Religious Education Forum  

Welcome Guest to ReligiousForums.com . You are currently not registered. When you become registered you will be able to interact with our large base of already registered users discussing topics. Some annoying Ads will also disappear when you register. Registering doesn't cost a thing and only takes a few seconds. We provide areas to chat and debate all World Religions. Please go to our register page!
Home Who's Online Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   Religious Education Forum / Religious Topics / Religious Debates
Sitemap Popular RF Forums REGISTER Search Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-05-2014, 03:15 PM
Quatermass's Avatar
Quatermass Offline
Religion: Rejectamentalist
Title:Follower of Dagon
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,979
Frubals: 147
Quatermass is called 'Da Frubalmesiter' by dorky friendsQuatermass is called 'Da Frubalmesiter' by dorky friendsQuatermass is called 'Da Frubalmesiter' by dorky friends
Default Religious Freedom Bill passed in Missisippi.

Mississippi Approves Religious Freedom Bill, Governor Signs It Into Law

Sad but true news. I have a fist with Phil Bryant's name on it.

I would put a sign up in my shop saying thus:

Spoiler for Language:



Still. It's kind of ironic coming from a state with the highest percentage of downloads of gay pornography in the US.

Last edited by Badran; 04-06-2014 at 10:49 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-05-2014, 04:30 PM
Quintessence's Avatar
Quintessence Offline
Religion: Neopagan
Title:The Elementalist
Shield of Labour: Awarded for admirable hard work and development of a cause - Issue reason: For your hard work as a moderator. 
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Midwestern USA
Gender: Undisclosed
Posts: 8,297
Frubals: 976
Quintessence was nearly buried when this wad of frubals tipped overQuintessence was nearly buried when this wad of frubals tipped overQuintessence was nearly buried when this wad of frubals tipped overQuintessence was nearly buried when this wad of frubals tipped overQuintessence was nearly buried when this wad of frubals tipped overQuintessence was nearly buried when this wad of frubals tipped overQuintessence was nearly buried when this wad of frubals tipped overQuintessence was nearly buried when this wad of frubals tipped overQuintessence was nearly buried when this wad of frubals tipped over
Default

The news article you posted is remarkable in its failure to actually describe what the law does. How about we have people look at the actual bill before making any assumptions about what it does or does not say and do. Here, I'll even make it easy for you guys:

Quote:
Originally Posted by SB 2681
SECTION 1.

(1) This act shall be known and may be cited as the Mississippi Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

(2) The Mississippi Legislature finds the following: (a) The framers of the Constitution, recognizing free exercise of religion as an unalienable right, secured its protection in the First Amendment to the Constitution; (b) Laws "neutral" toward religion may burden religious exercise as surely as laws intended to interfere with religious exercise; (c) Government should not substantially burden religious exercise without compelling justification; (d) In Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990), the United States Supreme Court virtually eliminated the requirement that the government justify burdens on religious exercise imposed by laws neutral toward religion; and (e) The compelling interest test as set forth in prior federal court rulings is a workable test for striking sensible balances between religious liberty and competing prior governmental interests.

(3) The purposes of this section are as follows: (a) To restore the compelling interest test as set forth in Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398 (1963), and Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972), and to guarantee its application in all cases burdened; and (b) To provide a claim or defense to persons whose religious exercise is substantially burdened by government

(4) As used in this section, the following words shall have the following meanings: (a) "Government" means any branch, department, agency, instrumentality or political subdivision of the State of Mississippi and any official or other person acting under color of law of the State of Mississippi. (b) "Demonstrates" means to meet the burdens of going forward with the evidence and of persuasion. (c) "Exercise of religion" means the exercise of religion under the First Amendment to the Constitution.

(5) (a) Government shall not substantially burden a person's exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, except as provided in paragraph (b) of this subsection. (b) Government may substantially burden a person's exercise of religion only if it demonstrates the application of the burden to the person: (i) Is in furtherance of compelling governmental interest; and (ii) Is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.

(6) A person whose religious exercise has been burdened in violation of this section may assert that violation as a claim or defense in a judicial proceeding and obtain appropriate relief against the government, as defined by subsection (4) of this section. Standing to assert a claim or defense under this section shall be the same as the general rules of standing under Article III of the United States Constitution.

7) (a) This section applies to all state laws, rules, regulations and any municipal or county ordinances, rules or regulations and the implementation of those laws, whether statutory or otherwise, and whether adopted before or after the enactment of this section. (b) Any such law, rule, regulation or ordinances adopted after the effective date of this section shall be subject to this section unless such law explicitly excludes such application by reference to this section.

(8) Nothing in this act shall be construed to authorize any government to burden any religious belief.

(9) Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect, interpret, or in any way address that portion of the First Amendment prohibiting laws respecting the establishment of religion. Granting government funding, benefits, or exemptions, to the extent permissible under the Establishment Clause, shall 81 not constitute a violation of this section. As used in this subsection, the term "granting," used with respect to government funding, benefits, or exemptions, does not include the denial of government funding, benefits, or exemptions.

(10) Nothing in this act shall create any rights by an employee against an employer if the employer is not the government.
Oh, I'm sorry! I'm supposed to not think critically and have a knee-jerk "OMFGs HOW DARE THEY" reaction by listening to internet hearsay about what this law is and what it does. I shouldn't be looking at what the law actually says.

And really, I shouldn't... that wasn't entirely sarcastic there. I don't have the legal expertise to make sense of it or fully understand how it would be implemented in practice. But I am certainly not going to base my assessment off a vague article from a news outlet of questionable reputation. Anybody around here have a law degree? Or a story from a reputable news outlet that covers it more appropriately? I think I've put in my homework contribution by finding the bill itself.
__________________
If we've learned something or gained understanding of others' points of view, then I've accomplished my goal.

"What is real is that which we need to believe exists in order that we might function."
Emma Restall Orr

Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-05-2014, 04:43 PM
Quatermass's Avatar
Quatermass Offline
Religion: Rejectamentalist
Title:Follower of Dagon
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,979
Frubals: 147
Quatermass is called 'Da Frubalmesiter' by dorky friendsQuatermass is called 'Da Frubalmesiter' by dorky friendsQuatermass is called 'Da Frubalmesiter' by dorky friends
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quintessence View Post

And really, I shouldn't... that wasn't entirely sarcastic there. I don't have the legal expertise to make sense of it or fully understand how it would be implemented in practice.

And this is a problem, since few people do. Legislators can make up laws that sound nice, and disguise its reality in legalese people either cannot understand or don't even bother to read.

I'm not sure what passess for reputable over in The States of America: Miss. governor signs religious freedom bill; civil rights groups dismayed - latimes.com

Mississippi religious freedom bill criticized as discriminatory

Mississippi passes Arizona-style religious freedom bill


Bryant signs controversial religious-freedom bill Mississippi Business JournalMississippi Business Journal

Last edited by Quatermass; 04-05-2014 at 04:52 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-05-2014, 04:50 PM
Sunstone's Avatar
Sunstone Offline
Religion: Podium Pounding
Title:De Diablo Del Fora
Shield of The Jester: Awarded for unyielding commitment to humour and the entertainment of others - Issue reason:  Shield of Creativity: Awarded for wonderfully original and innovative thinking - Issue reason:  Shield of Labour: Awarded for admirable hard work and development of a cause - Issue reason: Link Exchange project Shield of the Veteran: For continued service and valued contribution over the years - Issue reason:  Shield of 50,000 Thoughts: Awarded for contributing 50,000 posts - Issue reason: That's enough to fill a book! Congratulations! 
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Colorado, USA
Gender: Male
Posts: 54,859
Frubals: 7249
Sunstone lost a limb trying to raid a frubal nestSunstone lost a limb trying to raid a frubal nestSunstone lost a limb trying to raid a frubal nest
Sunstone lost a limb trying to raid a frubal nestSunstone lost a limb trying to raid a frubal nestSunstone lost a limb trying to raid a frubal nestSunstone lost a limb trying to raid a frubal nestSunstone lost a limb trying to raid a frubal nest
Default

I know just enough law to get the sense the bill is overturning at least some restrictions on people using a religious excuse to justify doing something. I could be wrong though. My family has a lot of lawyers in it, but I'm not one of them.
__________________
Uncle Sunstone!!! I feel so......so.....dirty. But I feel so ALIVE!!! -- MysticSang'ha

Certainty is a mind killer -- Debater Slayer

The most precious thing in life is its uncertainty. -- Kenko

It has always surprised me how little attention philosophers have paid to humor, since it is a more significant process of mind than reason. Reason can only sort out perceptions, but the humor process is involved in changing them. -- Edward de Bono
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-05-2014, 07:21 PM
Sleeppy Online!
Title:Intrepid Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,838
Frubals: 102
Sleeppy added a shed out back to store more frubalsSleeppy added a shed out back to store more frubalsSleeppy added a shed out back to store more frubals
Default

Vague. Seems like anarchy; everybody has their own religion, nowadays. Why is it that we use more words than necessary on these bills, without efficiently relaying its parameters? This made me more angry then the bill itself.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-05-2014, 07:24 PM
nazz Offline
Religion: Truth
Title:Esteemed Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Gender: Undisclosed
Posts: 4,019
Frubals: 163
nazz isn't quite sure why frubals always leave a ring in the tubnazz isn't quite sure why frubals always leave a ring in the tubnazz isn't quite sure why frubals always leave a ring in the tubnazz isn't quite sure why frubals always leave a ring in the tub
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quatermass View Post
Mississippi Approves Religious Freedom Bill, Governor Signs It Into Law

Sad but true news. I have a fist with Phil Bryant's name on it.

I would put a sign up in my shop saying thus:

Spoiler for for language:



Still. It's kind of ironic coming from a state with the highest percentage of downloads of gay pornography in the US.
This libertarian is cheering
__________________
The only mind I'm here to change is my own

Last edited by Falvlun; 04-06-2014 at 11:15 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-05-2014, 08:25 PM
Title:BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Gender: Undisclosed
Posts: 7,580
Frubals: 312
The Doors of Perception is a compulsive frubal lickerThe Doors of Perception is a compulsive frubal lickerThe Doors of Perception is a compulsive frubal lickerThe Doors of Perception is a compulsive frubal lickerThe Doors of Perception is a compulsive frubal lickerThe Doors of Perception is a compulsive frubal licker
Default

If it's the same as what AZ tried to pass then I'm glad it was passed. The only reason AZ vetoed was because of the NFL. Note I am assuming it is a similar bill, but the US is not a place to play favorites. If we are a free country how can we possibly be against a right to discriminate? We can frown upon discrimination but not the right to practice it. I've noticed the most people who've been fighting or equal rights all of a sudden freak out with bills like this that say those that disagree with them should have lesser rights. Again, assuming the bills are similar (they seem it), the OP may be happier somewhere in the Mid East?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-05-2014, 08:39 PM
Quatermass's Avatar
Quatermass Offline
Religion: Rejectamentalist
Title:Follower of Dagon
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,979
Frubals: 147
Quatermass is called 'Da Frubalmesiter' by dorky friendsQuatermass is called 'Da Frubalmesiter' by dorky friendsQuatermass is called 'Da Frubalmesiter' by dorky friends
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Doors of Perception View Post
If it's the same as what AZ tried to pass then I'm glad it was passed. The only reason AZ vetoed was because of the NFL. Note I am assuming it is a similar bill, but the US is not a place to play favorites. If we are a free country how can we possibly be against a right to discriminate? We can frown upon discrimination but not the right to practice it. I've noticed the most people who've been fighting or equal rights all of a sudden freak out with bills like this that say those that disagree with them should have lesser rights. Again, assuming the bills are similar (they seem it), the OP may be happier somewhere in the Mid East?
1952 called. They want their myopic view of the world back.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 04-05-2014, 09:00 PM
Title:BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Gender: Undisclosed
Posts: 7,580
Frubals: 312
The Doors of Perception is a compulsive frubal lickerThe Doors of Perception is a compulsive frubal lickerThe Doors of Perception is a compulsive frubal lickerThe Doors of Perception is a compulsive frubal lickerThe Doors of Perception is a compulsive frubal lickerThe Doors of Perception is a compulsive frubal licker
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quatermass View Post
1952 called. They want their myopic view of the world back.
Yup, straw men just like in AZ. Someone who believes that not forcing Jews to serve neo-Nazis and Jim crow laws are similar in any way can't possibly have anything to say that's worth listening to.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 04-06-2014, 04:57 AM
Quatermass's Avatar
Quatermass Offline
Religion: Rejectamentalist
Title:Follower of Dagon
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,979
Frubals: 147
Quatermass is called 'Da Frubalmesiter' by dorky friendsQuatermass is called 'Da Frubalmesiter' by dorky friendsQuatermass is called 'Da Frubalmesiter' by dorky friends
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Doors of Perception View Post
Yup, straw men just like in AZ. Someone who believes that not forcing Jews to serve neo-Nazis and Jim crow laws are similar in any way can't possibly have anything to say that's worth listening to.
Excuse me...are you from the past? Because in the 21st Century we learned that discrimination is the antithesis of the American Constitution. But that aside, you are not a free country. Freedom has never existed anywhere in the world that we know of yet. All you have is a certain range of permitted behaviour and in some parts of the world this is greater than in others. If an Arab came to America with 6 of his wives, he would not be allowed entry to the country because American Law states a man shall have only one wife. Well that's not freedom. But this bill isn't about freedom, it's about misappropriating the word 'freedom' to meet other agendas which are far more totalitarian.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:53 PM.


Copyright 2014 Advameg, Inc.

SEO by vBSEO ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.