The Kansas state House of Representatives has passed a bill that would allow virtually anyone in Kansas, including business owners, employees and government workers, to refuse to provide services to LGBT individuals on the grounds of “religious liberty.”
In an argument that gives new meaning to the word Orwellian, the bill’s sponsor, Charles Macheers (R.-As If You Had To Ask), insists that the bill actually prevents discrimination.
“Discrimination is horrible. It’s hurtful … It has no place in civilized society, and that’s precisely why we’re moving this bill,” he said. “There have been times throughout history where people have been persecuted for their religious beliefs because they were unpopular. This bill provides a shield of protection for that.”
The bill, which passed 72-49, would essentially allow anyone to provide any type of wedding-related service to gays and lesbians using the excuse of their religious belief. Even more troublesome, the bill allows individual government workers who object to marriage equality to refuse to provide services on the same grounds, although the services must still be available. Of course, in rural counties, the individual workers who object may be the only government representatives around.
“Every single rural county in this state has same-sex couples,” said Thomas Witt, a spokesman for Equality Kansas. “Government officials in those counties are going to be able to turn them away from services that they deserve as taxpayers.”
In a laughable attempt to prove that the bill is even-handed, supporters said that the measure would also protect LGBT people who have a “sincerely held” religious objection to heterosexual marriages. One representative, Mark Kahrs, cited the hypothetical example of a lesbian photographer who could refuse a job at a Catholic wedding because of the Church’s position on marriage equality. Of course, that wouldn’t be covered under the bill, because the objection isn’t to heterosexual marriage per se, but that didn’t stop Kahrs from trying.
A few Republicans broke with the party to reject the measure. Among them was Rep. Barbara Bollier. “I do not believe it is ever on the right side of history to be allowed to discriminate against people,” she told her colleagues. “Enough said.”
balehead
And they’ll continue to use less sugar in their frostings too…
sfbeast
would essentially allow anyone to provide……shouldn’t this read ‘anyone NOT to provide’
LandStander
“The bill, which passed 72-49, would essentially allow anyone to provide any type of wedding-related service to gays and lesbians using the excuse of their religious belief.”
When you put it that way, it sounds like a great bill! I did not know people were prevented from providing wedding services to gays and lesbians by law.
tdx3fan
I understand what this bill comes form, and I do believe that businesses should have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason without the threat of being sued for civil rights violations. I would never want my money going to a business that did not support me. However, when you extend it to the government services it goes too far.
dvlaries
This is what they do. This is what the people voted into office by U.S. citizens do while the rest of us do the real work that makes the country actually move: dream up and pass laws that they damn well know will never pass a test of constitutionality. Organized delusion, that’s what it is. Our tax dollars at work.
krystalkleer
what a COMPLETE waste of money and time to vote on ignorant bills like these!…these religious CASPER crusade’n nuts cases that don’t want to service people due to their own faith…GET REAL!…you think you’ve gone as far in yer life without ONCE purchase’n/promote’n/watch’n/give’n ect to someone who doesn’t conform to yer “NORM”…HA! then don’t ever get yer hair cut…watch tv…order flowers…hire an interior decorator…ect…get my point? http://getoffmydress.blogspot.com/2014/02/bleedn-hearts-club.html