Two people have just submitted anonymous comments in response to my popular post titled: “Explaining Indiana’s Religious Freedom Law.” To be completely honest and objective, I’ve posted both of their comments in their entirety below:
How do you square your “legal” explanation with what is the real intent of the Indiana Law particularly when the Constitution already covers the Indiana law? Here is what is coming from Indiana via NPR.
Religion News says: “Supporters of the law say it will keep government entities from forcing business owners — such as bakeries and florists who don’t want to provide services to gay couples — from acting in ways contrary to strongly held religious beliefs. Gay marriage became legal in Indiana last year following an appellate court ruling.”
However, the law’s application could go beyond same-sex couples. During debate on the legislation, state Rep. Bruce Borders cited the example of an anesthesiologist who objected to putting under a woman who was preparing to undergo an abortion.
According to The Indianapolis Star: “The proposal is modeled on a 22-year-old federal law known as the Religious Freedom and Restoration Act. That law played a key role in the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision that allowed Hobby Lobby and other closely held corporations with religious objections to opt out of an Affordable Care Act requirement that they cover certain contraceptives for women.”