First Amendment Defense Act

[finehoe]

Republicans are planning on turning back the clock on gay rights once President-elect Donald Trump takes office.

The so-called First Amendment Defense Act, or FADA, “prohibits the federal government from taking discriminatory action against a person on the basis that such person believes or acts in accordance with a religious belief or moral conviction that: (1) marriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman, or (2) sexual relations are properly reserved to such a marriage.”

In other words, you can discriminate, but you have to say that you’re discriminating because your religion wants you to.

Because of the bill’s language, it would not only permit discrimination against homosexual couples, but also unwed heterosexual couples and single mothers, so long as the business owners can claim that their religious beliefs are being violated. Because the phrase “moral conviction” appears in the legislation, one wouldn’t even need to connect their discriminatory acts to a specific religious creed or doctrine. All one would have to do is cite a moral conviction that sexual activity outside of heterosexual marriage is offensive.

Nor is the bill limited to business owners. FADA’s logic could also be used to justify pharmacies refusing to fill birth control prescriptions, businesses not offering health benefits to a same-sex marital partner, adoption agencies discriminating against gay families, and even hospitals turning away LGBT people or their children.

“There cannot be even one iota of doubt that this bill endorses one set of religious beliefs above others, and targets people in same-sex relationships, married or not, as well as unmarried heterosexual couples who live together,” said Jennifer Pizer, Law and Policy Director at Lambda Legal, in an interview with NBC Out on Wednesday. “It’s an unconstitutional effort to turn the clock back to a time when unmarried mothers had to hide in shame, and LGBT people had to hide, period.”

Both Trump and Vice President-elect Mike Pence support FADA, as do a number of Trump’s other cabinet appointments, from budget director Mick Mulvaney to secretary of housing and urban development Ben Carson.

“Hopefully November’s results will give us the momentum we need to get this done next year,” said Conn Carroll, a spokesman for Sen. Mike Lee of Utah (who co-sponsored FADA in 2015), during an interview with BuzzFeed News on Dec. 9.

Carroll later added, “We do plan to reintroduce FADA next Congress and we welcome Trump’s positive words about the bill.”

Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, the bill’s other co-sponsor, told BuzzFeed News that “the prospects for protecting religious freedom are brighter now than they have been in a long time. We are having ongoing conversations with our colleagues both in Congress and leaders in the new administration about a multitude of ways we can honor the commitment made to the voters in this last election.”

[spuwho]

When I read it it says "the government can't compel by law to make someone do something against their religious belief"

The last line is troublesome in that "person" is defined beyond a human being.  I have always had trouble with that.


https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/2802

First Amendment Defense Act

Prohibits the federal government from taking discriminatory action against a person on the basis that such person believes or acts in accordance with a religious belief or moral conviction that: (1) marriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman, or (2) sexual relations are properly reserved to such a marriage.

Defines "discriminatory action" as any federal government action to discriminate against a person with such beliefs or convictions, including a federal government action to:

alter the federal tax treatment of, cause any tax, penalty, or payment to be assessed against, or deny, delay, or revoke certain tax exemptions of any such person;
disallow a deduction of any charitable contribution made to or by such person;
withhold, reduce, exclude, terminate, or otherwise deny any federal grant, contract, subcontract, cooperative agreement, loan, license, certification, accreditation, employment, or similar position or status from or to such person; or
withhold, reduce, exclude, terminate, or otherwise deny any benefit under a federal benefit program.
Requires the federal government to consider to be accredited, licensed, or certified for purposes of federal law any person who would be accredited, licensed, or certified for such purposes but for a determination that the person believes or acts in accordance with such a religious belief or moral conviction.

Permits a person to assert an actual or threatened violation of this Act as a claim or defense in a judicial or administrative proceeding and to obtain compensatory damages or other appropriate relief against the federal government.

Authorizes the Attorney General to bring an action to enforce this Act against the Government Accountability Office or an establishment in the executive branch, other than the U.S. Postal Service or the Postal Regulatory Commission, that is not an executive department, military department, or government corporation.

Defines "person" as any person regardless of religious affiliation, including corporations and other entities regardless of for-profit or nonprofit status.

[Charles Hunter]

Why stop there? 50 years ago, people claimed religious justification to prohibit inter-racial marriage, and other discrimination. Why not bring that back, too, and make America Great Again?


The bill would also allow discrimination against divorced people who remarry - second spouse.

[JeffreyS]

We have seen this at the state level recently when he GOP is in control. Every Trump and Republican voter knew and intentionally voted for bigotry. I am not saying they are bigots just that they intentionally supported it. You know because email.