It was fairly obvious that the "Christian" right would be reacting to the impending Supreme Court opinion on marriage equality -- and at this point, while I hesitate to say that anything with this Court is a foregone conclusion, unless it involves corporate interests, from the weight of Circuit Court opinions and the complete lack of rational justifications for state bans, it does look as though the Court has no option but to find in favor -- I hadn't realized how quickly they would be piling on. The latest is from Oklahoma, with the "Oklahoma Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 2015" -- although no one seems to be able to explain why something that has not been taken away needs to be restored. The excuse -- because it sure as hell is not an argument -- is close to what we've been seeing from the "Christian Martyrs"™ who bake cakes and arrange flowers:
Forget the fact that the same arguments have been used against every advance in civil rights for every group. See, Sen. Silk is being "sensitive," because he has "homosexual friends." The reactions to that statement have not been kind.
The other prong of the attack that's come into play recently can be found in this bill being considered by the Texas Legislature:
Texas is a little behind the gun on this one: a similar law passed in Arkansas late last month.
Matt Baume has a couple of videos on these and other tactics and how to deal with them:
And, last but not least, sue. The courts are our last defense against this sort of thing (which is why Anti-Gay, Inc., hates the idea of an independent judiciary), and my own feeling is that if anything is going to make it obvious that sexual orientation and gender identity and expression should be included in suspect classes, it's this kind of back-door, systematic discrimination written into the law.
Silk told The New York Times in an article published today, that the "L.G.B.T. movement is the main thing, the primary thing that’s going to be challenging religious liberties and the freedom to live out religious convictions."
Forget the fact that the same arguments have been used against every advance in civil rights for every group. See, Sen. Silk is being "sensitive," because he has "homosexual friends." The reactions to that statement have not been kind.
The other prong of the attack that's come into play recently can be found in this bill being considered by the Texas Legislature:
The proposal from GOP Rep. Rick Miller (above) would prohibit cities from enforcing nondiscrimination ordinances that include protected classes not contained in state law.
The Texas Observer reports:
Texas law doesn’t include sexual orientation or gender identity and expression. If passed, Miller’s bill would undo LGBT protections passed by numerous cities, including Austin, Dallas, San Antonio, El Paso, Fort Worth, Houston and Plano. Altogether more than 7.5 million Texas are covered by such ordinances.
Texas is a little behind the gun on this one: a similar law passed in Arkansas late last month.
Matt Baume has a couple of videos on these and other tactics and how to deal with them:
And, last but not least, sue. The courts are our last defense against this sort of thing (which is why Anti-Gay, Inc., hates the idea of an independent judiciary), and my own feeling is that if anything is going to make it obvious that sexual orientation and gender identity and expression should be included in suspect classes, it's this kind of back-door, systematic discrimination written into the law.
No comments:
Post a Comment