1. Freedom

Category Archives: Freedom

Freedom of Expression Chilled by ICANN's Addition of Speech Restrictions in DNS

Posted on by

"Public Interest Commitments" Amount to Illegitimate Usurpation of Bottom-Up Policy

Freedom of expression on the Internet is at risk from ICANN's recent decision to prohibit anyone but one specific type of doctor from using the word within the .doctor new gTLD space. Last month, ICANN's New GTLD Program Committee decided that only "medical practitioners" would be allowed to register a domain in the .doctor name space. ICANN's decision to exclude numerous lawful users of the word, including a broad range of individuals who are in fact doctors, comes at a time when the world is watching ICANN to see if it can adequately protect Internet users' rights in the absence of US Government supervision. If ICANN's treatment of free expression in the implementation of its new gTLD program is any indication, ICANN has not yet sufficiently developed to be trusted with protecting Internet users' rights in the domain name system.

Often overlooked is that ICANN's community sought to protect freedom of expression rights in the new gTLD program by including free expression principles and recommendations in the GNSO's final approved new gTLD policy. However, those protections were quietly violated in the staff's subsequent implementation of the GNSO's policy, which afforded no protection to Internet users' free expression rights.

Specifically, after the GNSO approved the community's policy for new gTLDs, ICANN staff added a new requirement to the policy, called "Public Interest Commitments" or "PICs", which are contractual terms ICANN imposed on new gTLD registries that add policy requirements and restrictions that were never approved by the community or subject to a bottom-up process. Some PICs actually violate the community's consensus policy on issues, most notably freedom of expression.

The new gTLD policy approved by the GNSO Council in 2007 and subsequently ICANN's board included Principle G: "The string evaluation process must not infringe the applicant's freedom of expression rights that are protected under internationally recognized principles of law."1

Additionally, Recommendation 3 of the GNSO's final new gTLD policy states:

"Strings must not infringe the existing legal rights of others that are recognized or enforceable under generally accepted and internationally recognized principles of law Examples of these legal rights include ... the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) (in particular freedom of expression rights)."

Furthermore, Recommendation 6 of the GNSO's New GTLD Policy states:

"Strings must not be contrary to generally accepted legal norms relating to morality and public order that are recognized under international principles of law."

Recommendation 6 goes on to cite as examples of these legal norms, rights provided by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, both of which guarantee freedom of expression in any media and regardless of frontiers.

Here is the original post:

Freedom of Expression Chilled by ICANN's Addition of Speech Restrictions in DNS

Indiana will lose Disciples of Christ convention over religious freedom law

Posted on by

Organizers of a mainline Protestantchurch gathering say they are planning to move their 2017 convention from Indianapolis due toa hotly contested newReligious Freedom Restoration Act.

Last week, leaders of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), which is based in Indianapolis, wrote Gov. Mike Pence (R) urginghim to veto the proposal. The Disciples of Christ oncesupporteda 22-year-old federal Religious Freedom and Restoration Act, though the specifics of Indianas law have become divisive.

Indianas new lawwould prohibit the government from substantially burdening a persons exercise of religion, unless it can demonstrate that the burden hasa compelling governmental interest and is the least restrictive means of furthering the compelling governmental interest. Supporters say Indianasmeasure supports religious libertywhile opponents fear it could open up grounds for people to decline services for same-sex weddings.

Church leaders say have agreedto movetheir 6,000-person General Assembly because of concerns that some members might experience legally sanctioned bias and rejection once so common on the basis of race.The move reflectsa larger push in the state and across the nation to use business to pressure state leaders on the issue.

The church has not yet decided on a new venue for the 2017 convention.

As a Christian church, we are particularly sensitive to the values of the One we follow one who sat at (the) table with people from all walks of life, and loved them all, theletterstates. Our church is diverse in point of view, but we share a value for an open Lords Table.

All eyes are on Indiana after Gov. Mike Pence (R) signed a controversial religious freedom bill into law. The Posts Sarah Pulliam Bailey explains what's in the law and why there's so much opposition to it. (Pamela Kirkland/The Washington Post)

On Tuesday, Pence urgedurged state lawmakers to pass legislation making it clear that this law does not give businesses the right to deny services to anyone.

The Disciples of Christ, whichhad about600,000 membersin 2009, has held its annual convention in Indianapolis three times since 1989, according to the Indianapolis Star. Todd Adams, the associate general minister and vice president of the denomination, told theStarhe expects up to 8,000 people to attend its convention in 2017, which could have an estimated economic impact on the city of about $5.9 million.

[Religious liberty or discrimination? Read the text of Indianas religious freedom law]

Link:

Indiana will lose Disciples of Christ convention over religious freedom law

Religious freedom law: More controversy

Posted on by

Hutchinson asked for changes to the Religious Freedom Restoration Act bill the state legislature passed this week, responding to a nationwide backlash against a similar Indiana law that was threatening to whip through Arkansas.

Hutchinson had previously said he would sign the RFRA bill if it "reaches my desk in similar form as to what has been passed in 20 other states."

The Arkansas measure definitely fits the bill. But on Wednesday, Hutchinson said he wanted it to more closely mirror the federal RFRA, which is notably different from the Indiana law and doesn't face the same criticism that it could allow discrimination.

So who is this governor who appears to have narrowly escaped the still-brewing controversy?

Hutchinson only took over the governorship this year, but he's been a mainstay in Arkansas and national politics for nearly two decades.

READ: Arkansas governor sends religious freedom bill back to legislators

Hutchinson won a seat to the House of Representatives in 1996 after serving more than a decade as a successful U.S. attorney and lawyer in Arkansas.

His background as a federal prosecutor would rocket him into the spotlight just two years later, when he was tapped as one of the 13 managers effectively, prosecutors of President Bill Clinton's impeachment trial.

Hutchinson has since said he has no regrets despite initial reluctance to take the job because it wasn't good politics in Arkansas, where he took some flack for his leading role in prosecuting the state's former governor and the only Arkansan elected president.

Hutchinson even took heat from his opponent during last year's gubernatorial campaign over his role in the impeachment.

Here is the original post:

Religious freedom law: More controversy

Apple CEO blasts Indiana’s "dangerous" religious freedom law – Video

Posted on by


Apple CEO blasts Indiana #39;s "dangerous" religious freedom law
Protests and boycotts are growing over an Indiana law that some say discriminates against gay people. Gov. Mike Pence says he stands by the controversial religious freedom legislation. Supporters...

By: CBS This Morning

See the original post here:

Apple CEO blasts Indiana's "dangerous" religious freedom law - Video

Boycott Indiana Hashtag Trends After Controversial ‘Religious Freedom’ Law – Video

Posted on by


Boycott Indiana Hashtag Trends After Controversial #39;Religious Freedom #39; Law
Indiana passed a Religious Freedom Restoration Act that may allow businesses to discriminate against LGBTQ people. As Mara Montalbano (@maramontalbano) tells us, the Internet is responding....

By: Buzz60

Excerpt from:

Boycott Indiana Hashtag Trends After Controversial 'Religious Freedom' Law - Video

Who's pushing the 'religious freedom' legislation in states?

Posted on by

Norfolk, Va. A recentopinion pieceby Apples CEO, Tim Cook, lamented Indianas new 'Religious Freedom Restoration Act' as what he characterized as a wave of legislation" which some claim is the result of the emerging power and reach of conservative "bill mills."

Theres something very dangerous happening in states across the country. A wave of legislation, introduced in more than two dozen states, would allow people to discriminate against their neighbors, Mr. Cook wrote in The Washington Post. Some, such as the bill enacted in Indiana last week that drew a national outcry and one passed in Arkansas, say individuals can cite their personal religious beliefs to refuse service to a customer or resist a state nondiscrimination law. Others are more transparent in their effort to discriminate.

Cook was referring to Indiana Gov. Mike Pence andhis state's new "religious freedom" law, which gives business owners the right todecline serving customers based on religious grounds in effect turning away LGBT customers

Some Democrats and political analysts say that the "wave" Cook refers to is not originating with voters, but rather conservative "bill mills" that finance state legislators to attend educational conferences that may provide both unified ideas and prefabricated bills to take home. Specifically, they seeThe American Legislative Exchange Council(ALEC) as the primary driver of conservative state laws.

But when asked whetherALEC was involved in supporting theReligious Freedom Restoration Act, ALEC spokesperson Bill Meierlingresponds: We do not work on firearms, marriage equality, immigration, any of those things people frequently say are ours.

Still, North Carolina state Rep.Graig R. Meyerof (D) Durham says that ALECis having a profound effect on how state legislators in his state are picking their targets.

While ALEC may not be directly distributing the template legislation were seeing pop up all over the country, they are primarily the network for legislative exchange that is operating as a provider of educational seminars and conferences, Mr. Meyer says in a phone interview.

One such ALEC conferencewas held in North Carolina.While nobody can say for sure where the next religious freedom law bill will pop up, its probably a safe bet to look at where their most recent national conferences were held and where the next one will be, says Meyer.

The last ALEC national conference was held in December in Washington, D.C. The next one coming up will be in San Diego, Calif., according to ALEC's Meierling.He describes the organization as "an exchange of legislators and entrepreneurs who come together to discuss policy.

A Source Watch report on the legislative authors of Indiana's Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) shows many are also on theALEC Indiana membershiplist. Three of the bill's co-authors are also ALEC Task Force committee chairs, including Indiana stateSen. Carlin J. Yoder(R) of District 12, Sen. Jean Leising (R) of District 42, andSen. Jim Buck (R) of District 21,according to Source Watch.

Visit link:

Who's pushing the 'religious freedom' legislation in states?

Indiana law: Does freedom of religion mean freedom to discriminate? (+video)

Posted on by

New York For many conservative religious Americans, the nations long-standing Religious Freedom Restoration Acts, including the one just passed in Indiana last week, could possibly carve out a public space that permits individuals and their businesses to uphold their religious opposition to same-sex marriage.

But as more same-sex couples across the country legally celebrate their nuptials with traditional public pomp and ceremony, the cherished right of freedom of religion has run headlong into the principle of nondiscrimination in the public sphere.

As a result, a vexing national debate has begun to rage over the extent and legal limits of each sides visions for the nations common life together or how uncommon lives should interact within the public sphere.

What were coming up against is: How far does secular law have to go to accommodate a persons religion? says Mark Goldfeder, senior fellow at the Center for the Study of Law and Religion at Emory University in Atlanta. And the truth is, this is happening across the country, even in places where there are no RFRAs, or religious freedom restoration acts.

The poster businesses for the debate have been flower shops, photographers, and bakers who offer services to couples planning their weddings but object to providing these services to gay and lesbian couples, who can now legally marry in 37 states. The Supreme Court is expected to decide the issue by the end of the current term in June.

The issue also includes the religious conscience of public clerks who issue marriage licenses, doctors or anesthesiologists who may tangentially participate in abortion procedures, or any other professionals who might object to participating in events that offend their deeply held religious beliefs.

But since Indiana became the 20th state to pass its version of a religious freedom restoration act last week, a widespread chorus of critics has objected to the new state law or at least the perceived intentions behind it.

Believing it may indeed permit discrimination against lesbian and gay Americans, CEOs such asApples Tim Cook, the governor of Connecticut, the mayor of Seattle, and organizations such as the NCAA and Gen Con have begun to rethink, or even curtail, their business relationships with the state.

These bills rationalize injustice by pretending to defend something many of us hold dear, Mr. Cook, who is gay, wrote in an opinion piece in The Washington Post on Sunday. They go against the very principles our nation was founded on, and they have the potential to undo decades of progress toward greater equality.

Its a far cry from the overwhelming bipartisan consensus that first accompanied the original Religious Freedom Restoration Act in 1993. More than two decades ago, the federal version passed unanimously by voice vote in the House yes, thats right, unanimously and with only three nays in the Senate before President Bill Clinton signed it into law.

See more here:

Indiana law: Does freedom of religion mean freedom to discriminate? (+video)

How Indianas religious freedom law escalated to such national prominence

Posted on by

All eyes are on Indiana after Governor Mike Pence (R) signed a controversial religious freedom bill into law. The Posts Sarah Pulliam Bailey explains what exactly is in the law and why both sides are so vocal. (Pamela Kirkland/The Washington Post)

Indiana, a largely conservative state that votes pretty reliably Republican in presidential races, has become symbolic ina clash between politics and culture, religious rights and LGBT rights.

Last week, Indiana Gov. MikePence (R) signed into law a controversial religious freedom bill: Opponentsare concerned that it could allow discrimination against gay people.The law in question is called theReligious Freedom Restoration Act, more commonlyknown as RFRA.

The new law allows corporations to make an RFRA claim, expanding the number and type of groups that could make those claims in court. The law also makes it clear that RFRA can be used in lawsuits between individuals, when those claims usually apply only to conflicts between the government and individuals. However, its still unclear how exactly it could be used in court.

[Opinion: Tim Cook: Pro-discrimination religious freedom laws are dangerous]

Lawmakers are attempting to address the firestorm over the law that has prompted some convention organizers and businesses to threaten to cancel plansin the state over concerns of discrimination. The law has drawn attention from across the nation, as Seattle and San Francisco mayorshave urgeda boycott of Indiana.

A new Indiana law designed to keep the government from forcing business owners to act against their religious beliefs draws fierce criticism. (Reuters)

University of Virginia law professorDouglas Laycock, one of the nations foremost law-and-religion scholars, says the conversation has escalated over misunderstandings over previous cases.RFRA has become a national controversy in the past year since Kansas and Arizona considered and abandonedreligious freedom legislation. And last summer,RFRA was raised during last yearsHobby Lobby decision by the Supreme Court.

Theres bad behavior on both sides. Gay rights groups, as they become stronger and stronger and get more support for same-sex marriagekeep demanding more and more. Now they dont want any religious exceptions for anybody, Laycocksaid. Republican legislators are pandering to the base and saying we need to protect against gay marriage. These statements from the right fuel the outrage on the left.

[Opinion: What will the Indiana religious freedom law really do?]

View original post here:

How Indianas religious freedom law escalated to such national prominence

Backlash to Indiana 'Religious Freedom' Law a Hurdle for GOP

Posted on by

By Perry Bacon Jr.

The debate over Indiana's new religious freedom law illustrates an increasingly tough challenge for Republican Party politicians who are caught between growing national support for gay rights among most Americans and the large bloc of deeply religious GOP voters who are wary of policy changes like same-sex marriage.

Many Republicans have conceded that national acceptance of gay marriage is inevitable, with court rulings across the country striking down same-sex marriage bans. But social conservatives say that the next front in their fight should be to protect religious freedom, arguing that people of faith who oppose same-sex unions should not be required to take actions that in effect condone gay marriage.

Indiana social conservatives have been pushing for the adoption of a specific provision to defend religious freedom, and Gov. Mike Pence, a Republican, signed one into law last week. But the resulting national backlash - including from big business organizations - showed that the religious freedom argument may no longer be an easy way for Republicans to balance the views of gay rights backers and Christian conservatives.

Entertainers and actors have blasted the state, arguing the law in effect allows discrimination against gay people. So have a number of liberal politicians, mostly notably Hillary Clinton.

But perhaps most significantly to both Pence and the Republican Party, which seeks to cast itself as very-pro-business, a number of major companies have attacked the law, including an impassioned critique from Apple CEO Tim Cook.

"We have never seen reactions like this, we never expected that," said David Long, a Republican leader in the Indiana State Senate, which overwhelmingly approved the provision.

The issue has now become split along partisan lines. In a message on Twitter, Clinton wrote, "Sad this new Indiana law can happen in America today."

But when asked about it on Monday, three Republican presidential candidates, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, Ben Carson and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, all endorsed the provision.

"When you're asking someone who provides professional services to do something, or be punished by law, that violates their faith, you're violating that religious liberty that they have," said Rubio in an interview on Fox News.

View original post here:

Backlash to Indiana 'Religious Freedom' Law a Hurdle for GOP

How to prevent another anti-gay 'religious freedom' law

Posted on by

To the editor: The passage of bills in Indiana, Mississippi and Arkansas that sanction discrimination based on religious freedom demonstrate the dearth of federal protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (LGBT) individuals. ("In conservative Indiana, bemusement amid boycott threats over religious freedom law," March 28)

Boycotting Indiana will not solve this problem. Rather, Congress must make sexual orientation and gender identity protected classes. This would shield the LGBT community from the whims of state governments and ensure that LGBT inhabitants of all states enjoy the same rights.

But the current Congress seems unlikely to vote on anything resembling such legislation. Last year, House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) did not even allow for a vote on the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, a bill so moderate that some LGBT rights groups opposed it.

This is unfortunate, because no matter what the U.S Supreme Court decides on same-sex marriage, without action by Congress, many states will continue to treat LGBT people as second-class citizens.

Harriet Steele, Studio City

..

To the editor: Some in Indiana are baffled by the outpouring of opposition to their state's new so-called religious freedom law.

What's the mystery? After all, there has been an enormous change in the way most Americans view gay rights and same-sex marriage, especially with marriage laws in so many states being revoked in recent years.

At the same time, we have seen businesses refusing to bake a cake or provide a floral arrangement for a same-sex wedding. What other services could they deny and get away with?

So, to a lot of people, Indiana's new law looks like blatant discrimination, plain and simple.

Originally posted here:

How to prevent another anti-gay 'religious freedom' law


  1. Freedom