Wednesday, February 18, 2015

Balancing Religious Liberty with Anti Discrimination for LGBT

Lawmakers are still squabbling over the details and wording of any legislation concerning the goals to protect LGBT citizens from discrimination in housing, employment, and other public services, while also conserving a person's ability to avoid activities that violate "deeply held religious beliefs".

Anderegg of Lehi has drafted a bill that does not include any wording for LGBT, but widens the religious rights for anyone to deny services for any religious reason. Knowing that LGBT advocates will attempt to kill anything that does not have the words "gender identity" or "sexual preference", he states he will probably not run the bill.

On the other end, LGBT advocates are promoting St. George's Urqhuart's bill SB100, which simply adds those exact words to Utah's anti-discrimination bill. They believe Utah is already saturated with religious liberties and isn't in need of any more.

Some quotes I'd like to post from the article's comment forum:

This is an excellent question. Why does "relgious freedom" trump all other rights like LaVar's bill is asking to do? Religion is already a protected class and cannot be discriminated against, but his bill is a no holds barred bill that will allows anyone to discriminate anyone as long as they claim a religious belief. It is absolutely ridiculous and doesn't even follow the spirit of what the LDS Church was calling for.

Religious freedom means being able to WORSHIP in anyway you feel is right for you. Renting an apartment or baking a cake is not WORSHIP. If you serve the public, you have to serve the ENTIRE public, not just those who you like.

Also, adding protections in from discriminating against a person's sexual orientation or gender identity will have zero effect on what you are suggesting with "it would be very difficult to terminate them if they are unproductive or problematic". Adding thses protections would prevent you from firing someone strictly because they are Gay, Straight, asexual etc. But if they are unable to perform their job, you are firing them for performance issues not orientation issues. It is no different from me not being able to fire someone because they are Mormon. - LittleBrudda

I see a lot of complaining and whining about religious folks being forced to accept the LGBT way of life (even though nobody is asking anyone do to anything of the sort). When is it my turn to not have to be "forced" to accept the religious way of life? I'm straight, married, 2 kids, live a productive life, involved in my community, give time to others in need, and wouldn't step foot in a church if someone paid me. Why? Because I don't believe religion is necessary to do the right thing.
I don't care what the trait is, if you are discriminated against because of it then you should be protected. They should change the law so that it reads anti discrimination, regardless of why, is prohibited. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying protect the perpetrators in our society. I'm talking about those that just live their lives without causing problems for others. I don't know why we as humans act this way. -Fellow_Man

Read more here:

No comments:

Post a Comment