Governor Brewer Vetoes Religious Freedom Bill

Governor Brewer Vetoes Religious Freedom Bill February 26, 2014

Governor Brewer did what everyone expected and vetoed the religious freedom bill.

You can find a video with her explanation here, if you want to see it. I didn’t bother to look at it because I don’t believe that she’s going to tell the truth and I am not in the mood to hear lies. However, I could be wrong. Decide for yourselves.

A group of legal experts wrote the governor a letter concerning this legislation that answers most of the things which have been said about the bill. You can read it here.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"I didn't state that very well, sorry. Nothing wrong with the link, I just couldn't ..."

The Fallout: How to Help Women ..."
"You don't remember Lyndon Johnson doing any such thing because he didn't do any such ..."

Dr Christine Ford in Hiding Because ..."
"I haven't had the opportunity to read the FBI investigation. I'm not in the habit ..."

The Fallout: How to Help Women ..."
"Was there something wrong with the link?"

The Fallout: How to Help Women ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Catholic
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment

4 responses to “Governor Brewer Vetoes Religious Freedom Bill”

  1. I couldn’t find fault with the governor’s statement except I was a little suprised that the first reason given was that the issue wasn’t ripe for Arizona since she didn’t know of any business owners in the state who were claiming a religious freedom violation.

    The opinion from the lawyers said that the law left all decisions about which side was being unfairly burdened up to a court. Each side would have to make a case for why they were the party being unduly burdened, unlike a similar law in Kansas that gave the claim of religious infringement the benefit of the doubt and the suing party had prove their case for undue burden.

    1) I don’t want a court deciding the merits of my religious beliefs in order to have my 1st amendment rights upheld. How would that even look anyway? Plus, that could so easily turn into the appearance of gov. favoring one religion over another if the ss couple were part of a church that approved ssm.

    2) This law sounds like it was written for the benefit of lawyers since there were no standard exemptions or guidelines written into the law and therefore every case would have to be decided on it’s own merits. I think that would work to prevent a business from asserting a right to refuse service since they wouldn’t have any idea in advance how a court might rule. It was a crappy law and I’m glad she vetoed it.

  2. Thanks for posting the letter. We are drafting something here similar (hoping it is similar to AZ). I am glad how they pointed out the differences but not surprised that she vetoed it.

  3. Whether for cynical reasons or not, she did the right thing, and I think it will mark the end of this particular form of madness. Wherever we stand on gay marriage, it’s clear Americans are not interested in reopening the fundamental issues civil rights. We will never go back to the days where “we don’t serve your kind here”, not even for religious reasons.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.