Virginia Anti-Gay Bill

Help keep it from passing!

Petition:

https://go.allout.org/en/a/virginia/

Bill from the Commonwealth's website:
http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?151+ful+HB1414

This is disgusting. I signed the petition and I hope the bill isn't passed. Why can't people just be more tolerant?

I am 100% for equality.
But with that said I just read the bill and fail to understand how any part of it could allow a person to be thrown out of a restaurant for being gay?

For those who are interested this is the proposed clause the bill wants to add.

"1. § 1. A person seeking to obtain or renew a license, registration, or certificate from the Commonwealth, its political subdivisions, or any agency, authority, board, department, or other entity thereof, shall not be required to perform, assist, consent to, or participate in any action or refrain from performing, assisting, consenting to, or participating in any action as a condition of obtaining or renewing the license, registration, or certificate where such condition would violate the religious or moral convictions of such person with respect to same-sex "marriage" or homosexual behavior."


In laymen terms I interpreted it as

"No one who wants to obtain or renew a license, registration, or certificate from the government should be required to perform any action or participate in any act that goes against their religious beliefs in relation to same sex marriage or homosexual behavior."

I was trying to find some more neutral sources, but rather unsurprisingly couldn't find any. This one was cited by most of the ones I found and has a quote from the Executive Director of the ACLU.

Basically, the problem is that it's extremely broad. "...shall not be required to... participate in any action... with respect to same-sex "marriage" or homosexual behavior." Actions like serving them food or giving them medical care. What could happen is, the government says "Ok we'll give you a restaurant license, but you have to serve gay people because they're people" and the restaurant owner goes "FREEDOM!!!"

And maybe that restaurant owner loses that case, but it could be years before a verdict is reached while it bounces around the courts, and 1) the supreme court has been extremely reluctant to come down one way or the other on LGBT rights and 2) has been chipping away a lot at consumer protections in general.

Also the guy who wrote it is crazy homophobic and is definitely trying to get LGBT people kicked out of hospitals.

That would be discrimination against another person tho. The person applying for the certificate would still be required to follow pre existing anti discrimination laws.

I think the thing it would do would be require that the religious homophobe wouldn't have to, for instance, attend a Pride parade as part of their requirement to get their certificate.

To be clear I think the bill is stupid and I would vote against it, I just don't think it goes as far as people think it goes.

No one in Virginia is making religious people go to Pride.

This law doesn't exist in a vacuum. Laws like these are being proposed all over the country to restrict public accommodations of LGBT. The common rhetoric is, "should a Christian* photographer be required to photograph a same sex wedding if it goes against their religious beliefs?" Like, not having to eat lunch with those filthy sodomists is definitely the goal. Maybe this bill allows that made it doesn't, but its opening the door and setting precedent for a religious exemption for behavior towards LGBT. Normally I agree with you, there is a lot of panic about laws that don't allow what people are panicking about... but this one pretty much is at least paving the way.

https://www.aclu.org/using-religion-discriminate

There also isn't federal protection against discrimination in public accommodation for LGBT, federal laws only cover race, ethnicity, and national origin. Some states have anti-discrimination laws for LGBT, Virginia does not. So its likely that someone denied service for "homosexual behavior" wouldn't have grounds to sue in the first place, but this bill would make it explicit that they don't (if the business is one that is licensed by the state) and gives the business a defense.

* Yeah I know these bills generally say "religious beliefs"... but let's be clear, they mean Christian

OK I found a quote from Marshall:

“We don’t tell attorneys you will accept any client that walks off the street, we’d don’t tell doctors you have to do an abortion,†Marshall said. “This has to do with licensing. So say Sally Smith is a clinical psychologist and she has a professional, ethical or moral objection to counseling in favor of same-sex relationships – Sally should not be prohibited from obtaining a license to counsel in Virginia.â€

So his explicit goal is to let people discriminate against LGBT. Plus the language is so broad. Any business that registers with the state, moral conviction, homosexual behavior.

Ah, I did not know that there was no protection against discrimination based on sexual orientation in Virginia. Ya that makes this bill VERY open then!

Can't 'religious beliefs' also mean Muslim? Islam REALLY doesn't like gays yet you never hear of LGBT lawsuits against Muslims, or someone trying to force a Muslim baker, photographer, imam to take part in a gay ceremony. Heck, it's barely a blip on the media radar when some gay kid is beaten by a Muslim 'patrol' enforcing Sharia law. Are Muslims off-limits to LGBT activists? Or are Christians just the easier, more politically-correct target?

How do you get from 'Christian' photographer not wanting to photograph a ceremony he/she disagrees with to a Christian's goal of not to eat 'lunch with the filthy sodomists'? Generalizing much? I also don't understand why a gay couple would want to force someone who doesn't agree with their lifestyle choice to provide a service or participate in that gay couple's celebration of their relationship. Wouldn't having an unwilling/unhappy participant kind of ruin the happiness of their day?

As far as restaurants/hospitals/hotels - do you publicly announce your sexual orientation upon entering those places? I have yet to see anyone do so, nor have ever had the question asked when I'm out with friends of the same sex, so how would a business know? And don't say a same sex couple asking for a room is obvious, because lots of people travel with friends of the same sex and share hotel rooms to save costs.

It's stupid to have a bill like this but it's also stupid to force EVERYONE to agree with/condone/participate with a lifestyle that is explicitly against their religious beliefs. Those people have rights, too. As far as businesses go, let the market decide. If enough people disagree with that business' view of the LGBT lifestyle, that business will cease to exist.

as far as I"m concerned, those that feel so persecuted and attacked for being Christian can practice their faith exactly how they expect everyone else to live their lives. They can stay at home and do it in the privacy of their own home.

Some people to have such a problem with everyone else, maybe it's best they keep themselves out of society in general? Gay couples, "I don't want to see that" Ten commandments in the State Capital, "I have a right to be a Christian" Gay people want to utilize a public service or establishment, well not if there's anyone that happens to somehow find offense in 2 people that love each other. Want to have prayer time in school even though half the students believe in something else? "it's my right as a Christian"

It astonishes me the degree that certain groups of people in this country think they are somehow "different" and the lengths they'll go to excuse what amounts to nothing more than, "I want what I want and everyone else can go pound sand" attitude.

I wonder what happens when the first christian gets his hands chopped off for stealing his Muslim boss's stapler.

Certain groups have no problem hating on gays all day long, yet excuse the millions upon millions that have committed adultery. never mind the judge not and ye shall not be judged bit, that only matters sometimes

Your argument can be used against secular 'I want what I want and everyone else can go pound sand' attitude, just as much as against the religious. Christmas is now called 'Sparkle Day' in some schools. How about having the secular I-hate-all-religions not forcing THEIR non-beliefs on others? So you agree with the teacher who wouldn't let a kid, during his class FREE time, read his Bible? The kid wasn't preaching, wasn't reading aloud, he pulled out a book HE wanted to read and was told he couldn't. Where are HIS rights?

Just because people sometimes over-react in the name of political correct and make the wrong decision doesn't mean religious people are being persecuted. Good lord.

Just because SOME religious people object to participating in a gay marriage ceremony doesn't mean ALL gays are being persecuted by ALL Christians.

I say Merry Christmas to everyone I meet after Thanksgiving. I say happy holidays after Christmas. I have a Christmas tree. I dont care what other people say. I've never heard of sparkle day. I hardly think most schools are snatching Bibles from kids on their free time, unless of course other stuff is going on.

Again, context matters. Bob Marshall doesn't have a track record of Islam-motivated offensive statements. He does not have a track record of trying to legislate narrow interpretations of the Quran.

These laws are being proposed by Christians, to support a specific and extremely narrow interpretation of Christianity.

When Bobby Jindal was promoting his education vouchers for private schools, no one had a problem with it when it was Christian schools getting the money - but when a Muslim school applied for the vouchers, **** hit the fan. In 2012, of 51 participating schools in the Great Baton Rouge area, 46 are a flavor of Christianity.

No one is making religious leaders perform religious ceremonies for people they do not believe have access to those ceremonies.

People are trying to discriminate against LGBT people in public and private business. THAT is what is happening. Discrimination is happening against LGBT people, not Christians. Christians are not a discriminated class in the United States. They just aren't. What a lot of people are doing, is discriminating against people they disagree with, and when they get called on it, they cry that they are being discriminated against!

???

?????

As far as I can tell the only "Muslim patrol enforcing Shariah law" happened a few times in 2013 in London - and those people were jailed for that - so I'm not really sure how that supports your position

Pubic access is not a market-based decision.

:rofl1::rofl1::rofl1::rofl1::rofl1:

I'm sorry! I'm so immature.

No one is even remotely saying that. There is precedent against private and public businesses discriminating (disability, gender, race). If Christians believed that black people are filthy animals, would you encourage them to be allowed to discriminate based on this?

Due to legal precedence against discrimination, LGBT people must fall under this umbrella. No one is saying all Christians are persecuting gay people. They are just making it so that those who DO want to persecute them are unable to do so.

And for the record, the vast majority of people would agree that taking someone's bible away in free time is something that should not happen unless there was some other unrelated reason for removing the bible (the child was utilizing it to distract, harm, or offend other kids)

... I had to.