Earlier today, a group of Republican congressmen led by Rep. Raul
Labrador (R-ID) introduced the 'Marriage and Religious Freedom Act'
which would “protect freedom of conscience for those who believe
marriage is the union of one man and one woman.”
The Washington Post reports:
The bill drafted by Rep. Raul Labrador
(R-Idaho) is a "narrowly-tailored piece of legislation" that would
protect groups "from discrimination by the federal government," he said
in an interview this week.
Labrador said he began drafting his
proposal partly out of fear that the IRS and other federal agencies
might unfairly target groups that oppose same-sex marriage after the
Supreme Court struck down a federal law barring gay couples from
obtaining federal benefit this summer.
After the court's decision, "there were a
lot of ideas about what to do," Labrador said. "Some people looked at
overturning it, or doing a constitutional amendment. I looked at the
immediate need, which is the protection of religious institutions and
churches, so that they can continue practicing their religion as they
see fit."
The Human Rights Campaign reports
that it "permits federal workers, as well as recipients of federal
grants and contracts, to refuse to serve married same-sex couples based
on their personal religious beliefs about marriage. It also gives
anyone the right to sue the federal government for monetary damages if
he or she believes the federal government has discriminated against them
based on their religious convictions regarding marriage for same-sex
couples."
They offer a few examples:
If passed, the Marriage and Religious
Freedom Act would permit a federal worker processing tax returns,
approving visa applications or reviewing Social Security applications to
walk away from their responsibilities whenever a same-sex couple's
paperwork appeared on his or her desk. It would also allow a
federally-funded homeless shelter or substance abuse treatment program
to turn away LGBT people. Despite the cosponsors claims, there is no
evidence that federal programs have or would discriminate against
individuals because of their religious beliefs about marriage.
Protections against discrimination based on religious belief are
explicitly and robustly provided under the First Amendment and federal
nondiscrimination statutes.
Here's a copy of the bill, via Think Progress.
They add:
The consequences of this legislation
would be immense, such that a few individuals could short-circuit the
rights of gay and lesbian couples across the country. Given its prudish
inclusion of opposition to premarital sex, these consequences could
likely apply to many straight couples as well.
NOM has, of course, given the bill a major endorsement:
“This is a critical piece of legislation
to protect religious liberty as a cornerstone of our country and
deserves our full support,” said Brian Brown, NOM’s president. “Efforts
to redefine marriage pose a direct threat to the free exercise of
religion. This legislation would protect the right of organizations to
communicate their views about marriage without threat that the tax code
will be used to punish them. We applaud Congressman Labrador and his
colleagues for their leadership on this important issue.”
“This bill is crucial. Those who wish to
redefine marriage would like nothing better than to wield the tax code
as a weapon against those who hold a traditional view of marriage.
Further, during the IRS hearings before the House Ways and Means
Committee we all heard that some legislators would support stripping the
tax-exempt status of some groups that support traditional marriage,”
continued Brown. “Individuals and groups should be able to freely speak
their views about marriage in the public square without fear of
governmental reprisal including having their tax exemption stripped.
This legislation protects religious freedom and our constitutional
rights.”
The bill, they report, has 60 co-sponsors.
No comments:
Post a Comment