Leftist rabble-rousers have chalked up religious liberty laws as “anti-gay” Christian discrimination. Perhaps if they paused for a moment to consider what’s actually in the law – cuing Nancy Pelosi – they’d have an altogether different opinion. Matt Lewis in The Daily Caller points out that Religious Freedom Restoration Acts do not merely shield Christians from acting against their conscious; it also protects one of the Left’s most cherished constituents – Muslims.

“Just this year, for example, in Holt v. Hobbs, the U.S. Supreme Court found that ‘An Arkansas prison policy that prevents a Muslim prisoner from growing a half-inch beard in accordance with his religious beliefs violates the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act,’” Lewis noted. “There are, of course, other examples. In Irshad Learning Center v. City of Dupage (2013), a Muslim group was denied a conditional use permit, arguing their facilities weren’t zoned for religious and educational purposes. … And in Fraternal Order of Police Newark Lodge No. 12 v. City of Newark (1999), a court ruled that since medial reasons had been accepted to exempt officers from the ‘no beard’ uniform policy for police officers, religious reasons were also valid.”

Note too that Islamic terrorists at the Guantanamo Bay prison facility are granted virtually every religious accommodation in the book, save for jihad.

Incidentally, not all Muslims have a 100% success rate, as Lewis added. “In many cases, there was instead ‘a compelling government interest’ and the ‘least restrictive means’ had already been used. But that, of course, is sort of the point. The Indiana law wouldn’t permit people to use religious liberty as a carte blanche get-out-of-jail-free card. But it would allow for some common sense to be applied for people who have deep convictions and are being compelled to violate their rights of conscience.”

Unless, of course, you’re a member of the “intolerant Right.” More…