Ranting On...the Backwards Beliefs of Mike Pence

Gov. Mike Pence (R-IN)

I don't always agree with certain politicians, but I usually understand their point-of-view.  That wasn't the case this past week with both a decision that Indiana Gov. Mike Pence made regarding religious freedom laws and his dragging-his-nails decision regarding needle-exchange programs, and I thought if ever there was a reason for a rant, this was it (plus, it fits nicely with the focus this past week on the blog regarding Indiana politics).

For those of you unfamiliar, the governor signed a religious freedom bill that could allow businesses to reject gay/lesbian/transgender customers in their stores based on their own personal beliefs.  While there are multiple ways that one could interpret the religious freedom bill, that's really what it's boiling down to, and from almost every standpoint I just don't understand how someone could think this is a good idea.  For starters, it's clearly legalized discrimination-the reality is that if someone comes into your shop or building, wants to pay you for a service, you shouldn't be able to say 'no' to them because of whose hand they happen to be holding while they are buying the product.  For me this is complete and utter common sense.  It is literally the EXACT same thing as telling someone who is black or a woman or older or unmarried or Christian that they don't have the right to purchase something because of who they are.  The only time that someone should be refused a service is if there is a potential public safety risk, such as a 12-year-old buying cigarettes or a convict trying to buy a gun.  There is no safety risk in selling any services to someone just because they are gay, and as a result it's just being discriminatory.

This is wrong for many reasons, but the reality is that religion should not be a reason to justify discrimination, and since it is the last card left in the anti-gay marriage/anti-gay rights deck of arguments, I think someone needs to say that out-loud: Freedom of Religion is a freedom for you to practice your religion.  That's it.  Whether you want to be Catholic or Baptist or an Atheist or a Belieber, it's up to you, but that's where it ends.  You can say anything that you want about other people's lifestyles, but you shouldn't be able to hinder their freedom.  That's what this really is all about.  Your freedom of religion doesn't extend to my freedom, end of story.  And that means you cannot decide whom I should be able to marry in a state-sanctioned marital ceremony.  You can say "not in my church" since that falls under Freedom of Religion but you cannot say that I can't get married, and you cannot legally deny me a right to a florist or a caterer or a photographer-that's discrimination, and it's wrong.  It's that simple, and also just because you use religion as a shield card doesn't stop you from being a bigot.  Religion is not a get out of being a homophobe free card, and I say this as a gay man who regularly attends Catholic services.  Decisions in life are not easy, but the law shouldn't be encumbered because you don't want to make difficult moral choices.

The other part is that I don't get why this is the avenue that Republicans want to take against the gay rights movement.  Of all of the ways to attack gay people, the best you can come up with is the free market?  The capitalistic business model that you worship as the be-all, end-all solution to why the government shouldn't be anything more than a sea of tanks and a couple of embassies?  That's the weirdest thing about this-why would you want to hinder businesses making more money?  Why would businesses want to hinder growth and the ability to pay the bills?  You see most companies are bending over backward to try and attract new gay clientele. Every major corporation in America (well, 98% of them-Chick Fil-A and Hobby Lobby need not apply) is trying to shore up gay dollars and loyalties because they are a new and emerging market, which is not only great for business, it's kind of the fun part about being in business.  Hindering growth in states like Indiana is going to potentially have new companies questioning expansion or moving into your state, which is awful for your state's economy (as there is no state with zero-unemployment, least of all Indiana which was still has one of the higher unemployment rates in the country).

Finally, before I exit, I do want to say something about the Scott County needle exchange program.  For starters, while I think he took too long and isn't doing enough, Mike Pence made the right decision to try and curb the frighteningly high increase in HIV-infections in the county due to needle-sharing.  The reality is that needle-exchange is just one of many programs that we need to institute to try and curb HIV-infection amongst intravenous drug users.  We also need to get to the root of the problem (drug suppliers, addiction treatment), as well as increase awareness through HIV-testing, and hopefully, work to find a cure to a disease that has ravaged communities for decades.  Throwing in the towel when your state starts seeing insanely above-normal HIV-infection rates and doing it with the authenticity of a five-year-old sharing her toys: not really a step in the right direction.