

Rapid Response: Right or wrong call on Arizona religious rights bill?

6:20 PM, Feb. 28, 2014  |  Comments
Demonstrators celebrate in Phoenix after they learn Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer vetoed a bill designed to give added protection from lawsuits to people who assert their religious beliefs in refusing service to gays.
  • Filed Under

Question: Do you think Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer made the right call to veto a bill that would have allowed businesses in her state to refuse service on grounds of religious beliefs? Do you think there is a need for a version of that bill in Indiana?

? Businesses do not have religious beliefs. We must meet in the marketplace - as we expect to be met by our government - in a religiously neutral manner.

Gordon Clark

West Lafayette

? I feel that the bill should have been vetoed, but I also don't want the government telling me how to run my business. It's not good business to discriminate anyway.

Mark Acles


? Arizona has no statewide law to protect anyone LGBT. The bill neither helped not hurt that basic fact. To make the "right call" she would have needed to pass an anti-discrimination law at all. That's what Indiana needs.

Jason Dufair

West Lafayette

? Gov. Brewer's veto is a disappointing capitulation to demagogic lies and special interest bleating. Indiana could use such a statute, because businesses in Oregon, New Mexico and Iowa have been legally targeted by militants for standing up for their religious beliefs.

Bert Chapman


? Where is the Biblical passage that asserts that straights are obliged/permitted/encouraged to practice business discrimination against gays? It's all nonsense on stilts. Hate masquerading as high-minded principle - only without a clear principle. "Mean-spirited Christian" is becoming a redundancy.

Jeff Ridenour


? She made the right call in vetoing a bill to legalize more discrimination. Oh, please, let's not take Indiana any further backward - no, we should not pursue such an embarrassing goal.

Noemi Ybarra


? A private business owner should never be forced to violate his religious conscience if it does no harm to another. A Christian bakery shouldn't be forced to bake a wedding cake with two grooms on top.

John Pickerill


? 1965 called, they want their civil rights issue back.

Tim Delworth

West Lafayette

? There is a need for a similar bill in Indiana that was vetoed in Arizona, but we won't see it for the same reason the marriage amendment was defeated earlier this month. According to opponents, the measure in Arizona and the marriage amendment in Indiana was a license for discrimination, and the Arizona governor and our Indiana state reps bought it hook, line and sinker. In reality, the only thing being discriminated against was the truth. All Senate Bill 1062 did was ensure the government couldn't "force" business owners to violate their religious beliefs. If that's controversial, then so is the First Amendment.

Joe Bell


? Businesses benefit from taxpayers who fund a government that provides the infrastructure that allows them to conduct their business. Therefore, businesses have a duty to treat all patrons equally. If they offer a service to the public, they need to offer it to everyone. If not, we're moving back to the days of Jim Crow laws.

David and Marj Rush Hovde


? Yes, to the first question. As to the second question: There may be some defensible reasons for refusing service on religious grounds, but writing a comprehensive law would require the wisdom of Solomon. Gov. Brewer's statement implied that. Forcing the production of a specifically themed cake would be absurd.

Claire Brigham

West Lafayette

? No. There are way too many situations where the rights of those with strong religious beliefs are being trampled on in the name of civil rights. The nation needs a religious rights bill far more than most people realize.

Carl V. Covely, Jr.

Sheffield Township

? I think we need a national version of that bill, or better, a judiciary that actually respects human rights. No one should ever be compelled to do anything against their will.

Rob Keeney


? Maybe the Tea Party bigots in Arizona are not familiar with the establishment clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution. They may also be unaware of the Civil Rights Act. Word to right wingers, quit trying to disenfranchise and discriminate and pass laws that are constitutional.

Rich Trent


? Yes, she did, and no, we don't. At some point we have to wake up to the fact we can't legislate morality. When you go into business, you open yourself up to the public. Like it or not, you cannot discriminate against your customers and still expect protection under the Constitution.

Dennis Donoho


? The state does not have the constitutional authority to demand that private businesses violate the religious beliefs of their owners. It is unfortunate that legislation protecting the rights of citizens against governmental overreach needs to be codified in today's political atmosphere.

Nate Pfeiffer

Wabash Township

? Gov. Brewer caved to the money instead of sticking to her convictions. Although she probably did what will bring business to her state. That said, I can't help thinking a business owner should be able to serve or not serve anyone they please. It is, after all, their money and effort that started their business. Indiana doesn't need another law. It's time to stop letting others tell business owners how to run their business.

Jon Sexson


? Arizona absolutely did the right thing. I am tired of people using religion to persecute other human beings just because they are different. If you start a business and open the doors to the public, then you expect all kinds of people to enter. You do have certain rights to protect your business and customers from criminal elements, but that is not the issue here. Indiana should not even go there.

Mike Fogleman

West Lafayette

? Yes, it was the right call. I only wish she would have put more emphasis on doing the right thing rather than protecting Arizona's economy and reputation. In Indiana? What kind of "need" would possibly be fulfilled by hateful discrimination?

Jonnie McConnell


? She certainly did the right thing, and it's a prime example of why the veto is a necessary part of our system of government. Such a bill in Indiana would further expose us as intolerant and unwelcoming to retail commerce.

Jerry Hirschinger

West Lafayette

? It was the right thing to do. Indiana does not need more of this kind of stupidity. My only question is why it took Gov. Brewer almost a week to veto it.

Mike Dudgeon


? Absolutely. The bill is legally, financially and morally bankrupt. It has no place in Arizona, Indiana or anywhere other than the ashbin of history.

Frank Arnold


? The question is inaccurate so most answers will be ill informed. The bill she vetoed would have allowed businesses to claim a religious freedom defense against alleged discrimination, without declaring a winner. If Indiana considers a Religious Freedom Restoration Act, it should extend religious freedom defenses to business activities alleged to discriminate.

Roger Bennett


? Absolutely not! She sold out in the name of money and against Christians. When something is so against your religious beliefs one should not be forced to offer services. This is a gross violation of our freedom of religion. A true, Bible-believing Christian can never partake in promoting homosexuality; this would violate one conscious and standing with God. Yes, I feel Indiana would benefit greatly from such a bill. For one thing, a bill such as the Arizona bill would bring blessings from God on our fair state and guarantee the freedom of religion to all Christians. As it is now, I believe I hear jackboots coming off in the distance.

Carolyn Foust


? The Arizona governor did make the right call. The consequences would have been horrendous. It is a reinstatement of Jim Crow. This law is dangerous. It is wrong, and this type of law has no business even being proposed.

Mary Finnegan


? Anyone can post a sign that says, "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone," but, in reality, refusing service based on race, creed, gender, religion or sexual orientation is illegal. Human rights trump personal choices, every single time. It's that simple. If we allowed a law like this, we'd set civil rights back a century.

Scott Schnarr


? Let's skip the religion part and say a couple goes to Ruth's Chris Steak House for weekend dining, wearing cut-offs, a T-shirt, halter-top and flip-flops. Think you are going to get in? Or better yet, show up at Ebony and Ivory Dance with a beer in hand and cigarette hanging out of your mouth. Remember, restaurants' no-smoking policy? Establishments/businesses/owners have their rules, no matter what their reason. If you don't like it, tons of other places to go. Simple as that.

Cliff Davenport


? George Takei, Capt. Sulu from "Star Trek," who grew up in a Japanese Detention Camp in the U.S. says we lost up the right to determine who gets to sit at the lunch counter in the 1960s. Religious bigots who the teacher despised requires a bill in Indiana.

Furman A. Powell


? When did we decide discrimination for any reason was OK? To legislate discrimination is the same as religious persecution, the reason many came to America in the first place. They can take our land and take our lives, but not our freedom. Remember America is freedom.

Ray Faber


? The governor did the right thing, both morally and legally. It would have been successfully challenged as a violation of the Constitution.

Wayne Merriman

West Lafayette

? Easy answer to this one. She made the right call. We have enough bigotry in this country without legislating it.

Harold Williams


? I think the Arizona governor made the right choice. Business should not refuse services on grounds of religious beliefs. We have sons overseas fighting wars and dying for our freedoms. We have other important bills to think of to improve Indiana.

Shelby Branstetter


? Yes. Why in the hell would Indiana want to replicate such a reprehensible and obviously discriminatory law?

Bud Wang


? No business should be forced to give any service or sell any product in a situation that would go against their religious conscience. Gov. Brewer caved to public sentiment. Indiana should fashion a similar bill and proudly pass it.

Tom Haynie


? I'm not the kind of left-wing hater who would force people to violate their faith just to make a point for their own personal satisfaction. But I still wouldn't support a law limiting my freedom to choose either way.

Edward Priest

Battle Ground

? Yes. No.

Eric Thiel

West Lafayette

? From my viewpoint your right to your gayness should not be denied. My right to my religious beliefs should not be compromised, either. You can buy a cake many places without forcing me to violate my convictions. Your rights do not supersede mine, or mine yours. Time to grow up.

E. Lloyd Wells




sign up for home delivery today

Real Deals



Photo Galleries