Talk:Religious Freedom Restoration Act

Psychoactive and Recreational Drugs (defunct)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychoactive and Recreational Drugs, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.Psychoactive and Recreational DrugsWikipedia:WikiProject Psychoactive and Recreational DrugsTemplate:WikiProject Psychoactive and Recreational DrugsPsychoactive and Recreational Drugs articles

United States: Government Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (assessed as Low-importance).

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Deciding Communication Law: Key Cases in Context (Susan Dente Ross)[edit]

I don't currently have time to correct this, but just a heads-up for anyone with more than a passing interest in this article: some of the passages cited from Susan Ross' book are nearly copied verbatim rather than merely drawing upon her information or even paraphrasing. · Andonic ^contact 16:03, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have time to look more closely at this just now either, but I do see that the book is previewable online vie Google Books. See Susan Dente Ross (2004). Deciding communication law: key cases in context. Psychology Press. ISBN 9780805846980. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 23:19, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sponshorship discrepancy corrected[edit]

I just corrected an error in the introductory paragraph claiming that this bill "was introduced by Howard McKeon of California and Dean Gallo of New Jersey", cited to the following page: "Religious Freedom Restoration Act full text at http://www.prop1.org/rainbow/rfra.htm". The good-faith error was due to a poor transcription of the bill's text by the source.

The actual Introduction statement, from the full-text PDF of HR 1308 as viewable in the THOMAS data is as follows (apologies for any spacing damage I may have missed, copy-pasting from the PDF made a mess of the text and required serious cleanup):

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES MARCH 11, 1993 Mr. SCHUMER (for himself, Mr. COX, Mr. NADLER, Mrs. MALONEY, Mr. GILMAN, Mr. MORAN, Mr. LEWIS of Georgia, Ms. WOOLSEY, Mr. WASHINGTON, Mr. COOPER, Mr. ACKERMAN, Mr. CARDIN, Mr. YATES, Mrs. MEEK, Mr. KOPETSKI, Mr. RAMSTAD, Mr. DEUTSCH, Mr. PRICE of North Carolina, Mr. SWIFT, Ms. SHEPHERD, Mr. TOWNS, Mrs. MORELLA, Mr. CRAPO, Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts, Mr. BERMAN, Mr. EDWARDS of California, Ms. BYRNE, Ms. PELOSI, Mr. SUNDQUIST, Mr. BRYANT, Mr. HUTCHINSON, Mrs. UNSOELD, Ms. MOLINARI, Mr. HALL of Ohio, Ms. SLAUGHTER, Mr. HASTINGS, Mr. GUTIERREZ, Mr. WELDON, Mr. GORDON, Mr. SPRATT, Mr. SAWYER, Mr. ANDREWS of New Jersey, Mr. RUSH, Mr. LEHMAN, Mr. GLICKMAN, Mr. GONZALEZ, Mr. JOHNSTON of Florida, Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut, Mr. MATSUI, Mr. OWENS, Mr. MARTINEZ, Mr. MCDERMOTT, Mr. PORTER, Mr. JEFFERSON, Ms. ESHOO, Mr. HERGER, Mr. SAXTON, Mr. SMITH of Texas, Mr. MCHALE, Mr. SANDERS, Ms. WATERS, Mr. WYNN, Mr. THORNTON, Mr. NEAL of North Carolina, Mr. WYDEN, Ms. MARGOLIES-MEZVINSKY, Mr. LANTOS, Mr. REYNOLDS, Mr. LEVY, Mr. STUDDS, Mr. LINDER, Mr. BLACKWELL, Mr. MINETA, Mr. PAYNE of New Jersey, Ms. MCKINNEY, Mr. TORRICELLI, Mr. KNOLLENBERG, Mr. SERRANO, Mr. SABO, Mr. BARRETT of Wisconsin, Mr. MACHTLEY, Mr. SISISKY, Mr. TORRES, Mr. DELLUMS, Mr. DEFAZIO, Mr. WAXMAN, Mr. STARK, Mr. SHAYS, Mr. SCOTT, Mr. FROST, Mr. LEVIN, Mr. FILNER, Mr. PETEGEREN of Texas, Mr. STRICKLAND, Mr. FINGERHUT, Mr. HOCHBRUECKNER, Mr. GEJDENSON, Mr. FRANKS of Connecticut, Mr. GOODLATTE, Mr. HOUGHTON, Mr. LIGHTFOOT, Mr. SCHIFF, Mr. TALENT, Mr. BEILENSON, Mrs. LOWEY, Mr. HANSEN, Ms. DELAURO, Mr. MFUME, Mr. HOYER, Ms. NORTON, Mr. ORTON, Mr. GUNDERSON, Mr. WILLIAMS, Mr. HAMBURG, Mr. KLEIN, Mr. DICKS, Mr. STUMP, Mr. EVANS, Mr. SKAGGS, Mr. STOKES, Mrs. COLLINS of Illinois, Ms. VELÁZQUEZ, Mr. VENTO, Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas, Mr. ANDREWS of Maine, Mr. BACCHUS of Florida, Mr. FAZIO, Mr. COPPERSMITH, Mrs. KENNELLY, Mr. DERRICK, Mr. SWETT, Mr. LAZIO, Mrs. FOWLER, Mr. FRANKS of New Jersey, Mr. RAVENEL, Mr. MCKEON, and Mr. GALLO) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

However, the cited source commits the grave error of truncating this to:

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES March 11, 1993 [co-sponsors] Mr. MCKEON, and Mr. GALLO introduced the following bill, which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Obviously, in light of this, the http://www.prop1.org/rainbow/rfra.htm page cannot be considered a reliable source. I would ask that editors refrain from using it as a reference for further work on this article. The Bill's full text is adequately accessible at the canonical sources, either the Library Of Congress's THOMAS system or the Congress.gov site that will eventually replace it. – FeRD_NYC (talk) 10:34, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Direct quote in the lead[edit]

An earlier version of this article used a direct quote from a primary source in the lead - "substantially burden". This has been replaced with an interpretation, but without a secondary source (the source given is a primary one). I'm reverting to the original per policy at WP:PRIMARY and elsewhere. Andyjsmith (talk) 13:51, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm... this seems to have provoked a dispute. The original phrase - "substantially burden" - is a direct quote and is referenced earlier in the same sentence, here. I am unable to find the current phrase "ensures that interests in religious freedom are protected" in the cited source. Any ideas? Andyjsmith (talk) 14:35, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

is in page 56 of the reference (burwell v hobby lobby opinion) Ctrl F found it pretty quickly. Bryce Carmony (talk) 15:24, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Informative news article[edit]

"So just what are religious freedom laws designed to protect?", LA Times. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 17:44, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]