Oklahoma, Ohio, Utah & Georgia Join Arizona By Drafting Their Own Religious Anti-Gay Hate Bills
Share on FacebookShare on twitterShare on emailShare on pinterest_shareMore Sharing Services40
The author of an Oklahoma bill that would allow business owners with strongly held religious beliefs to refuse service to gays, says the measure is currently being rewritten and likely won’t be considered in its current form this session.
“We’re still in favor of running a bill like that, but we’re just trying to get the language tightened up to prevent there from being any fiascos like there have been elsewhere,” said Rep. Tom Newell, R-Seminole.
Arizona’s House and Senate approved a bill last week, which seeks to prohibit the state from taking actions against a person, defined as “any individual, association, partnership, corporation, church, estate, trust, foundation or other legal entity,” who refuses services based on their religious beliefs. The bill is currently awaiting Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer’s veto or signature.
Georgia introduced anti-gay House Bill 1023 last week in the Georgia house. “The Preservation of Religious Freedom Act,” has bipartisan support, with at least three Democrats as co-sponsors.
Ohio also introduced a House bill this week that addresses religious freedom. The sponsor of the bill says it won’t allow discrimination but the ACLU of Ohio says that it could open “the exact same doors that the Arizona bill does”
“Our bill and the intention of our bill is to do a reflection of the federal law that’s in place now and that governs federal actions,” said the bill’s sponsor, Democratic State Rep. Bill Patmon. “Clearly, we were not anticipating Arizona and people trying to say everything that looks like that is like it but it is not.”
He added:
It will protect you if you want to exercise your faith at work, if you want to pray, if you want to wear a cross, if you want to exhibit something at your school that doesn’t interfere with government interest. We would apply the strict scrutiny test to it. It is not in our interest to ban people from wearing yamikas or any of that.
WKSU reports:
Nick Worner with the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio says, “I think it opens the exact same doors that the Arizona bill does” and is full of “unintended consequences.”
“And it’s not just Arizona either. We’ve got Kansas and Mississippi and a number of other states that are dealing with the unintended consequences of this.
“If they had other things in mind, like religious garb, clothing and prayer, they already have the First Amendment, not to mention us, who have already defended people in situations like that and have already prevailed in court. The issue is the unintended consequences – the license to discriminate that this creates.
Ohio’s religious freedom bill is in the beginning stages of the legislative process. It has about three-dozen co-sponsors.
The Washington Post reports that Utah is also drafting a similar Arizona-style anti-gay bill:
State Sen. Stuart Reid is sponsoring a Religious Liberties Amendment, which would allow businesses to deny services on religious grounds in a way similar to the Arizona legislation. He is drafting two other bills pertaining to religious protection. The Deseret News reported in late January that “general descriptions indicate they would protect individual religious conscience rights, require religious freedom instruction in public schools, and establish a nondiscrimination law that ‘avoids sexual politics.’
Legislation was filed on Monday in the Missouri Senate that would allow Missouri business owners and individuals to cite religious beliefs as a legal cover for to deny services to LGBT people.
Sen. Wayne Wallingford (R) sponsored the legislation, which states that a governmental authority shall not substantially burden a person’s free exercise of religion unless the government demonstrates that it has a compelling interest.
“We’re trying to protect Missourians from attacks on their religious freedom,” Wallingford told the Kansas City Star.
The Mississippi Senate passed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act at the end of January, which says that the state cannot “burden a person’s right to the exercise of religion.” The bill still needs to be passed in the House, which currently has a Republican majority.
The Washington Post writes:
The legislation is very broad — and lack of specificity and the probability of discrimination are what doomed many of the other religious freedom bills being considered around the country. State Senator Hob Bryan said he was worried because the legislation’s expansive decree would protect all religions during floor debate on the bill. “This bill applies to all religions, including Islam, Buddhism and New Age religions,” he said soon after the bill made it through the Senate, according to the Associated Press. “We need to think carefully about the implications of it.”