| ▲ | 1659447091 21 hours ago | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
They bring Religion Freedom lawsuits over sacred sites involving federal land (which the RFRA is a federal law) and keep losing. What is the problem here? That they exercise the same right all Americans have to use a federal law to challenge the federal government (because federal land) to not "substantial burden" their religious freedom? Thats the whole point(major point) of how this country was founded, religious freedom from the government. It's one of the more good faith uses of a law that has been weaponized against minorities. And they keep losing anyway, it has to be the weakest issues in this pro-BAAJA promotion campaign -- which should make others question how the rest of it holds up as well | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | whimsicalism 9 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
My point is that this is not native sovereign land and BAJAA is more about clearing away the numerous types of lawsuits that all sorts of groups can bring that hamstring development in federal lands. The RFRA case is one such type of lawsuit, although not impacted by BAJAA (too bad, the RFRA is a terrible law in my veiw). > Thats the whole point(major point) of how this country was founded, religious freedom from the government. I would be very happy if we repealed the RFRA and returned to the well established case law for fundamental 1st amendment protections. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | consensus1 18 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
What about my religious freedom to not give a shit about their primitive superstitions and what land they consider sacred? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||