FFRF’s Anti-RFRA Ad in NYT

How’s that for an acronym-filled headline? The Freedom From Religion foundation is taking out a full-page ad in the New York Times about the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act and its many state-level copies. The ad argues, quite correctly, that RFRA is unconstitutional. Full ad below the fold.

No Hate in any State Ad Web

"How about written accounts by three women (and a witness of one of these rapes ..."

Trump’s Blatant Hypocrisy on Sexual Harassment
"Wow, how do you sign up to be in the Illuminati? Powerful enough to direct ..."

Taylor: The Illuminati Sent the Hurricanes ..."
"Not so much special as rich and famous enough to be able to get away ..."

Trump’s Blatant Hypocrisy on Sexual Harassment
"In grudging fairness the fact that taking her flak jacket off would've woken her and ..."

Trump’s Blatant Hypocrisy on Sexual Harassment

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • dingojack

    I wouldn’t have mentioned Atheists and Agnostics.

    That is all.


  • tomh

    @ #1

    I agree. The sentence reads better without it.

  • Synfandel

    Yes, that last sentence did tend to undermine the message. The ad made a broad appeal on universal principles and then finished by getting all exclusive.

  • david

    Running the ad in the NY Times seems like preaching to the choir (pardon the metaphor). Maybe it would better target the people who need to see it, in the WSJ, which is currently running a editorial titled “Liberal Intolerance,” arguing in favor of RFRAs.

  • grumpyoldfart

    My prediction: RFRA will not be repealed.

    The church has got a foot in the door and now it will just keep on pushing…

  • Childermass

    Take the federal law, amend it to make it clear that it applied to individuals and not corporations and that it shall not be interpreted to allow one person to oppress another in the name of their beliefs and I would support it. Heck add some basic protections for ethnic cultures as well. The idea that the law needs to comedown like a ton of bricks on people who are different from the majority is something that need to be curbed.

    People might also consider using these laws when someone in government tries to use government power to ram a religion down someone’s throat.

  • StevoR

    Ad looks great to me. As far as not mentioning atheists and agnostics goes I can see why they’ve done it there and it may be misleading if they didn’t.

  • tomh

    @ #7

    There are plenty of people who are not atheists or agnostics, yet support separation of church and state. Some of them may even support the FFRF.

  • StevoR

    @^ tomh : Ok, yeah that is a good point. Maybe should’ve altered wording there after all.

  • raven

    The head of Americans United for Separation of Church and State is a Methodist minister.

    A lot of xians saw what happened in Europe. State churches. And a dead religion.

    You can set up a state religion very easily. And watch it die. People may have to pay tax money to it but they don’t have to believe it. And they don’t like religion being forced on them.