TMO Daily Observations 2015-03-30: Tim Cook and Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act Law

| Daily Observations Podcast

Apple CEO Tim Cook is speaking out against Indiana's Religious Freedom Restoration Act and against other laws that support discrimination. Dave Hamilton and Bryan Chaffin join Jeff Gamet to talk about Mr. Cook's public position and businesses speaking out against discrimination, plus they offer up their thoughts on word that Apple Watch purchases will require a reservation.

TMO Daily Observations 2015-03-30: Tim Cook and Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act Law

Mar. 30, 2015 — Download: MP3 Version (AAC Version Coming Soon)

Sponsors

Casper premium hybrid memory foam and latex mattresses. Use TDO's special code for a US$50 discount.

Popular TMO Stories

Comments

Bob.petersen

With all due respect this law, originally enacted in 1993 by President Clinton, does’t allow someone to discriminate against anyone.  It states that the government can not unfairly burden a company based on their religious beliefs!  Here’s the law, be informed, because you and Tim Cook are not correctly understanding the law!

Religious freedom restoration act. Provides that a state or local government action may not substantially burden a person’s right to the exercise of religion unless it is demonstrated that applying the burden to the person’s exercise of religion is: (1) essential to further a compelling governmental interest; and (2) the least restrictive means of furthering the compelling governmental interest. Provides that a person whose exercise of religion has been substantially burdened, or is likely to be substantially burdened, by a state or local government action may assert the burden as a claim or defense in a judicial proceeding, regardless of whether the state or a political subdivision of the state is a party to the judicial proceeding. Allows a person who asserts a burden as a claim or defense to obtain appropriate relief, including: (1) injunctive relief; (2) declaratory relief; (3) compensatory damages; and (4) recovery of court costs and reasonable attorney’s fees.

MacDaddy

Hey Bob, with all due respect, this law is not the same as the 1993 version, but in fact is nothing more than an easy-to-understand, pander-to-the-base anti-LGBT effort by Pence and the Indiana legislature (i.e. Republican Party). You doubt my word? Then have a look at this photo taken as Pence signed the law into effect in a “private” signing ceremony: http://www.glaad.org/blog/one-simple-graphic-shows-anti-lgbt-animus-behind-indianas-new-law

Bob.petersen

Three out of 10 people identified, so what? The words in the law say something different, that’s why I included the text of the law in my initial posting.  The 1993 federal law has been copied and adopted in approximately 19 states so that the state and federal statues are consistent.  The arguments being made now are ignoring the context and content of the law to push the Gay agenda. 

I work with many gay people on a daily basis, some of my best friends are gay and I will fight for their freedom and they should not be discriminated against.  I will also fight for my freedom as a Christian to live my life according to the teachings of Christ. The gay community should not be able to step on my rights any more than I should be able to step on theirs.

MacDaddy

Look, Pence’s problem of course is that the law’s intention is all too clear, since several such laws were specifically designed to allow discrimination in defiance of any court decisions on gay marriage. In fact, several of those smilingly present at the signing ceremony are noted Christian bigots who have been advocating gay conversion therapy; equating homosexuality with bestiality, pedophilia and adultery; as well as falsely claiming pastors could be jailed for preaching against homosexuality. ( if you have gay friends, as you claim, I bet none of them fit these specious profiles) The governor has underestimated the intellectual capacity of the rest of America as he tries to ride the fence between the snake handlers and those who place the rule of law above ancient superstition. Here’s how it works in the USA: you, as an individual can discriminate against me if you dislike me, and say all kinds of foul things about me and refuse to associate with me, BUT if your belief system prevents you from providing a BUSINESS service to me because of my sexual orientation (or skin color, religious beliefs or gender) then I can sue you. However, the law signed by Pence is specifically designed to prevent me from doing so in the state of Indiana by granting you a “religious belief” exception, on the theory that your religious beliefs trump my rights, and anyone else like me. Supreme Court settled that question a long time ago,  I’m pretty sure you understand which way it was settled, and that’s not going to change.

Log in to comment (TMO, Twitter or Facebook) or Register for a TMO account