Corvino claims to respect religious liberty, but he doesn’t see that religious beliefs deserve any particular protection. In his view, “not every religious claim is deep and important, and not every deep and important claim is religious.” This means the end of religious liberty. RFRA and SOGI laws pale in significance to the force of his assertion. If religious liberty doesn’t protect religious belief as a special category of belief, it becomes meaningless.
The language of Arizona’s law allows exemptions from requirements that “substantially burden” an individual’s exercise of religion–something that could allow almost any kind of discrimination as long as it is based on sincere religious beliefs.
· Unlike Indiana, Illinois law on religious objection balanced by ban on LGBT discrimination
"We may not like the claim of conscience," Haynes says, "but you know, we don't judge claims of conscience on whether we like the content of the claim. We are trying to protect the right of people to do what they feel they must do according to their God. That is a very high value."
What types of religious activities are allowed in public schools?
Poll: Should it be legal for small business owners to discriminate on religious grounds?