INDEFENSIBLE

Proposed Law Shows Republicans Dislike Straight Sex Almost As Much As Gay Sex

U.S. Republican presidential candidate Trump makes a point as he formally announces his campaign for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination at Trump Tower in New YorkHow badly do Republican presidential candidates want to stick it to LGBTQs?

So bad they’re willing to screw over straight people at the same time.

Feast your eyes on one of the right wing’s worst ideas ever: a proposed bill called the “First Amendment Defense Act,” which has flown underneath the media radar this election season.

The point is that it was created to pander to homophobic anxieties by making life unpleasant for queer people.

Oh, and whoops, it also targets any straight people who have sex outside of marriage.

Let’s review. The wording of the FADA is so difficult to get through, you might have trouble translating it. The law would ban:

“discriminatory action against a person on the basis that such person believes or acts in accordance with a religious belief or moral conviction that: (1) marriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman, or (2) sexual relations are properly reserved to such a marriage.”

Okay, so what does that actually mean? It means that the government can’t prohibit discrimination against same-sex couples (whether that discrimination comes from a government employee, or a business, or an individual). It essentially creates special rights for anyone who says that they don’t like the gays — you know, just like how they’re always accusing us of wanting special rights whenever we ask to be treated equally.

But then it goes even further with that second point. The FADA also allows discrimination against any people — gay or straight — who have sex outside of marriage.

Is this seriously a problem? Are religious groups beset by heterosexual fornicators? Why does anyone need to have the “right” to punish straight people for having sex?

So let’s talk about some of the potential consequences of the FADA: If you’re gay and married, homeless shelters could turn you away; federal employees could refuse to process your tax returns; employers could refuse to grant you family and medical leave if your husband gets sick.

If you’re straight and single, your landlord could evict you for having an overnight date; your boss might refuse to cover your birth control; and then you could be fired for becoming pregnant.

The worst part about this act is that it doesn’t defend the First Amendment — it actually violates the First Amendment by enshrining a specific religious belief into law. Of course, this law would probably be found unconstitutional; but that could take years. Remember, the Defense of Marriage Act was passed in 1996 and didn’t go away until 2013.

But this is just part of a larger trend of Republicans, the party of small government, harnessing government power to control the lives and bodies of anyone they don’t like. Naturally, it’s been endorsed most of the Republican front-runners: Cruz and Rubio signed their names to a pledge to pass it, and Donald Trump said he supported it in a letter. (Santorum and Huckabee also pledged their support — thank God we don’t have to take those guys seriously anymore.)

We don’t have to worry about FADA right now. President Obama would never sign anything like that into law. And we wouldn’t have to worry about it if next year we have a President Clinton or President Sanders.

But if anyone else winds up in the White House — well, then straight people better be careful about who finds out what they’re doing in the bedroom.

Don't forget to share:

Help make sure LGBTQ+ stories are being told...

We can't rely on mainstream media to tell our stories. That's why we don't lock Queerty articles behind a paywall. Will you support our mission with a contribution today?

Cancel anytime · Proudly LGBTQ+ owned and operated