Re: The Religious Freedom Act currently under fire in Indiana: did you know . . . . . .

Did you know that 19 other states have the same law;  that Obama voted for this law while an Illinois State Senator;  that Eric Holder and the DOJ has defended this law in the recent past; that the Illinois law is patterned after the law signed by Bill Clinton in 1993;  that the bill does not allow discrimination for the sake of religious conscience, but only allows a defense in a court for reason of religious conscience.  Our courts may choose to ignore that argument and charge the "offending parties" with discrimination,  anyway.  Without this law,  the offending parties cannot refer to their religious conscience, at all.     Of course.  Obama and the Left do not have a religious conscience,  so what do they care?

So why the attack on Governor Mike Pence?  He may be a GOP presidential candidate and needs to be "taken out."  There is no other reason   . . . . . . .    period.
_________________________

PENCE: “I think it is explained by the fact this [law]  was grossly mischaracterized by advocates who oppose the bill and quite frankly from sloppy reporting for the first several days, so I really do believe that. I mean look, if I read some of the stuff about this bill, I would have had the same concern millions of Hoosiers had and people across the country have had. It just isn’t so. When President Clinton signed the bill in 1993 they said the Religious Freedom Restoration Act was the most important legislation considered by Congress since the First Amendment was approved. When state senator Barack Obama voted for this bill in Illinois, it was with broad, bipartisan support. One of the great pieces of legislative history of religious freedom restoration act is it is a way of bringing people together, consensus.

from National Review: 

Last week, Governor Mike Pence of Indiana signed into law the Indiana Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). Almost immediately, an uproar ensued, claiming that the law was discriminatory — that it provided a license for businesses to discriminate against gay and lesbian customers. Entirely lost in this kerfuffle has been the simple fact that the Indiana law is modeled on the 1993 federal law of the same name, and that counterparts have been adopted in 19 other states. Further, four federal courts of appeals and the Obama Justice Department have all taken the position that RFRA can be used as a defense in private suits involving the enforcement of laws that substantially burden free exercise of religion. Important debates over the intersection of faith and equality are impaired when they are overtaken by misguided rhetoric, rather than being informed by the history and context of how our legal system has treated this issue.