quote:
don't even get why they're doing it. A state passes a law already passed by 19 states, some of which are in worse form. There is nothing novel about the Indiana law, and RFRA laws have not led to any measurable change in businesses dealing with gay people.

Does Wilco understand that? Does anyone? 20 states have these laws, and there is simply no measurable impact on the gay community to date.

A) This isn't the Poli board.

B) Your interpretation is wrong (this is not an opinion, this is a legal fact). They clearly added language to the RFRA in Indiana in the aftermath of Elane Photography v Willock. It is the 1st RFRA state statute that allows for a cause of action without the government as a party to the case. That's what activists are complaining about it, and it is unique to the IN law (right or wrong, if you want to get into the merits, there is another board for that). But to say it is the same as other RFRA statutes is just wrong.

C) Boycotts have been effective in the past (SEE the refusal of many bands to play Sun City). That sucks for the people who live there, but a boycott is perfectly legal and legitimate, and has a long history in entertainment.

D) It does seem to be working, as Indiana is pushing through a new law to be reviewed by the governor by the end of the week, making clear that the RFRA is not to be used to discriminate against gays. So, you can bitch about whether it is a band being too political, but the very public boycotts are certainly working.

E) It sucks for the Wilco fans in Indiana. To them, I say that Wilco sucks anyway, as does Indiana. Find a new state and a new band.

3 ...

Report Post

Posted by Hawkeye95

Member since Dec 2013

20293 posts

Posted on 4/1/15 at 11:37 am to Baloo

quote:
E) It sucks for the Wilco fans in Indiana. To them, I say that Wilco sucks anyway, as does Indiana. Find a new state and a new band.

and +1 for the rest of the post.

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by Pettifogger

Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone

Member since Feb 2012

79465 posts

Posted on 4/1/15 at 11:52 am to Baloo

A) I don't really care about your preferences. This is a music and politics discussion in a single thread that bridges two topics.

B) My interpretation isn't wrong. I stated that Indiana passed a law passed by other states. It's an RFRA. This is objectively accurate.

Furthermore, the idea that it isn't novel is also correct, unless you're relying on the concept that the statute's private suit defense is distinct (it is, but it's already been read in to other RFRA's through Court decisions and is therefore far from novel).

C) Irrelevant to anything I said. Whether a boycott is ineffective or not doesn't render Wilco's decision any less childish or ill informed.

D) See C)

E) Endorsed without exception

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by Cdawg