Wednesday, February 9, 2011

Iowa House Bill That Would Have Legalized Discrimination Against Same Sex Marriage Couples Is Dead , For Now

An update on a previous post, the Des Moines Register reporting that the ridiculous legislative proposal to allow Iowans refuse service to those whose marriage they disapprove of on religious grounds is dead, the chairman of the House Judicial Committee said Wednesday, Representative Richard Anderson (Republican-Clarinda) told a meeting of about 75 people, that House Study Bill 50, which he sponsored, will not receive further consideration. However, following the meeting, Anderson hinted to reporters that work on the bill may continue. When asked if the bill might return in a narrow form, Anderson answered “We don’t know. There are issues that people have and we just have to continue to work on it.” The bill, known as the Religious Conscience Protection Act, was intended to allow individuals, businesses, and organizations to deny services to married same sex couples. The bill was so broad that it would legalize a wide-range of discriminatory acts, opponents suggesting for example if a Christian were married to a Jew, or a couple unable to have children, since Anderson claimed on the floor of the House Monday that state’s prime role of marriage is in promoting “responsible procreation.” Alicia Claypool, an Iowa Civil Rights Commission, told Anderson today that “My recollection of history is that religion has been used demonize and to keep people down. Religion was used to say blacks were inferior under Jim Crow laws; religion has been used to say that women could not handle being in public life or even voting because this was inappropriate for their role in society.” Governor Terry Branstad, who opposes same sex marriage, has not said whether he would have signed House Study Bill 50 if it made its way to his desk, however he told WHO-TV 13 that he did not believe the bill legalizes discrimination, saying “What it does is protect people who want to exercise their moral and ethical rights under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.”

0 comments: