Indiana's New Law and Why it Was Necessary

As you know by now, Indiana just passed a law and here is the digest:

"Religious freedom restoration. Prohibits a governmental entity from substantially burdening a person's exercise of religion, even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, unless the governmental entity can demonstrate that the burden: (1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and (2) is the least restrictive means of furthering the compelling governmental interest. Provides a procedure for remedying a violation. Specifies that the religious freedom law applies to the implementation or application of a law regardless of whether the state or any other governmental entity or official is a party to a proceeding implementing or applying the law. Prohibits an applicant, employee, or former employee from pursuing certain causes of action against a private employer."

I thought we already had a law that said that... it's in the Bill of Rights.

But anyways, this takes it a bit farther by defining religious freedoms more broadly. Now it doesn't have to be an act of congress, so, yay! Government won't be preventing anyone from following their religion. Everyone should be on board! Right? 

Well, It got a lot of people up in arms and excited, and that resulted in Facebookers getting a little distracted by ideologies and argument rather than the substance of the law itself. I think that a lot of people only heard from Facebook what this law was and immediately started typing away.
Anger>logic.
"This paves the way for discrimination!" "Jesus would bake cakes for anyone!" "I bet you would like to see Civil Rights repealed too!" (I literally heard variations of all of these)

Woah! Hold on. So, you actually believe that Christians refuse to serve gays? AND That makes them racist? False and Non sequitur. Maybe one Christian refused to serve one homosexual out in the sticks somewhere, but I'm sure an Atheist refused to serve a homosexual somewhere too. ANYWAYS! 

Christians do not refuse to serve gays.

Christians should be loving and kind and to follow the example that Jesus gave to us. That means serving everyone. Not just in a business sense, but also being a servant to anyone who needs it in their daily walks. Ministering means to serve, and it is something that all Christians should do for orphans, widows (James 1), poor, crippled, blind, lame (Luke 14), tax collectors and sinners (Mark 2), and the list goes on. These are the worst people the Bible had to offer to us, and we are told to serve them. "The greatest among you shall be your servant." (Matt 23:11) In a business sense, we would not have a business if we refused to serve anyone who commits sin on a regular basis. Nor would we be able to do business with anyone. In I Cor 10, we are instructed to eat with unbelievers and buy in the (pagan at the time) markets if we want to. Also, we shouldn't ask questions about how the meal was prepared (or sacrificed) so that we don't have internal conflict over what we are eating. I could go off on a tangent here, but let us stay on topic.

My Stance on the Homosexual Marriage Debate.

I believe two adults who think that they are ready to spend their lives together should be able to do that without getting permission from the government and paying an extra tax to do so, especially if they plan on having a ceremony about it. People should be able to have a ceremony without saying "mother may I" to the government. Politically, I don't get involved in this debate arguing that homosexuals shouldn't get married. I don't think that homosexuals should get married, but I don't think that it should be illegal. This is much like I don't think you should ride without a helmet, but I don't think it should be illegal. Why?

Because Yeshua (Jesus) did not attack the Roman government trying to get them to legislate Christianity. 

Because every government that has decided to get involved in religion has ended in totalitarian rule (England, Rome, Early Puritan settlements, Christendom).

Because I don't want government deciding what sin is. 

Because sometimes prohibition increases popularity of something (Prohibition, the drug war, trying to find .22 ammo after the last gun law scare).

Because this debate is not handled correctly by people on BOTH sides of the isle (Christians act unchristian and Atheists act intolerant), and I'm ready for it to end. 

I could go on. 

BUT legal marriages for homosexuals presents a MAJOR problem that I didn't think about before.

Why this law is necessary.

I guess this law isn't REALLY necessary because the Bill of Rights had this covered, BUT... With homosexual marriage being legalized in certain states, there also arose situations where Christians were being put on trial for their beliefs.

Remember 1 Corinthians 10 that I mentioned earlier? Well, it says that we aren't supposed to ask whether the meat was sacrificed to idols when we are at an unbeliever's house, BUT it also says that if your friend comes out and TELLS you that the meat was sacrificed to idols that you shouldn't eat it. That isn't so that your conscience isn't seared, but so that your friend is not affected negatively by seeing you act out of character or inconsistently. That principle applies here.

We are able to eat, serve, communicate, celebrate, etc. with sinners of all types, but when they come to us and ask for us to do something or to support them in doing something that is sinful, we must refuse.

A Christian baker will bake a cake for a homosexual unless it is going to aid in celebrating sin.

A Christian Pizzeria will bake a pie for a homosexual couple unless it is catering their celebration of sin.

A Christian preacher will serve, love, and study with a homosexual couple, unless that involves aiding their sin.

The Bakery, the Pizza shop, Preachers, and Chapels all were under fire for not wanting to participate in what they considered sin. If government were to get involved and compel them to participate anyways by penalty of law (like has been threatened), that is preventing that individual from following their own religion.

 I was talking to one of my (mostly) liberal friends and I said something that made him say "oh... well if that's all it is, then I'm for it." Apparently how I worded it just came out there right way, so I'm just going to leave this here...

" I don't think many people at all have a problem serving homosexuals, and I dont think that's what this is about. This is about a baker baking a cake for a gay wedding or a preacher officiating their ceremony. There is no reason that a person should be forced to do something they aren't comfortable with. I don't think this same baker would refuse to do any other cake or the preacher would refuse to allow them in the church for worship. It isn't that these people don't want to serve gays. It's not like we will see signs that say "no gays" on the doors. It is just that people shouldn't have to serve in a way that violates the core of who they are."

I hope I don’t come off as crass, preachy, negative, proud, or bigoted, and I hope that this reaches some people and gives them an idea of why this makes sense and actually protects freedoms rather than limiting them.