TAMMY BRUCE: REACTION OF FASCIST LGBT ACTIVISTS ANTITHESIS OF WHAT EVERY CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT WAS ABOUT
TAMMY BRUCE, RADIO HOST: “I say to every other gay person out there, especially young people: For you to turn into what we have been fighting against for generations. My activism began with Act Up, which was gay group dealing with AIDS issues in the 80s.
For me to turn around in the 21st century and see that this is what we were fighting for, so we could condemn people who were different, and with whom we disagree, it is the antithesis of what every civil rights movement was about.” (Please view the entire video:)
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/04/02/tammy_bruce_reaction_of_fascist_lgbt_activists_antithesis_of_what_every_civil_rights_movement_was_about.html
What IS the Indiana Religious Freedom law that has everyone all stirred up? (from the Minnesota Family Council)
It’s fairly simple, really: Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) sets a standard that state government must follow when dealing with cases that involve religious freedom. The government must demonstrate that it has a “compelling interest” to get involved, and then, if a remedy is called for, it must use the “least restrictive” solution.
“Compelling interest” and “least restrictive” are words of art in the legal profession. The law sets a high bar to get involved and a low bar for any solution. That’s it.
It does not give anyone a “license” to do anything. It does not say what the outcome of challenges should be. It does offer similar protections to what’s already in federal law.
In fact, the federal RFRA has been in place since 1993, signed into law by President Bill Clinton. That law passed the U.S. House and U.S. Senate nearly unanimously. 19 other states already had RFRA’s in place before Indiana.
President Obama, when serving as an Illinois state senator, voted for Illinois’ RFRA…twice.
President Clinton said this about the federal RFRA when he signed it into law:
“What this law basically says is that the Government should be held to a very high level of proof before it interferes with someone’s free exercise of religion. This judgment is shared by the people of the United States as well as by the Congress. We believe strongly that we can never, we can never be too vigilant in this work.”
Filed under: American Culture, Conservatism, Gay Fascism, Intolerance, Marriage, The Press | Leave a comment »