Now Reading:
RFRA: Discriminatory or Protective?
Full Article 5 minutes read

RFRA: Discriminatory or Protective?

Every time that a piece of legislation is thought up, someone, somewhere claims that it is discriminatory. It doesn’t matter if it is protecting the rights guaranteed to the people, someone is going to say it is bigoted. The Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) is no exception. In the past week alone, it has been called anti-LBGT by Hillary Clinton, accused of “legitimizing discrimination” by the White House’s Press Secretary, Josh Earnest, and several businesses have expressed their “universal loathing” and threatened to leave Indianapolis. This isn’t your petty “that’s rude” backlash, this is getting real. But is it true?

All of this has been brewing since the Christian bakery, Masterpiece Cakeshop refused to create a wedding cake for a homosexual couple’s wedding. Since then, the owners have were mandated to take sensitivity training and to show that all discriminatory practices had stopped. Theodore Shoebat, a Christian activist, called several different bakeries asking to place an order for pastries that read “gay marriage is wrong”. These bakeries all refused, even though in the opposite situation this was called discrimination.

The Indiana RFRA holds the federal government responsible for accepting obligations to protect the 1st Amendment rights of businesses. In 1993, President Bill Clinton signed the first Religious Freedom Restoration Act, passed in response to claim that the Native American culture from was being oppressed by the government. This shows that this is not a racist, sexist, anti-LBGT action. And if it were, it would have been called out within the last twenty years, or in one of the other 20 states that have this same law. This is simply a way to protect the values of a business and its owners. There is no intent to discriminate, no malicious intent at all.

Flashback to the Hobby Lobby case, we saw a company dragged through the mud because they wanted to exercise their 1st Amendment freedom of religion. I’m not sure why it is so hard to think that businesses should be able to have a say in the services and products they provide, but apparently that is a bit too hard for those on the left to understand.

Memories Pizza in Indiana is another case similar to Masterpiece Cakeshop that has suffered from this RFRA debate. This time, it was forced to close. After receiving an overflow of hateful reviews and threats due to refusing to cater a homosexual marriage, this small pizza parlor had to shut its doors. Memories Pizza prides itself of being a Christian shop, but they welcome customers of any kind. They claim they just do not want to work with homosexual weddings, of course. The thing is, this business doesn’t even cater. This started exclusively on their Yelp page. This is just a group of people trying to make a scene, and we see small business paying the price. All the work they put into building up their American Dream fell apart after nine years because they were called bigots for not offering a service they didn’t provide in the first place.

My good friend, Lauren Cooley, made several good points as she spoke about “if the tables were turned”. The left often tries to pin Christians, whites or men as the enemy, but Cooley took those pawns out of play and showed that it isn’t always about being discriminatory. It’s about being able to act with their freedoms as a private business owner. Here are two highlights from Wednesday:

So, if a pro-gay marriage bakery wants to refuse Theodore Shoebat’s order, that is all fine if the opposite situation is offered the same exact treatment. The pro-traditional marriage business owners should be able to refuse the order of a gay wedding cake. This isn’t harming anyone, either. This isn’t a bad thing. If you don’t like what someone does, take your business elsewhere. It’s common sense.

Even though this all seems elementary, people who do not understand the Constitution are making it that much harder on private businesses. Indiana Governor Mike Pence is now being forced to save face after receiving this negative media, so he has stated that the law will be reviewed to not allow discrimination. This is politician-speak for “we are losing this battle, there is nothing left to do but compromise.”

They way I see it, if we are going to dumb down the law, what is the point of having it in the first place? It may not be perfect but it is a very important law, to customers and business owners alike. This is a classic case of the government’s interest outweighing religious freedom.

Input your search keywords and press Enter.