on the cloak of righteousness in order to scam. Link below.

 

Indiana pizza shop won?t cater gay wedding, gets over &u0024;50K from supporters - The Washington Post

 

I think people are fools to give money in that situation.

 

The other side of the coin is that the place has temporarily closed it's doors due to harassment and threats they've received.

I think people are fools to give money in that situation.

 

The other side of the coin is that the place has temporarily closed it's doors due to harassment and threats they've received.

I can see all kinds of businesses in Indiana now receiving calls from hucksters in the name of "religious liberty." (1) Publicly announce that the business will not serve so-and-so. (2) Post a photo on Facebook showing all the employees in prayer while one holds a Bible. (3) Solicit "faith money" through an online campaign organized by the scammers, who, of course, will receive a healthy portion of the donations.

 

This all could get comical. I'm eagerly waiting for the scenarios to play out.

I think people are fools to give money in that situation.

 

The other side of the coin is that the place has temporarily closed it's doors due to harassment and threats they've received.

 

Both sides are equally as ridiculous. There's no place for either action IMO.

I think people are fools to give money in that situation.

 

The other side of the coin is that the place has temporarily closed it's doors due to harassment and threats they've received.

Yet another illustration of the intolerance from the left.

Yet another illustration of the intolerance from the left.

 

Intolerance from the left in response to intolerance from the right....Why don't we just acknowledge that the world is full of intolerance from every angle instead of trying to make it always into a right vs. left thing? It's sad and pathetic.

I can see all kinds of businesses in Indiana now receiving calls from hucksters in the name of "religious liberty." (1) Publicly announce that the business will not serve so-and-so. (2) Post a photo on Facebook showing all the employees in prayer while one holds a Bible. (3) Solicit "faith money" through an online campaign organized by the scammers, who, of course, will receive a healthy portion of the donations.

 

This all could get comical. I'm eagerly waiting for the scenarios to play out.

 

Sounds like they will get as many calls threatening and harassing them also although I am not eagerly awaiting those scenarios to play out.

I have doubts about the extent of this so-called harassment. I've never bought the Christian-as-victim argument in this country.

 

Which brings up an important component of this new Indiana law ... and Hobby Lobby, too. While Christian businesses now have the green light to discriminate, such discrimination comes at a price. If you don't want to get get angry calls or letters or boycotts, then don't advertise your religious zeal.

I have doubts about the extent of this so-called harassment. I've never bought the Christian-as-victim argument in this country.

 

Which brings up an important component of this new Indiana law ... and Hobby Lobby, too. While Christian businesses now have the green light to discriminate, such discrimination comes at a price. If you don't want to get get angry calls or letters, then don't advertise your religious zeal.

 

The fact that you're condoning threats and harassment is not at all surprising, but incredibly embarrassing.

I have read no specifics about these alleged "threats." Have the police been notified ... or are we just talking about people mouthing off on Facebook and such? If you find specifics, please share.

 

I also wonder how many times this particular pizza joint has been asked to cater a gay wedding. My money is on "zero times." Another example of a remedy in search of a problem.

 

But, hey, they're 50 grand richer than they were a few days ago.

The fact that you're condoning threats and harassment is not at all surprising, but incredibly embarrassing.

 

People see what they want to see and a person's bias and intolerance can blind him to what is right in front of him.

 

And yes that goes for both sides, neither one has a market on it.

Intolerance from the left in response to intolerance from the right....Why don't we just acknowledge that the world is full of intolerance from every angle instead of trying to make it always into a right vs. left thing? It's sad and pathetic.

 

Thank you, thank you, thank you.

It's easy to take that stance when your side is currently the most egregious offender.

 

I was called a racist "sphincter" today on my Facebook because I posted a picture of Obama with a caption asking when the April Fools joke was over. That's one less person on my friend list.

 

Anytime a conservative disagrees with a liberal it must be because they are :

bigoted

misogynistic

homophobic

xenophobic

 

or

 

they are just to heartless to care about poor people

 

or

 

they are just to stupid to realize our side is right.

 

If that's not intolerance I don't know what is.