Recommended Posts

Garfield, did you notice how I quoted you the US statute in which the RFRA is encoded into law? That might clue you in on whether or not I've read the act. Didn't even need to google it, got a big ol' fat book of statutes right here next to me.

And I see nothing in City of Boerne v. Flores that invalidates that exception. It would be odd if there was, of course, since that would be well outside the purview of that case.

Yes, I did see that it's the US Code, which I why I asked if you read it before you posted it.

The test is whether or not the gov't can burden religious freedom. It can only under compelling gov't interest, and only as a least resort.

It doesn't apply to the states.

EDIT: I'm not suggesting anywhere that anything invalidates the exception that allows the gov't to burden religious freedom. I don't know where you got the impression that I was.

Edited by garfield

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow. OK, I respect your opinion, but there is so much here that is way off-topic that, to address it, will certainly get the thread closed. And maybe it's time for that, mercifully.

If you care to copy and paste your post to me in a PM I'd be happy to keep sharing my opinion. My hope is that you'll accept it with equal veracity.

I will cut and paste if you like and even if i did not agree with you at times have respected your points of view,BUT I do not see it as off topic at all. Most everything written has in one way or another already been mentioned and IMO does affect ( or can ) the way our children may be looked at or treated when this sort of thing is allowed.

Forgive me if it was very soap box of me. I have just seen ( in our activity ) many young people , believe me, on the brink of who knows what because of this way of thinking. Drum Corps has evolved, thankfully where people of ALL persuasion's can feel safe and express themselves in a way many do not get the chance to in life and to compromise this in anyway would be tragic.

do I actually think it will be an issue, maybe , maybe not BUT the possibility can be just as scary.

Edited by GUARDLING

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the previous comments on the ability of the Boy Scouts to ban females, the Supreme Court ruled that the Boy Scouts are not a business entity, They are a private entity. Therefore the Court ruled, it is within their rights to ban females. Such a Supreme Court ruling had the ancillary effect to allow the Boy Scouts of America to ban " avowed homosexuals " from any leadership positions as well. ( Boy Scouts lifted the ban on homosexual boys memberships in 2013 ) To this day, it is the official policy of the Boy Scouts of America to have a policy that bans avowed, or publically acknowledged homosexuals from serving in ANY leadership capacity within the Boy Scouts of America. Just wanted to pass this info along, as DCI does have 2 Corps that have elected to ban females from marching their units ( but it remains unclear if the Madison Scouts are in compliance or in support of the current rules and policies of the Boy Scouts of America regarding the prohibition of avowed homosexuals from leadership positions in the Madison Explorer Scouts Drum & Bugle Corps.) The Executive Director of the Madison Scouts today made public comments regarding their response to what publically elected officials in Indiana have done... but no mention was made in these comments regarding whether or not the Madison Scouts are in compliance and are in support of the current rules and policies of their umbrella organization... The Boy Scouts of America. Perhaps he might be able to chime in on this for us as well over the next few days.

Edited by BRASSO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the previous comments on the ability of the Boy Scouts to ban females, the Supreme Court ruled that the Boy Scouts are not a business entity, They are a private entity. Therefore the Court ruled, it is within their rights to ban females. Such a Supreme Court ruling had the ancillary effect to allow the Boy Scouts of America to ban " avowed homosexuals " from membership as well. To this day, it is the official policy of the Boy Scouts of America to have a policy that bans avowed, or publically acknowledged homosexuals from serving in ANY capacity within the Boy Scouts of America. Just wanted to pass this info along, as DCI does have 2 Corps that have elected to ban females from marching their units ( but it remains unclear if the Madison Scouts are in compliance or in support of the current rules and policies of the Boy Scouts of America regarding the prohibition of avowed homosexuals from participation in the Madison Explorer Scouts Drum & Bugle Corps.) The Executive Director of the Madison Scouts today made public comments regarding their response to what publically elected officials in Indiana have done... but no mention was made in these comments regarding whether or not the Madison Scouts are in compliance and are in support of the current rules and policies of their umbrella organization... The Boy Scouts of America. Perhaps he might be able to chime in on this for us as well over the next few days.

You may want to check your post for facts on such matters, especially when it comes to the BSA and the Madison Scouts, including their membership as an explorer troop.

http://www.scouting.org/MembershipStandards/Resolution/Resolution.aspx

Edited by JohnZ
unnecessary comment removed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And lest anyone still believes that this law is really about religious freedom, it has become painfully clear what's going on and who specifically this law is targeting. This, from the lobbying group who championed the law:

http://www.advanceamerica.com/blog/?p=1849

(Notice that they only mention Christians. Strange to think why other religions were excluded. It makes one wonder.)

Edited by seen-it-all
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

Edited by JohnZ
unnecessary comment removed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DCI will be in a position where they have to get commitments from their partners during Championships Week that they will serve everyone equally and make sure that information is very visible. This is like going back in time 50 years.

Ultimately, I think this law will get thrown out because it grants discriminatory rights to religious people that it does not grant to non-religious. I can refuse to serve you because of my religion while Bob cannot refuse to serve you because he has no religion. I cannot fathom why that should be alright.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DCi is small potatoes compared to the NCAA or GenCon. But what should happen is all of these groups should band together and really put some heat on. I have no desire to go back to Indy anyway, but this lessens even that desire...and i'm straight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DCi is small potatoes compared to the NCAA or GenCon. But what should happen is all of these groups should band together and really put some heat on. I have no desire to go back to Indy anyway, but this lessens even that desire...and i'm straight.

The NFL has yet to chime in, but I'm fairly certain, based on their recent track record against similar types of legislation, they will soon. They say that money speaks, and the way I see it the NFL is the biggest gorilla in the room who could really move the needle on this thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NFL has yet to chime in, but I'm fairly certain, based on their recent track record against similar types of legislation, they will soon. They say that money speaks, and the way I see it the NFL is the biggest gorilla in the room who could really move the needle on this thing.

and the NFl could use PR....i'm surprised they've held back.

Love to see the Colts speak up on their own

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.