In 1993 the federal government passed the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The law was intended to protect Native Americans in danger of losing their jobs because of religious ceremonies that involved the illegal drug peyote. In 1997 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Congress overstepped its bounds in passing RFRA in 1993, and that the law applied only to federal laws, not to those passed by the states. Since then 22 U.S. states have passed their own versions of the “religious freedom” laws. Supporters of the law argue that the government shouldn’t force religiou…
Read moreNarrow down which types of responses you would like to see.
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
Discussions from these authors are shown:
@9L7LQBRIndependent1yr1Y
The discrimination laws should be expanded to protect members of the LGBTQ+ community so businesses would be able to deny service to customers if it is not considered discriminatory.
@9FK9T8Q2yrs2Y
No, because once one company does it every other company will and it will turn into a viscous cycle of discrimination.
@9DHBTQN2yrs2Y
Yes, businesses should be allowed to deny service to any customer, but it might not be justified or the right thing to do
@9BN2G7PLibertarian2yrs2Y
No, businesses should not be involved religious beliefs.
@93K2V6M3yrs3Y
Depends on why the person is denying service
Yes, but only if they are not discriminating against any group of people in the process.
@8WSGBPM4yrs4Y
No, the only right that outweighs equal treatment is the right to live.
@8W45RRH4yrs4Y
Yes, but within reason. Protected classes should be expanded to encompass more types of people.
yes, long as the reason for denial isnt due to someone's, race ,gender, belief, or lifestyle
@larionad5yrs5Y
Only if the denial of service is not a hate crime (i.e. refusing to serve any kind of minority).
Join in on more popular conversations.
