When it comes to political actions, I am just curious and skeptical enough to dig deeper and see who benefits most from the most drastic measures.
Such is the case of Senate Bill 101 or Indiana Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). You see, some politicians that pander to the religious right know exactly how to play people on the fears and emotions of Christians.
My first inclination is that this bill is nothing more than lip service. Actually, they could change the name from Senate Bill 101 to Politics 101 – it’s becoming quite obvious that there is a real AGENDA here. Anyway, we all have the right to do and act however we choose. We all have the right to refuse service to anyone, at any time, for whatever reason – it's the consequence that we don't have control over. Especially when it comes to lawsuits.
I read several articles yesterday and dug into the spending of lobbyists and special interest groups, trying to wrap my head around this whole bucket of chaos! Basically, money talks (and it buys voting power). You can see exactly where spending is being made, by industry and more on http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/ Last year, lawyers and lobbyists sunk $136,621,043 into the pockets of politicians (most of which were Democrats). Before politics, Pence was a lawyer and well, once a lawyer, always a lawyer. Follow the money and see how voting power is bought. It’s sickening! Which by the way, if I lived in New Jersey, there's a certain Democrat that I would be inclined to monitor his every move and vote. Just sayin'
In the end, the RFRA is nothing more than a big red bow put on what we already have. We will still be able to refuse service to anyone, for any reason – we will still have certain consequences that result from our actions.
This bill is not going to pave the way for a cake baker to refuse service to a gay couple without consequence. There will still be lawsuits – there will still be a “day in court” the only difference is, this bill is a great marketing tool to get more lawyers, more business by inciting more controversy and encouraging others to refuse business as the first step to the entire court process.
It all became SO clear when I read this piece by Daniel O. Conkle, professor, Indiana University Maurer School of Law.
Of particular interest to me was, first, the fact he is a lawyer and then this:
If the Indiana RFRA is adopted, this same general approach will govern religious freedom claims of all sorts, thus protecting religious believers of all faiths by granting them precisely the same consideration.
But granting religious believers legal consideration does not mean that their religious objections will always be upheld. And this brings us to the issue of same-sex marriage.
Under the Indiana RFRA, those who provide creative services for weddings, such as photographers, florists or bakers, could claim that religious freedom protects them from local nondiscrimination laws. Like other religious objectors, they would have their day in court, as they should, permitting them to argue that the government is improperly requiring them to violate their religion by participating (in their view) in a celebration that their religion does not allow.
Do you see how that works?
Personally, I think the REAL answer to all our problems is for people to have and keep their right to serve who they wish but for the government to step in and place the restrictions on lawyers and our justice system, when it comes to stupid lawsuits.
Too many people are looking for a free ride, easy money and are ready to jump aboard the financial train of opportunity through lawsuits.
If you call a cake shop and they don't want to bake your cake, big freaking deal – go someplace else.
When I got married, I was rejected by a minister who didn't want to perform the service because I “lived in sin” before marriage. I didn't blow a gasket, I didn't file a lawsuit – I went someplace else.
NO BIG DEAL
When I had my boys by c-section – I wanted my tubes tied. My boys were born in a Catholic hospital – they would not perform the surgery. I had to wait and have it performed elsewhere. That meant two surgeries, but I respected the policy of the hospital and went someplace else.
When people stop filing lawsuits over stupid, petty reasons – stupid discrimination along with the egging on of stupid discrimination. Granted, there are reasons to file lawsuit – but to sue a cake maker for not baking a cake, Yes! That's stupid.
At some point, common sense should become our guiding light.
If you don't believe in abortion – don’t have one and for Pete's sake, don't work where you might be asked to assist in one.
If you want to take birth control or use fertility medication to become pregnant – don't work in a Catholic school.
If you want to have insurance that provides certain medications – don't work for a company that won't support your choice.
Just recently, a woman filed a lawsuit to be able to attend an all men function. Why? Because she COULD when she Should NOT have been able to. That's just STUPID.
Yesterday I was enraged about RFRA – today, I see it as a non-issue for the most part. NOTHING is going to change really – other than lawyers getting richer from the flood of stupid lawsuits that are going to result from this complete, bullshit bill.
Feel free to add your thoughts – all comments welcome.