Discussion for article #232231
What this case illustrates is nothing more than the foolishness of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Repeal it.
1 Like
Of course, most conservatives would want a Democratically-sponsored law that protects the rights of faithful persons to practice their religion without interference from government to be repealed–if those persons include Muslims. Religious rights are only for Christians, right?
3 Likes
He just doesn’t LOOK like a Muslim [aka terrorist]. If he were dark-skinned I;m positive the outcome would have been much different.
2 Likes
You are in a country that indulges ridiculous fancies and you use it to get 1/2" of facial hair?
If I exercise my rights to religious freedom, the government will be informed that I am a devout Hedonist.
1 Like
He looks like a cousin from Duck Dy[nasty]… how’s a well-intentioned Fox News-tard supposed to profile this guy?
3 Likes
As Ian Millhiser points out in the ThinkProgress.org article on this decision, Justice Ginsberg wrote her own concurring opinion that contains these two sentences:
“Unlike the exemption this Court approved in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.,” Ginsburg explains, “accommodating petitioner’s religious belief in this case would not detrimentally affect others who do not share petitioner’s belief. On that understanding, I join the Court’s opinion.”
6 Likes
IMO, cameras would be invaluable in helping to straighten things out. Nothing would be more earth shattering than The SCOTUS Channel. Judges, especially high ranking ones, live in a fantasy world.
How devout of a hedonist are you if you spend any time typing? Unless you REALLY like it.
I’m glad to see that the great state of Arkansas has no more urgent need for its ressources than fighting a half inch beard all the way up to the Supreme Court, where the 9:0 seems to indicate that the legal question was not all that difficult to solve. It might even have been possible to expect this outcome in advance.
What a happy state Arkansas must be.
4 Likes
Them damned activist judges have done it again!
I believe that is a stock photo.
This applies a narrower law in part covering prisons – RFRA doesn’t apply to the states any more. Religious exemptions for places like prisons make some degree of sense.
Oh great, now we’re under Sharia law. Thanks, John Roberts.
Posting comments at TPM could very well be a pleasurable experience. For example deep sixing a nasty troll with the kind help of the moderators is indeed a pleasurable experience.
1 Like
I have a beard and I don’t practice Sharia Law. jes sayin’.
1 Like
Um what?
RWNJ freakout in 5, 4, 3…
This SC votes 5-4 on everything under the sun, but a freakin’ beard they can agree on. smdh
It’s foolish to want to keep stripping rights and privileges from inmates. I have a friend who was (now retired) a prison guard, and then a parole officer. She told me that inmates are calmer and less likely to cause problems if they have a reasonable amount of activity, entertainment, religion/church, etc. She said that treating inmates decently helped the guards as much as the inmates.
3 Likes