Great article - What Makes Indiana's Religious-Freedom Law Different?

I just read a great article that helps to point out the key differences in Indiana's new "religious freedom” law written in plain English by a law professor.

Sorry for bringing up politics here, but this article really helped me understand what's being done.

Here's the link.

I'm a firm believer that my rights end where someone else's begins.

Good post. The private business inclusion has been made pretty clear though. I didn't catch the date of the article when I read it and maybe the private/corporate issue has been clarified since. However, I wonder about something. Perhaps some of those knowledgable in legal matters can clarify something. Back during the civil rights days, the federal gov't became agressive with restraint of free trade laws. Essentially, if you open your doors as a public business, you have to serve everybody equally unless there are laws requiring restrictions. I moonlighted for a place that got caught up in this during the late 70's. I was coming in after work and doing radio repairs when the owner was served with a subpoena. This was during the CB days and CB radio operators were buying and modifying ham radios and amplifiers and using them on CB. The FCC came down hard on the industry threatening restrictions on the sale of amplifiers if they didn't clean their own house. A national organization instituted a code of ethics for anyone that advertised in their magazine that required proof of identication and licesnse to purchase anything that transmitted or an amplifier. That also extended to replacement tubes or power semiconductors used in such. Illegal CB radio operators were turned away from purchases nationwide. Some communications atty in CA started to sue individual stores for restraint of free trade and several other federal laws and then enacted a class action lawsuit againt the national organization which withdrew their code of ethics. The FCC responded by making good on their threat by forcing manufactures to only sell radios and amplifers that were factory made not to cover near the CB bands or modifiable. Damned if they were, damed if they did catch 22 situation. So how does this differ under federal restraint of trade law? There should be no difference between a store that refuses to sell to non-ham radio operators and a photographer or baker that refuses to provide services to a client in a business that is open to the general public. I never got the laws here. When I first got married in the mid 70's, I went to a drug store and tried to buy condoms. The cashier went up the steps and got the pharmacist that came down and gave me the third degree. He wouldn't sell them to me unless I could prove I was married. It just so happened I had a photo in my wallet and both of our names on my company insurance card. I also was wearing a wedding ring engraved with our initals and date of marriage. Then he tells me that he doesn't believe in contraception and the condoms are for the prevention of disease and walks away. That was very common in areas that were heavily catholic, but not here. A pharmacist could refuse to sell contraceptives citing moral or religious reasons. Did that federal restraint of free trade apply in that situation?