Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

First Church of Cannabis is Approved in Indiana

posted by CoolHand on Monday April 06 2015, @05:32PM   Printer-friendly
from the better-than-sacramental-wine dept.

"gewg_" writes:

AlterNet reports

In a classic case of "unintended consequences", the recently signed Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) in Indiana may have opened the door for the establishment of the First Church of Cannabis in the Hoosier State.

While Governor Mike Pence (R) was holding a signing ceremony for the bill allowing businesses and individuals to deny services to gays on religious grounds or values, paperwork for the First Church of Cannabis Inc. was being filed with the Secretary of State's office, reports RTV6.

Church founder Bill Levin announced on his Facebook page that the church's registration has been approved, writing, "Status: Approved by Secretary of State of Indiana - "Congratulations your registration has been approved!" Now we begin to accomplish our goals of Love, Understanding, and Good Health."

Levin is currently seeking $4.20 donations towards his non-profit church.

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
First Church of Cannabis is Approved in Indiana | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 65 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 2) by Sir Finkus on Tuesday April 07 2015, @03:09AM

    by Sir Finkus (192) on Tuesday April 07 2015, @03:09AM (#167302) Journal

    Secondly, businesses use services (fire, police, dog catchers), utilities (water, sewer), and roads that are paid for by the public as a whole. To turn around and say to that public which pays for that infrastructure: "I'm going to pick and choose who among you monetary contributors I will serve", is for that business to become a freeloader, a bum.

    I utilize and am protected by those public services on a regular basis. Does that mean I shouldn't be able to determine who I let in my house or who I associate with based on any criteria I want? Sure if I don't want to be friends with a black guy because he's black (or gay, or a woman), I'm an asshole, but I have the right to be an asshole

    I understand why people balk at these sorts of laws, and why "anti discrimination" laws are passed, but I'd argue that they're a rather severe restriction on free speech.

    I do make a few exceptions, for very basic things like privately-owned utilities and real estate because they represent natural monopolies.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  
    Total Score:   2  

  • (Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Tuesday April 07 2015, @03:33PM

    by hemocyanin (186) on Tuesday April 07 2015, @03:33PM (#167478) Journal

    Here is the distinction:

    Are you making a personal profit utilizing a publicly provided service?

    Yes (aka Business): serve the public as a whole.
    No (aka Private Home): be a bigot as much as you want.