Schumer: Stop Comparing Indiana's Religious Freedom Law To Mine

[DonViejo]

Source: TPM

-snip-

Schumer's full Facebook post is below:

In the uproar over the recently passed Indiana Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), defenders of the bill like Indiana Gov. Pence are trying to hide behind the argument that the law "simply mirrors" the federal RFRA Sen. Ted Kennedy wrote and I introduced as a Congressman in 1993. That may be true only if you're using a Funhouse mirror. In reality, it is completely false, and a disingenuous argument to boot; they should cease and desist immediately comparing the federal RFRA of 1993 to their present, misguided law.

There are two simple reasons the comparison does not hold water.

First, the federal RFRA was written narrowly to protect individuals’ religious freedom from government interference unless the government or state had a compelling interest. If ever there was a compelling state interest, it is to prevent discrimination. The federal law was not contemplated to, has never been, and could never be used to justify discrimination against gays and lesbians, in the name of religious freedom or anything else.

Second, the federal RFRA was written to protect individuals’ interests from government interference, but the Indiana RFRA protects private companies and corporations. When a person or company enters the marketplace, they are doing so voluntarily, and the federal RFRA was never intended to apply to them as it would to private individuals.

Because of these significant, legal differences, the Indiana RFRA in no way resembles the intent or application of the federal RFRA. As the signer of the bill, Governor Pence should put a stop to it immediately.

Read more: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/schumer-religious-freedom-mike-pence

[NYC Liberal]

1. This is the salient point:

Second, the federal RFRA was written to protect individuals’ interests from government interference, but the Indiana RFRA protects private companies and corporations. When a person or company enters the marketplace, they are doing so voluntarily, and the federal RFRA was never intended to apply to them as it would to private individuals.

[still_one]

2. What is outrageous is our media propagating that there is no difference

[tosh]

5. Truth.

This SHOULD be the outrage du jour - tous les jours - that anyone, media and R's are citing a law that they haven't even bothered to READ and COMPREHEND and no one is being called out for it!

Sadly it's just business as usual.

We need a strategy to stop this absurdity.

[still_one]

7. Oui

[central scrutinizer]

6. Our local fish wrap got it right this morning

http://registerguard.com/rg/opinion/32926450-78/promoting-discrimination.html.csp

excerpt:
The law’s defenders argue that the federal government and a number of other states have RFRA laws. True. But while they share the same name, Indiana’s law differs in key ways. Unlike the federal law and those of most other states, it specifically allows for-profit businesses to assert a right to “the free exercise of religion.”

Garrett Epps, a blogger for The Atlantic who formerly taught at the University of Oregon School of Law, recently wrote that the Indiana law contains language recognizing that a for-profit corporation has free-exercise rights equivalent to those of churches or individuals. If that sounds chillingly familiar, it’s because it takes the U.S. Supreme Court’s reasoning in last year’s Hobby Lobby ruling, which gave employers the right to opt out of a government mandate on religious grounds, and expands it into a right to discriminate against anyone on those grounds.

[CrispyQ]

9. The media is our enemy.

They are not there to inform or tell the truth. We have so many deep rooted problems in our electoral system it's depressing. I wish I was like more of my friends and not into politics.

I'm going to try to stomach Wolf Blitzer today & see if he mentions the difference in the laws or if he just parrots Jeb Bush & says, "But Clinton passed the same law federally." I"m putting my money on the parrot option.

[tclambert]

12. Oh, little details can't be that important. Like H20 vs. H2O2. Practically the same thing.

Two chemists walk into a bar and one says, "I'll have some H2O." The other one says, "I'll have some H2O, too." The first chemist is fine with his water, but the second dies, poisoned with hydrogen peroxide.

[bullwinkle428]

15. There really shouldn't be any question in a reasonable person's mind at this

point that the mainstream media skews right-wing.

[Cha]

20. Yes, another Outrage from the US corp mediaWhores.. but, no freaking surprise. Damn them to hell.

[summerschild]

3. Is anyone watching Pence's news conference?

I'm gritting my teeth and clenching my fists. Why is it that no matter what, no Republican takes responsibility for anything or owns up to the slightest mistake.

He has spent the entire conference citing the irresponsible news coverage and distortion of the "real" facts of his law.

Once again, Republicans right, everyone else lying......

[CrispyQ]

11. A huge part of the problem is the media never calls them out on it.

Repubs get a free pass almost every time. The media lobs them softball questions & never any followup questions - they just accept the repub pablum they're fed.

[Gothmog]

4. The laws are very different

[Fred Sanders]

8. 30 different legal EXPERTS told Pence this...he ignored them and followed his version of the Bible.

Religious extremists in America do not blow up libraries, but they do blow up democracy in other ways.

Now all the GOP Presidential Pandereds to Iowa tea party cretins are also lonely good with gay discrimination?

And which side is the media on this.....is there a false equivalency they can come up with now, because I think not?

[blkmusclmachine]

18. www.constantinereport.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/Blog_American_Taliban.jpg

Last edited Tue Mar 31, 2015, 09:44 PM - Edit history (1)

[Fred Sanders]

19. Take a look at this Indiana story, another Taliban law passed on religious grounds...a woman is in prison:

"In addition to the charge of neglect, prosecutors later added a charge of “feticide” based on text messages found on Patel’s phone showing that she took miscarriage-inducing drugs purchased online. Toxicologists could not find any trace of such drugs in her body or that of the fetus, but the evidence was enough to convince a jury that Patel had committed feticide, a charge normally used against those who harm pregnant women, not pregnant women themselves.

Patel is the first woman convicted of feticide in Indiana, and only the second to be charged. Chinese immigrant Bei Bei Shuai faced feticide charges two years ago in the state, and both cases highlight an emerging “gray area” for pregnant women within the US legal system."

More Pence "grey areas" laws that never needed to be laws.

http://www.pri.org/stories/2015-03-30/purvi-patel-faces-20-years-prison-feticide-and-child-neglect

"There are also concerns Patel may be a victim of wider political dynamics in Indiana. The judge in Patel’s case, Elizabeth Hurley, was the first superior court appointee by Indiana’s conservative governor, Mike Pence. Judge Hurley allowed the jury to view a video of police interrogating Patel in post-operative recovery, despite defense arguments that Patel’s Miranda rights were ignored and she was recovering from sedation and severe blood loss during the questioning."

[corkhead]

10. but... but... it's almost called the same thing!

[libodem]

13. .

[img][/img]

[PatrynXX]

14. ie Pence is breaking a commandment

gays and lesbians are not oops (thou shalt not lie)

[blackspade]

16. Ka Pow!

[Trillo]

17. Pence is a corporatist. Is any fix to the Indiana law going to roll back

the rights newly granted to corporations?

Is that why this is now all about writing in protections for LGBT folks, instead of redacting the new law?