Religious freedom laws don’t justify abortions any more than they excuse child abuse by Matt Lamb for Life Site News
State and federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act laws do not give a broad liberty for someone to evade all laws simply by claiming it violates their religion, or whatever the Satanic Temple is supposed to be.
The ACLU and abortion industry are resorting to a favorite last-ditch effort in an attempt to overturn a pro-life law passed by Indiana’s duly elected representatives.
The pro-abortion legal group wants a judge to rule that the state’s new law, which will shut down all abortion facilities in the state and is expected to eliminate 95 percent of abortions in Indiana, is in violation of the state’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).
Now is your chance to support Gospel News Network.
We love helping others and believe that’s one of the reasons we are chosen as Ambassadors of the Kingdom, to serve God’s children. We look to the Greatest Commandment as our Powering force.
The group filed a lawsuit on September 8 to stop the law, which goes into effect on Thursday.
Planned Parenthood and the Satanic Temple previously tried, and failed, to make the argument that a set of Missouri pro-life laws violated the federal RFRA.
That’s because state and federal RFRA laws do not give a broad liberty for someone to evade all laws simply by claiming it violates their religion, or whatever the Satanic Temple is supposed to be.
RFRA laws, like Indiana’s, state simply: “A governmental entity may substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion only if the governmental entity demonstrates that application of the burden to the person:(1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and (2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.”
Put another way, the government entity has to show there is a good reason for a law and that there is no other way to enforce the law without violating someone’s religious liberty claims.
For example, if someone tried to claim that their religion required them to drive 150 miles per hour on the highway, a judge would likely find that the state must restrict this liberty because there is no other way to ensure safety on the roads than to enforce speed limits.
Continue Reading / Life Site News >>>
