# What exactly did the Indiana GOP \*think\* was going to happen when they passed this anti-gay law? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 30, 2015, 11:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-did-the-indiana-gop-think-was-going-to-happen-when-they-passed-this-anti-gay-law/716378 "2015-03-30T23:44:34Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 18
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2015, 2:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-did-the-indiana-gop-think-was-going-to-happen-when-they-passed-this-anti-gay-law/716378/341 "2015-04-04T14:45:58Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Now $842,000 in two days. Again, I congratulate you on your victory. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2015, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-did-the-indiana-gop-think-was-going-to-happen-when-they-passed-this-anti-gay-law/716378/342 "2015-04-04T15:29:15Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No – I’m saying that I’m confident that not a one of them believed the Declaration aspired to authorize same-sex marriage. So you think it’s something they considered and discussed and had activity on, that they could reach this belief? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2015, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-did-the-indiana-gop-think-was-going-to-happen-when-they-passed-this-anti-gay-law/716378/343 "2015-04-04T15:34:25Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > So you think it’s something they considered and discussed and had activity on, that they could reach this belief? Why would they have had to discuss it? ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2015, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-did-the-indiana-gop-think-was-going-to-happen-when-they-passed-this-anti-gay-law/716378/344 "2015-04-04T16:37:09Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Look, when the subject is global climate change, or evolution, much hay is made from the fact that opponents to these positions deny and falsify factual information. And rightly so. Evolution is as certain a theory as gravity; climate change is undeniably occurring. Those who obstinately deny it and fight back with factually false claims deserve to have those claims debunked and a light shone upon the truth. > > Now, is that commitment to truth limited to areas in which it benefits you? > > Or are you willing to also acknowledge the facts when they are not all that helpful? The problem is that, barring a declaration from a court case, the law is not something that has fixed truths. It has interpretations. Heck, even in court cases, the result is called an opinion. It’s perfectly legitimate for you to argue your interpretation of the law, citing court cases and all that. But to move from there to an established truth while people are still disagreeing with you is a step too far. You have made legal arguments on this board in the past that you indicated you were very sure of, and then they turned out to be wrong. Now, I’m not saying you’re wrong this time. But we’re not remotely at the level of truth of evolution or global warming. We’re not dealing with science here. It is perfectly possible for people to look at your arguments and your evidence, and conclude that you are mistaken. Now, if you were to find that 95% of all lawyers agreed with your interpretation, like with evolution and climate change, then we’d have another story. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2015, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-did-the-indiana-gop-think-was-going-to-happen-when-they-passed-this-anti-gay-law/716378/345 "2015-04-04T16:41:25Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Now $842,000 in two days. Please stop gloating about this. It only makes it look like you actually are pro-homophobia, and puts your legal analysis into question. That’s the message being communicated when people say “Congratulations” to you. ---
**Author:** ![Munch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/munch/32/5281_2.png) [@Munch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Munch)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2015, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-did-the-indiana-gop-think-was-going-to-happen-when-they-passed-this-anti-gay-law/716378/346 "2015-04-04T16:47:33Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > It’s an interesting effect: law passes that is materially no different from federal law and many other state laws; left-wingers cry foul and support their case with false claims; bystanders believe false claims and are outraged; bigots believe claims and are pleased; both react in accord thereto. I will take issue with this characterization. If you’re going to point out that left-wingers supported their case with false claims, you cannot leave out the fact that right-wingers (including the author of the bill) supported their case with equally false claims. Or that supporters that Pence chose to stand behind him as he signed the bill into law believe that if SB 50 - the new law being discussed to “clarify” SB 101 - is enacted, then “Christian bakers, florists and photographers would now be forced by the government to participate in a homosexual wedding or else they would be punished by the government”. And it’s odd that you limit the outcry to just left-wingers. Both the Indianapolis and Indiana Chambers of Commerce have come out in vocal opposition of the law, and both are considerably conservative. Ditto Indianapolis Mayor Greg Ballard. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2015, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-did-the-indiana-gop-think-was-going-to-happen-when-they-passed-this-anti-gay-law/716378/347 "2015-04-04T16:57:22Z")
> [@Munch](#): > > And it’s odd that you limit the outcry to just left-wingers. Both the Indianapolis and Indiana Chambers of Commerce have come out in vocal opposition of the law, and both are considerably conservative. Ditto Indianapolis Mayor Greg Ballard. [Arnold Schwarzenegger Blasts Indiana’s Anti-Gay Law](http://www.people.com/article/arnold-schwarzenegger-blasts-religious-freedom-laws) ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2015, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-did-the-indiana-gop-think-was-going-to-happen-when-they-passed-this-anti-gay-law/716378/348 "2015-04-04T17:06:47Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > Please stop gloating about this. It only makes it look like you actually are pro-homophobia, and puts your legal analysis into question. > > That’s the message being communicated when people say “Congratulations” to you. Now, now. Don’t take away his one salve. A state just got hammered with the threat of billions in lost commerce for their conservative religious bigotry, and capitulated as a result. The one thing he has to sooth the pain is that a bunch of conservative bigots could give one other bigot a million bucks. So that’s a victory, I guess. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2015, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-did-the-indiana-gop-think-was-going-to-happen-when-they-passed-this-anti-gay-law/716378/349 "2015-04-04T18:24:16Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > Now, now. Don’t take away his one salve. A state just got hammered with the threat of billions in lost commerce for their conservative religious bigotry, and capitulated as a result. The one thing he has to sooth the pain is that a bunch of conservative bigots could give one other bigot a million bucks. So that’s a victory, I guess. I’m sure the next bigot will get a million bucks, too! There’s no way this can fail! ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2015, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-did-the-indiana-gop-think-was-going-to-happen-when-they-passed-this-anti-gay-law/716378/350 "2015-04-04T18:35:19Z")
> [@Munch](#): > > I will take issue with this characterization. If you’re going to point out that left-wingers supported their case with false claims, you cannot leave out the fact that right-wingers (including the author of the bill) supported their case with equally false claims. Indeed, and this is key: whatever false claims left-wingers have made about the effects of the law have been based on trusting the writers of the law that it would do what they said it would do. Blaming liberals for believing the law’s designers and holding liberals primarily accountable for false narratives of the law’s effect is extraordinarily unfair. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2015, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-did-the-indiana-gop-think-was-going-to-happen-when-they-passed-this-anti-gay-law/716378/351 "2015-04-04T18:38:02Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > Indeed, and this is key: whatever false claims left-wingers have made about the effects of the law have been based on trusting the writers of the law that it would do what they said it would do. Blaming liberals for believing the law’s designers and holding liberals primarily accountable for false narratives of the law’s effect is extraordinarily unfair. But pizza people are making bank, therefore his side is winning. Ours is not to reason why. Ours is just to point and laugh. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2015, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-did-the-indiana-gop-think-was-going-to-happen-when-they-passed-this-anti-gay-law/716378/352 "2015-04-04T18:45:17Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > Please stop gloating about this. It only makes it look like you actually are pro-homophobia, and puts your legal analysis into question. > > That’s the message being communicated when people say “Congratulations” to you. That’s an interesting view. My analysis is correct because I’m not pro-homophobia, and if it turns out I am pro-homophobia, then my analysis becomes wrong? How about this whacky idea: my analysis is correct based on the fact that it accurately states the law, and would be correct even if offered up by Nelson Mandela, Learned Hand, or JoJo the Dog Boy. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2015, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-did-the-indiana-gop-think-was-going-to-happen-when-they-passed-this-anti-gay-law/716378/353 "2015-04-04T18:47:15Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > So you think it’s something they considered and discussed and had activity on, that they could reach this belief? No, I think it was such a far-fetched idea that no one even discussed it. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2015, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-did-the-indiana-gop-think-was-going-to-happen-when-they-passed-this-anti-gay-law/716378/354 "2015-04-04T19:12:28Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > But pizza people are making bank, therefore his side is winning. Ours is not to reason why. Ours is just to point and laugh. Well, one pizza person. And it wasn’t pizza that got him a million bucks. It was the bigotry. Pizza was incidental. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2015, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-did-the-indiana-gop-think-was-going-to-happen-when-they-passed-this-anti-gay-law/716378/355 "2015-04-04T19:15:46Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > Well, one pizza person. And it wasn’t pizza that got him a million bucks. It was the bigotry. Pizza was incidental. Sorry, I should have capitalized. The Pizza People are making bank… ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2015, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-did-the-indiana-gop-think-was-going-to-happen-when-they-passed-this-anti-gay-law/716378/356 "2015-04-04T19:49:19Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > That’s an interesting view. My analysis is correct because I’m not pro-homophobia, and if it turns out I am pro-homophobia, then my analysis becomes wrong? > > How about this whacky idea: my analysis is correct based on the fact that it accurately states the law, and would be correct even if offered up by Nelson Mandela, Learned Hand, or JoJo the Dog Boy. So, Bricker- it the Indiana law is essentially the same as Federal law, then what was the purpose of passing it? 😕 ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2015, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-did-the-indiana-gop-think-was-going-to-happen-when-they-passed-this-anti-gay-law/716378/357 "2015-04-04T19:59:14Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > So, Bricker- it the Indiana law is essentially the same as Federal law, then what was the purpose of passing it? 😕 IF the Indiana law is essentially the same as the Federal law, the purpose of passing it would be because SCOTUS ruled that the federal RFRA does NOT apply to the state governments. Note that my posting this does not indicate that I share **Bricker** ’s naivete (or disingenuity) about the motives of the Republican legislators who passed it… ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2015, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-did-the-indiana-gop-think-was-going-to-happen-when-they-passed-this-anti-gay-law/716378/358 "2015-04-04T20:05:40Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > So, Bricker- it the Indiana law is essentially the same as Federal law, then what was the purpose of passing it? 😕 I see that you haven’t read this thread, because I have answered this question at least twice previously. The federal RFRA’s text makes it applicable to both the states and the federal government, but the Supreme Court decided, in a case called _City of Bourne v. Flores_, that Congress had no authority to bind states with this requirement. So the federal RFRA does not apply to state laws. If a state wants the same effect for its laws as the federal RFRA provides for federal laws, then it must pass its own, state version, which 20-some states have done. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2015, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-did-the-indiana-gop-think-was-going-to-happen-when-they-passed-this-anti-gay-law/716378/359 "2015-04-04T20:07:41Z")
> [@jayjay](#): > > IF the Indiana law is essentially the same as the Federal law, the purpose of passing it would be because SCOTUS ruled that the federal RFRA does NOT apply to the state governments. > > Note that my posting this does not indicate that I share **Bricker** ’s naivete (or disingenuity) about the motives of the Republican legislators who passed it… I don’t dispute the motives of many of the legislators who voted for it. But. Don’t care about the motives. Care about the actual effect of the law. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2015, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-did-the-indiana-gop-think-was-going-to-happen-when-they-passed-this-anti-gay-law/716378/360 "2015-04-04T20:10:24Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I see that you haven’t read this thread, because I have answered this question at least twice previously. > > The federal RFRA’s text makes it applicable to both the states and the federal government, but the Supreme Court decided, in a case called _City of Bourne v. Flores_, that Congress had no authority to bind states with this requirement. So the federal RFRA does not apply to state laws. If a state wants the same effect for its laws as the federal RFRA provides for federal laws, then it must pass its own, state version, which 20-some states have done. Yes, but I am a old dude and it’s like a zillion posts and I forgot. But thanks! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-did-the-indiana-gop-think-was-going-to-happen-when-they-passed-this-anti-gay-law/716378.md?page=17) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-did-the-indiana-gop-think-was-going-to-happen-when-they-passed-this-anti-gay-law/716378.md?page=19)