Well that was fast. The Politically Correct Lobby stared down Governor Pence, motivating him to issue a clarification and urge a new bill.
Indiana Gov. Mike Pence said Tuesday he wants a bill by the end of this week clarifying that the state’s new religious freedom law doesn’t allow businesses to deny services to gays and lesbians.
In other words, he wants a clarification that the law doesn’t really protect anything at all. In other words, he wants to be very clear this time: the government will punish those who do not abide by the will of the cultural elite. The law, apparently “doesn’t allow business” to make decisions and judgements with their own property. It is market decisions by government fiat, which means it is not a market decision.
Mr. Pence, a Republican, was asked on ABC’s “This Week” on Sunday in seven different ways whether the law would allow business owners to discriminate against gays by citing their religious beliefs.
As I stated previously, this mischaracterizes the root of the problem. And as Ron Paul recently said on this issue, this law is a result of too many laws previous. There should be no law needed at all because the presumption should be that a business owner as the legal authority to make these decisions; no customer has a “right” to the goods and services of another. Ron Paul states that it is misleading when the Left calls them rights at all. Rather, they should be called “demands.” They law “allows” business owners to discriminate (a controversy-loaded word which should actually just be “choose”) based on their religious beliefs. This makes the issue appear as if the great battle is between “religious views” and the LGBT community.
In reality, the principle on which this law stands should encourage a much broader admittance of the rights of business owners. In other words, the principle is not that religious beliefs should allow one to choose his own customers, but instead the principle is that private property should allow one to choose his own customers based on anything he wants, including religion, political ideology, etc. Indeed, the business owner should have the right to deny service to 23 year olds because the sky is blue and it is Tuesday. It really doesn’t matter his rationale because he owns the property! Chris Rossini makes an excellent point on this subject:
One company that has a problem with the law is Angie’s List, and to show its dissatisfaction, the company is nixing plans to build a $40 million headquarters in Indianapolis.
Isn’t that interesting….
…and isn’t that discrimination?
Apparently Angie’s List has the “freedom” to notassociate with a state (and its inhabitants) that it doesn’t want to associate with. It will instead choose to associate with another state (and its inhabitants). Their discriminatory act will cost many jobs, and is a vengeful move to hurt individuals financially?
Where are all the chants against Angie’s List?
States Pence, from the WSJ article:
“We do have language that we’re working on. I’m frankly working with members of the business community and civic leaders of a variety of groups to be sure the language we’re working on everyone can stand together and say, ‘Yes, this does the job,’” he said. “I think it is critical we make a crystal clear fix to the bill that just absolutely answers the question it does not allow discrimination.”
“It does not allow discrimination.”
That is to say, it does not allow business owners to make decisions. Rather, upon threat of government coercion, the business will Do As They Are Told. Or else.