Indiana Lawmakers Announce They've Reached Agreement To Alter Law

[DonViejo]

Source: TPM

Indiana lawmakers announced on Thursday morning that they have reached an agreement to address concerns that the religious freedom bill would permit discrimination against gays and lesbians.

During a press conference, Indiana House Speaker Brian Bosma (R) and Indiana Senate President Pro Tempore David Long (R) said that they would introduce the changes at 9:30 a.m.

Bosma said that the changes make a "strong statement to assure that every Hoosier's rights are protected, and won't be infringed upon" by the new law. Long blamed the backlash against the law on the perception of the legislation.

-snip-

According to a report from the Indianapolis Star, the bill will add protections for LGBT individuals by making it clear that businesses cannot use the religious freedom law to defend discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity.

Read more: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/indiana-announce-agreement-religious-freedom-law

[handmade34]

1. not enough...

Repeal!

[Myrina]

2. Here it is ...

http://www.wthr.com/story/28698272/clock-is-ticking-on-rfra-clarification-at-indiana-statehouse


"The new language reads, in part:

This chapter does not: 1) authorize a provider to refuse to offer or provide services, facilities, use of public accommodations, goods, employment, or housing to any member or members of the general public on the basis of race, color, religion, ancestry, age, national origin, disability, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or United States military services; 2) establish a defense to a civil action or criminal prosecution for refusal by a provider to offer or provide services, facilities, use of public accommodations, goods, employment, or housing to any member or members of the general public on the basis of race, color, religion, ancestry, age, national origin, disability, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or United States military Service"

[asiliveandbreathe]

7. then why have the RFRA in the first place....

[Myrina]

18. ... so they can fundraise off of "lookit how right wing we are!"

The intolerance and vitriol that runs rampant among the hillbillies in this state is breath taking.

I've seen so many people post - here and elsewhere - about how 'friendly' Indiana is. I've been here 15 years and I just don't see it.
I see racism, sexism, xeno and homo phobias and mindless Bible thumping galore. I see small-minded, greedy people who look for any way they can find to 'get one over' on business/gov't but then squeal on anyone else who does the same.

There may be pockets of semi-liberals and relatively benign, tolerant groups but they are small and hard to come by.

I can't wait to get the hell away from here.

[LiberalFighter]

12. This is also part of the conference report.

SECTION 2. IC 34-13-9-7.5 IS ADDED TO THE INDIANA CODE 3 AS A NEW SECTION TO READ AS FOLLOWS [EFFECTIVE JULY 4 1, 2015]:
Sec. 7.5. As used in this chapter, "provider" means one (1) or more individuals, partnerships, associations, organizations, limited liability companies, corporations, and other organized groups of persons. The term does not include:

(1) A church or other nonprofit religious organization or society, including an affiliated school, that is exempt from federal income taxation under 26 U.S.C. 501(a), as amended (excluding any activity that generates unrelated business taxable income (as defined in 26 U.S.C. 512, as amended)).

(2) A rabbi, priest, preacher, minister, pastor, or designee of a church or other nonprofit religious organization or society when the individual is engaged in a religious or affiliated educational function of the church or other nonprofit religious organization or society.

(Reference is to ESB 50 as reprinted March 17, 2015.)

[frazzled]

3. So can Indiana pharmacists no longer refuse to fill a woman's prescription

for birth control? I hope that's what it means. But I kind of doubt it. It seems to be generally accepted that that's okay.

[jeff47]

6. No, they still can refuse to do that.

From the language in the post above yours, they could still refuse to fill birth control prescriptions for women as long as they also refused to fill birth control prescriptions for men.

[frazzled]

8. Actually, I just looked it up

Surprisingly, it appears that Indiana (unlike neighboring Illinois) does not have a conscience clause law for pharmacists. Or at least I think, based on a quick google search.

[jeff47]

9. This law would appear to give them one. (nt)

[ananda]

4. But women are still screwed!

I wish laws against women would get the same response
and provoke needed changes!

[whatthehey]

11. In this case "sex" is also protected.

[asiliveandbreathe]

5. Said the spider to the fly -

IMO anything other than repeal falls short....limited protection? - are you sure you really want to fix this thing Indiana?

Or continue to just blow smoke....

and now Jebbie wants it both ways...man o man o man.....

[Chipper Chat]

10. Whatever the "fix" is the damage has been done.

Indiana's reputation and economy has been set back a hundred years.

[lark]

13. So, every other kind of discrimination is OK?

They make me sick. Glad they won't be able to discriminate based on sexual orientation, but what about pharmacists refusing to fill birth control or morning after bill prescriptions? What about restaurants being able to refuse service to mixed couples? There are so many ways this law will remain heinous.

[spiderpig]

14. I can't believe these morans

Backpedal much?

Now we have Arkansas, North Carolina & Maine*

*Not critical of residents (I'm from Ohio - Kasich & Boehner FFS) but what is going on with this rampant Repug insanity?

At least Stephen King is coming back with both barrels.

[vlyons]

15. so with the new chapter, what's the point of the law?

it has no point, except to let liar politicians to pander the Dominionist christians, who as we all know are the most persecuted people in America. *snark*

[gordianot]

16. Oh yes, the Dominionist are persecuted since the Constitution did not frame a State Religion.

The First amendment took care of that, it comes down to their views are (fundamentally "pun intended&quot contrary to the Constitution. The reason they are so opposed to Sharia Law that is essentially what they want they just want to do the branding. Every time you hear that this country is based on Biblical Principles of the framers some RW hack is whistling past the graveyard.

[safeinOhio]

19. I see the point as making it legal

to sell, buy, grow and smoke pot if you belong to that new church. Once they figure that out, it'll be repealed.

[cosmicone]

17. I want full repeal. "Bigot + protests = Bigot -1" won't do.

"Bigot = 0" is the only way.

[Zorra]

20. Republicans always lie and cheat. We need to see the text of this revised legislation.

If it is weasel speak BS, no quarter for Indiana.