They said that their priority this legislative session was to focus on issues that really mattered, like the condition of our roads, and the facts that good jobs for Michiganders are increasingly difficult to come by, but guess what? House Republicans, instead of focusing on things that really matter to Michigan families, just passed a bill that would allow individuals and businesses to use religion as an excuse to discriminate. The bill, which is euphemistically called the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, or HB 5958, passed the House in a 59-50 vote along party lines. Speaker of the House Jase Bolger, in defense of the bill, said, “This is not a license to discriminate,” and then went on to contradict himself by explaining how good Christians shouldn’t be forced to bake wedding cakes for godless homosexuals. (Sadly, homosexuals will not be allowed under the law to discriminate against those individuals they find to be unworthy of cake.) Bolger went on to say, “People simply want their government to allow them to practice their faith in peace.”
Democrats offered amendments that would have, among other things, require that individuals asserting “the right to discriminate” be able to somehow quantify their religiosity, by demonstrating that they, for instance, either tithe to their church, or participate actively in their congregations, but the Republicans, apparently not wanting to set the discrimination bar too high, chose not to include them.
The bill, having passed the House, will now move to the Michigan Senate, where Republican Majority Leader Randy Richardville is likely to bring it to a vote.
I know folks like Jase Bolger feel as though they have to pass legislation like this in order to protect the poor, defenseless Christian majority of Michigan from cake-loving homosexuals, who, if left to their now devices, would have the audacity to audacity to walk into a bakery and order food, but I wonder if they’ve really thought this through.
I was just reading today about how, at the Florida state capital, the Church of Satan would allowed to set up a display right alongside the depiction of the baby Jesus in the manger this holiday season. (While not yet approved, the adherents of Festivus are petitioning to have a 6-foot tall stack of empty beer cans displayed in accordance with their religious practices as well.) And it makes me wonder if maybe, just maybe, all of this could come back and explode in the face of Bolger and the persecuted majority he so faithfully represents. Might it be possible, I wonder, for one of our newer religions to adopt a doctrine outlawing proximity to old, white, angry conservatives? Or, better yet, I wonder if homosexuality could just become a religion, making it possible for its practitioners to deny service to Christians? [a note to all my gay friends: Just think of all the fabulous robes you could afford to make, and outrageous church parties you could afford to throw, if homosexuality were to become tax exempt?]
I posed this question in a round about way to my friend Jeff Irwin, who represents Ann Arbor in the Michigan House. Here’s our exchange.
MARK: Jeff, would I be right to assume that, under this law, if it were to pass, a devout Muslim shop owner could refuse service to a woman who was not completely covered?
JEFF: Well, it’s complicate, and it’s not clear which religious beliefs will be sufficiently sincere to receive protection. In practical terms, the bill gives anybody (such as the shop owner in your example) a defense in court against any government action that infringes on their religious beliefs. In that case, the government would be required to prove that our anti-discrimination laws are serving a “compelling gov’t interest” and are “narrowly tailored to satisfy the gov’t’s interest.” I have no problem with free exercise of religion, but I am very sensitive about violating the aspect of the first amendment preventing establishment of religion by the state.
So, if I read that correctly, we’re putting the state in the position where it will have to decide which religions will be able to exercise the right of bigotry… What could possibly go wrong?
And where in the Bible does it say that Christians can’t bake cakes for gays, anyway? Maybe I missed it, but I don’t recall Jesus ever having said, “My followers shouldn’t bake for certain kinds of people.” And, if he did say that, those people probably wouldn’t have been the gays. They’d have been the CEO class. Jesus washed the feet of prostitutes, for fuck’s sake.
And this, by they way, shouldn’t surprise anyone. This is what the Republicans do during the lame duck session. They seek to criminalize homosexuality and drive the intelligent from our state. Remember this headline from two years ago today… “New legislation in the Michigan Senate would empower health care workers to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation and religion“?
And who can forget that time that Michigan Republicans in the Senate amended anti-bullying legislation to so that it excused bullying by those motivated by religious conviction?
No, this, sadly, is par for the course in Michigan, and no one seems to give a damn. If they had, they would have voted in November, and we wouldn’t be having this conversation right now. We knew that this was coming, and yet we did nothing to stop it… How long will it be before we start seeing “No Homosexuals” signs hanging in the windows of our local businesses?
[The image at the top of the page is courtesy of the Michigan Democrats.]
