LAMESAUCE: Everyone Who Helped Pass TN’s Anti-Gay Bill Is Now Against It, Including The Governor

This week, HRC pres Joe Solmonese threw us all under the bus by praising the 13 corporations that helped pass Tennessee’s anti-gay employment bill. When these companies came under attack by LGBTs, all of them said “we do not support discrimination” but almost none of them did anything to help get it repealed. And now Tennessee Governor Bill Haslam, the very man who just signed it into law has also said that he opposes it on discriminatory grounds (though he loves it’s creamy free-market center). Are you shitting us?

Luckily, a Nashville attorney has already planned to challenge the bill in court saying that its wording would also prevent protections for the handicapped, veterans, and anyone not currently protected by the state’s anti-discrimination law. Also, some think the law might get delcared unconstitutional for it’s similarities to the Supreme Court case Romer v. Evans.

Via Towleroad

Get Queerty Daily

Subscribe to Queerty for a daily dose of #billhaslam #joesolmonese #nashville stories and more


  • Cam

    And once again Solomnase proves that he isn’t there to help the gay community in ANY way.

    But rather, he sees his only job, as helping his friends, and coporate backers continue to screw with the gay community by coming out and providing them cover.

  • Mark

    Joe S is a useless tool of corporate america. he could give jackshit about the rest of us regular every day glbt people — it’s all about cocktail parties, being in tv and seeing his name in print – sort of like sarah p

  • Bruno

    FAIL, read the Towleroad piece again. He said he’s against discrimination, but he’s in favor of the bill because he thinks it’s up to individual businesses whether or not to discriminate. Typical libertarian Ron Paul-esque crap.

  • TMikel

    Why didn’t Joe Solmonese THINK before he rubber stamped this bill? Are these yokels incapably of thought before action? As for the corporations, well, look at Target. The good thing is that we don’t HAVE to buy their products.

  • Jim Hlavac

    The law is pointless for several reasons. One is that we have won a lot of non-discrimination without any such laws in effect all across this nation. The governor should come to our side not because there’s a law, but because he’s a decent man, that’s part of the process. That quest is not complete, no; but it is happening, and it has gotten better. The outcry alone is proof. But the law wouldn’t help the process, for it’s hearts and minds that need to be changed; and not reliance on the cudgel of the law.

    Second, if a company wants to get rid of you, they have numerous ways to do so that don’t involve mention of being gay whatsoever, and that are well protected for the business to use under labor law and contract law. Third, our hetero opponents, whom are many still, can use the law against us by making gay bars hire straight women — send them in to apply; they’ll get rejected; ergo discrimination on the basis of gender or gender identity. That’s the short list of “libertarian crap” versus “socialist crap” that forces people to do things they don’t want to do.

    Furthermore, we’re already covered under “marital status” and “religious belief” but we have so far not availed ourselves of those options. Speak to the gay lawyer brigades: I’ve tried.

    And in a way of hoisting the anti-gay on their own petards, especially in regards to the “don’t say gay” bill — and not that they are right that we are “sick” and “psychologically unsound” — but let’s quote them on that, then apply Section 504 of the Federal Dept. of Ed laws which says “sick” and “psychologically unsound” children need to be given extra special care and protections. Let them argue themselves out of that sticky wicket.

    And I recall that about 20 years ago in Tampa a lesbian couple bought a restaurant, and fired all the hetero staff, and even a pregnant woman, and stated specifically it was because of “heterosexuality” and “incompatibility” with the new focus of the business. The heteros made suit, the business said “it’s legal.” The Judge dismissed the case. Good thing, perhaps, that there wasn’t such a law, or the gay world would have had to deal with hetero waiters, and perhaps the business failed, causing harm to the lesbian entrepreneurs.

  • Steve

    The new Tennessee statute is essentially identical to the Colorado Amendment 2 that the SCOTUS deemed unconstitutional. Both prohibit local governments from providing any protections to gay and lesbian people, thereby nullifying those peoples right to lobby local governments and otherwise participate in the political process.

Comments are closed.