Indiana law ignites firestorm of protests

If you’ve been following the shenanigans in Indiana, there’s a call to boycott the products from there… and when was the last time you used Red Gold canned tomato products? Yeah, me neither. And who or what is a Vera Bradley?

Aside from the Colts and the Pacers, what else is there that’s exported from Indiana? Here’s the list of products you are being asked to boycott: Clabber Girl Baking Powder, Nestle but only Nesquik, Boost and CoffeeMate, Red Gold canned tomato products, Bar Keepers Friend, Vera Bradley and Eli Lilly (never mind that you might need their medications). Plus they want the NCAA to pull the Men’s Final Four Basketball Tournament out of Indiana… good luck with that.

Needless to say, the enactment of a state religious freedom law in Indiana has provoked a firestorm of protest. Although the law is quite similar to those on the books in over a dozen other states, as well as the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), some claim that the law authorizes discrimination against homosexuals and same-sex couples and trumps state-level nondiscrimination laws.

Are the claims made against the new Indiana law accurate? Depends who you talk to and how you “interpret” it. Most note this law, like other RFRAs, merely requires that state laws meet a demanding, but hardly insurmountable, test before infringing upon the religious practice or conscience of religious believers. If the law imposes a substantial burden on religious belief, the law must yield unless the law serves a compelling state interest and is the least burdensome way to advance that interest.

Conversely, some pundits citing the RFRA is “identical if not modeled on the federal statute,” always end their comparison by saying President Clinton signed the federal RFRA into law. But they say if you only take the time to read both the Indiana law and federal law, they are in fact not identical. Indiana law specifically gives businesses the right to discriminate - well beyond even the findings in the SCOTUS ruling o the Hobby Lobby case.

There is no such language in the federal law giving businesses this religious-based “privilege” to discriminate, sayeth the left

You just know this is going to end up back in the laps of SCOTUS and they will have a huge conundrum: Constitutionally guaranteed right to religious freedom vs . judicially enforced gay rights. Stay tuned.

e\`C