Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: 19 states that have ‘religious freedom’ laws like Indiana’s that no one is boycotting [View all]NutmegYankee
(16,483 posts)26. The difference is Connecticut has strong GLBT protections written into law.
And with the exception of employment and internal rules in religious organizations, they apply broadly including in public accommodations.
Sec. 46a-81d. Sexual orientation discrimination: Public accommodations. (a) It shall be a discriminatory practice in violation of this section: (1) To deny any person within the jurisdiction of this state full and equal accommodations in any place of public accommodation, resort or amusement because of such persons sexual orientation or civil union status, subject only to the conditions and limitations established by law and applicable alike to all persons; or (2) to discriminate, segregate or separate on account of sexual orientation or civil union status.
(b) Any person who violates any provision of this section shall be guilty of a class D misdemeanor.
(b) Any person who violates any provision of this section shall be guilty of a class D misdemeanor.
Sec. 46a-63. Discriminatory public accommodation practices: Definitions. As used in this chapter:
(1) Place of public accommodation, resort or amusement means any establishment which caters or offers its services or facilities or goods to the general public, including, but not limited to, any commercial property or building lot, on which it is intended that a commercial building will be constructed or offered for sale or rent;
(1) Place of public accommodation, resort or amusement means any establishment which caters or offers its services or facilities or goods to the general public, including, but not limited to, any commercial property or building lot, on which it is intended that a commercial building will be constructed or offered for sale or rent;
Sec. 46a-64. (Formerly Sec. 53-35). Discriminatory public accommodations practices prohibited. Penalty. (a) It shall be a discriminatory practice in violation of this section: (1) To deny any person within the jurisdiction of this state full and equal accommodations in any place of public accommodation, resort or amusement because of race, creed, color, national origin, ancestry, sex, gender identity or expression, marital status, age, lawful source of income, intellectual disability, mental disability or physical disability, including, but not limited to, blindness or deafness of the applicant, subject only to the conditions and limitations established by law and applicable alike to all persons; (2) to discriminate, segregate or separate on account of race, creed, color, national origin, ancestry, sex, gender identity or expression, marital status, age, lawful source of income, intellectual disability, mental disability, learning disability or physical disability, including, but not limited to, blindness or deafness; (3) for a place of public accommodation, resort or amusement to restrict or limit the right of a mother to breast-feed her child; (4) for a place of public accommodation, resort or amusement to fail or refuse to post a notice, in a conspicuous place, that any blind, deaf or mobility impaired person, accompanied by his guide dog wearing a harness or an orange-colored leash and collar, may enter such premises or facilities; or (5) to deny any blind, deaf or mobility impaired person or any person training a dog as a guide dog for a blind person or a dog to assist a deaf or mobility impaired person, accompanied by his guide dog or assistance dog, full and equal access to any place of public accommodation, resort or amusement. Any blind, deaf or mobility impaired person or any person training a dog as a guide dog for a blind person or a dog to assist a deaf or mobility impaired person may keep his guide dog or assistance dog with him at all times in such place of public accommodation, resort or amusement at no extra charge, provided the dog wears a harness or an orange-colored leash and collar and is in the direct custody of such person. The blind, deaf or mobility impaired person or person training a dog as a guide dog for a blind person or a dog to assist a deaf or mobility impaired person shall be liable for any damage done to the premises or facilities by his dog. For purposes of this subdivision, guide dog or assistance dog includes a dog being trained as a guide dog or assistance dog and person training a dog as a guide dog for a blind person or a dog to assist a deaf or mobility impaired person means a person who is employed by and authorized to engage in designated training activities by a guide dog organization or assistance dog organization that complies with the criteria for membership in a professional association of guide dog or assistance dog schools and who carries photographic identification indicating such employment and authorization.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
63 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
19 states that have ‘religious freedom’ laws like Indiana’s that no one is boycotting [View all]
B2G
Mar 2015
OP
20 wrongs do not make a right, good to see the mass media is waking up, even if unintentionally.
Fred Sanders
Mar 2015
#1
The federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act was introduced by Chuck Schumer...
PoliticAverse
Mar 2015
#4
It's especially silly for cake makers since all they have to do is change out a bride or groom.
PoliticAverse
Mar 2015
#23
The reasons for the Federal law (which does not permit discrimination) were legal disputes involving
Bluenorthwest
Mar 2015
#24
The main purpose of RFRA was to protect Native American religious practices
The Velveteen Ocelot
Mar 2015
#27
For me, I loathe religion. I think it's the greatest pestilence even unleashed on mankind! One has
RKP5637
Mar 2015
#8
I don't see much of a difference between abolishing religion and abolishing atheism.
stone space
Mar 2015
#52
Out of all those states, Arizona, Idaho and Virginia are the only ones I've visited.
nomorenomore08
Mar 2015
#14
Actually, there are big differences. The federal act's intent was to protect specific religious
Luminous Animal
Mar 2015
#60
The difference is Connecticut has strong GLBT protections written into law.
NutmegYankee
Mar 2015
#26
This section allows any current Indiana law to be challenged for religious reasons.
LiberalFighter
Mar 2015
#47