To The Daily Sun,
Since Ed Allard concedes my main allegation, what is the point of his letter of April 29? Perhaps he just wanted a platform for name-calling intended to intimidate people into accepting leftists' efforts to undermine the Judeo-Christian values that underlie our free, prosperous, and peaceful society.
Supporting my point about the great difficulty of being able to use the Religious Freedom Restoration Acts (RFRAs) to justify discrimination, Allard says that courts have consistently held against anyone attempting to use an RFRA to justify discrimination. I would say a zero record of success is clear evidence of great difficulty.
Allard apparently wants to mislead readers into believing that the Indiana RFRA allows almost casual discrimination without possible legal penalty just because someone thinks his "religious freedom is likely to be violated." That is false.
Nevertheless, Allard says many of the politicians who passed the 1993 Federal RFRA support his claim. Does support from politicians really strengthen anyone's argument? What did these politicians tell us about Obamacare? Lies. And, apparently there are politicians who believe the opposite.
Quoting from the Indiana RFRA to show the intent of the law, "A person whose exercise of religion has been substantially burdened, or is likely to be substantially burdened, by a violation of this chapter may assert the violation or impending violation as a claim or defense in a judicial or administrative proceeding...."
The "likely to be substantially burdened" simply means that you can go to court before you are harmed. For example, if a law required that everyone, or certain people, be tattooed, and if someone felt that being tattooed was likely to substantially burden his/her religious exercise, he/she could go to court before being tattooed ... where he might or might not succeed in his attempt to avoid being tattooed.
It is ridiculous to argue that someone who hasn't been harmed by a law, but feels he might be, would be more successful in court than someone who actually has been or is being harmed by that law.
Despite Allard's claim to the contrary, the attitude behind the Indiana RFRA is the opposite of the attitude behind the Jim Crow laws. The attitude behind the RFRAs is to protect peoples' rights, to support their First Amendment right. The attitude behind the Jim Crow laws was the desire to take away peoples' rights, i.e., to subjugate others.
Allard approves of denial of service (discrimination) as long as he gets to determine the criteria (which apparently excludes religious freedom concerns). In Allard's world you can't deny a service because it violates your principles and firmly held beliefs that such actions support harming people and society. But, you could deny that service by claiming it is to avoid inciting violence (perhaps from the Christians that scare so many leftists, and who, in the name of their religion, apparently are constantly committing violent acts — that the media must be hiding from us).
This whole discussion began with the false charges that the Indiana RFRA allows discrimination against gays. That fantasy was created to smear Indiana's successful governor and potential presidential candidate and as an attack on America's Judeo-Christian values which are the basis for our freedoms, prosperity, and peaceful society.
Despite Allard's objection, the trumped-up attack on the Indiana RFRA is just another piece of the leftists' war to destroy the influence of our Judeo-Christian religion in our society. Leftists have fought to eliminate prayer from public schools, our military academies, and public events, to remove the Ten Commandments from public buildings, to remove religious monuments and displays from public lands, to stop private Bible reading or private Bible study groups during free time in public schools, to force hiring people whose behavior violates the religious principles of the employer, to limit the ability of military chaplains to proclaim their Christian beliefs, to force pastors to submit their sermons to government, threaten the tax-exempt status of religious colleges that oppose same-sex marriage, and on and on and on. Unfortunately, leftists have been successful in many areas.
John Adams warned, "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
Leftists try to destroy our Judeo-Christian values which underlie our freedom, prosperity, and peaceful society. But these values stand in the way of leftist success in instituting the government they envision where "smart", "caring", and "honest" people like themselves control our lives, let us keep the part of our earnings that they think we deserve, and make all our decisions for us because they know what is best for us.
Anyone who wants to live in such a Utopia doesn't have to wait, they already exist. Our borders are open. Cuba, Russia, Venezuela, North Korea, and similar utopian countries will surely welcome you.