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

Showing Original Post only (View all)

proud2BlibKansan

(96,793 posts)
Mon Jun 11, 2012, 11:17 AM Jun 2012

North Dakota votes on a 'religious freedom' amendment tomorrow [View all]

Government may not burden a person's or religious organization's religious liberty. The right to act or refuse to act in a manner motivated by a sincerely held religious belief may not be burdened unless the government proves it has a compelling governmental interest in infringing the specific act or refusal to act and has used the least restrictive means to further that interest. A burden includes indirect burdens such as withholding benefits, assessing penalties, or an exclusion from programs or access to facilities.
http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/North_Dakota_Religious_Freedom_Amendment,_Measure_3_(June_2012)


Does this mean a man can marry a 12 year old girl because his religion says that's okay?

And of course, it authorizes bullying gays.

What about an unmarried pregnant woman? Could her boss now legally fire her for being pregnant and unwed?

What about women who use birth control pills?

This shit is getting ridiculous.

20 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»North Dakota votes on a '...