NCGA: A hearing for medical marijuana, but NOT for protecting religious freedom. | Eastern North Carolina Now

    Publisher's note: Brant Clifton keeps aware of Religious Freedom Restoration Act here in North Carolina in his "bare knuckles" Conservative online publication known as The Daily Haymaker.

    Our baby-faced House speaker appears to be caving to the drive-by hysteria on North Carolina's proposed Religious Freedom Restoration Act. (Never mind that nearly three dozen states have already passed identical versions, or are in the process of doing so. Never mind that Ted Kennedy and Chuck Schumer ushered the federal version through a Democrat Congress in the early 90s, and Bill Clinton signed it into law.) Here's what the North Carolina House's BMOC had to say to McClatchy in this morning's paper:

    [...] Moore said though some members wanted a committee meeting on the bill this week, "That's not going to happen."

    "This is worthy of discussion," he said. "It's going to take some time." [...]

    It's "worthy of discussion", but a committee hearing is "not going to happen." Huh? Talk about speaking out of both sides of your mouth.

    Just a few days ago, Moore allowed a committee hearing to occur on a proposal to legalize marijuana for medicinal purposes. THAT clearly had no chance in hell of passing the legislature, but it got a committee hearing.

    Clearly the howling liberal hordes and the drive-bys are filling up some testicle lock-boxes in our fair capital city. There is so much misinformation out there about RFRA. It's not a license to oppress people. It actually protects innocent, average people from being driven out of business because - for instance - they don't want to put two guys on top of a wedding cake or participate in a gay wedding.

    HERE is the best explanation I've seen about Indiana's legislation and the other existing state and federal laws.

    It's sad that we even have to consider passing extra legislation to protect freedoms that are already explicitly laid out in the constitution. But, in this era of creative jurisprudence, we find ourselves venturing into previously uncharted waters every day.