Religious Freedom Restoration Act

{{law}}
There are several '''Religious Freedom Restoration Acts''' in the [[United States]]. In general, they attempt, under the guise of [[religious freedom]], to restore the right to discriminate against minorities. Most news coverage focuses on what is often the intended purpose of these laws: discrimination against [[LGBT]] communities by [[Christian]]s. However, the laws could effectively allow for other behaviours by other religions.

==Typical provisions==
The following is the meat of the federal RFRA, upon which many state statutes were modeled:

{{cquote|Government may substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion only if it demonstrates that application of the burden to the person—
:(1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and
:(2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.<ref name=rfratext>https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/chapter-21B</ref>}}

This effectively restores the so-called Sherbert test of Sherbert v. Verner. Despite there being very little secret about the intended effect (allowing discrimination against others), this rule (a) is not guaranteed to achieve that effect (in particular, the application of the federal version to state laws was struck as unconstitutional, with its application to federal law standing as a rule of construction) and (b) can lead to some other undesired effects (see below).

==Indiana doesn't want me==
[[Indiana]]'s 2015 law — largely a brainchild of then-governor and former vice president [[Mike Pence]] — of this name has brought the existence of such acts into the limelight, and has brought on something of a backlash, with a looming boycott<ref>[http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-32094331 Indiana boycott urged after 'religious freedom' law passes]</ref> causing the state of [[Georgia]] to reconsider passing its own version of the law.<ref>[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/30/georgia-religious-freedom_n_6969608.html Georgia House Committee Cancels Meeting On 'Religious Freedom' Bill]</ref> The Governor of Connecticut has banned state-funded travel to Indiana, even though [[Connecticut]] has its own RFRA law; the crucial difference is that Connecticut also has a law protecting minorities from discrimination.<ref>[http://www.indystar.com/story/news/politics/2015/03/30/rfra-prompts-connecticut-governor-issue-order-travel-indiana/70674826/ RFRA prompts Connecticut governor to issue order about travel to Indiana]</ref> This has all led to a certain amount of backpedalling in Indiana, with "clarification" of the law's reach in the works.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/31/us/indiana-legislators-say-theyll-clarify-beliefs-law.html Indiana Legislators Say They’ll Clarify Beliefs Law]</ref> Meanwhile, over at the department of unintended consequences, the First Church of [[Cannabis]] has plans to make merry in the Hoosier state.<ref>What does "hoosier" mean anyway?</ref><ref>[http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/03/30/indiana-religious-freedom-law-unwittingly-ushers-in-first-church-of-cannabis-for-weed-worshipers/ Indiana religious freedom law unwittingly ushers in first church of cannabis for weed worshipers]</ref>

==See also==
*[[Religious freedom]]

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Government incompetence]]
[[Category:Homophobia]]
[[Category:LGBT]]
[[Category:Misnomers]]
[[Category:Religion]]
[[Category:Transphobia]]

Categories: Government incompetence, Homophobia, LGBT, Misnomers, Religion, Transphobia