[Steve_Seattle]

The problem is that it appears that a person must GO TO COURT - a very expensive and time-consuming process - in order to guarantee their freedom of conscience. Now, maybe once a precedent is set, not everyone would need to go to court, but the government can fine you despite precedent, and you would still need to go to court. This law does not seem very favorable to small business.

[SeekAndFind]

RE: The problem is that it appears that a person must GO TO COURT

That is of course, if an aggrieved party ( e.g. gay couple ) sues.

But then that will happen anyway without RFRA.

At least with RFRA, the person has some lawful protection he can cite.

[Intolerant in NJ]

... if the government 1) has a compelling interest to do so...and since every case where a person is forced to act contra to his religious beliefs violates his religious practices, whereas in virtually all cases the supposed aggrieved parties have alternatives to forcing that violation (they can go to other photographers or pizza shops), the government would very rarely seem to have a "compelling interest" to force the businessman to comply.....