Washington lawmakers introduce religion-based discrimination bill.

God dammit, United States.  I go AWOL on the road traveling and you go and do shit like this.

Legislation proposed in Washington state this week would allow businesses to deny service to the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender population and others, based on religious differences.

Under the terms of the bill, businesses in the state could refuse service to anyone whose religious or philosophical beliefs differ from their own. They could not, however, refuse service based on areas protected under federal law, which does not include the LGBT community.

The legislation was sparked by a lawsuit filed in April by the American Civil Liberties Union against a florist in Richland, Wash., who, based on her religious beliefs, denied service to a gay couple who were getting married, The Associated Press reports.

The faithful who support this bill are adults.  How do they not see the irony in a supposed religion of love prioritizing telling you precisely who to hate?

Let’s take this one to the Supreme Court.  Pretty please.

  • Glodson

    Let’s say this bill gets to stand as is. What happens when Christians are no longer the majority? What happens if people decide they don’t want to serve those who oppressed them with laws such as this?

    Of course, those who drafted this bill never considered this. They didn’t think a time would come that such as a law could hurt them. It was one of many faults they never considered.

    • Loqi

      Isn’t religion one of those things protected by federal law? Of course, you could deny service to bigots, since I’m pretty sure that’s a protected class.

      • Glodson

        That’s true. I hadn’t considered that. I guess they get to have their cake and still tell people who are already marginalized by society that they cannot even purchase cake.

      • Loqi

        Ugh. Pretty sure that’s *not* a protected class.

      • b33bl3br0x

        It is. The Civil Rights Act protects against discrimination on religious grounds in places of public accomodation. The first time this law was used as a defense it would be struck down due to supremacy of federal law.

  • Rain

    Faith is a choice. So therefore it is immoral and it should be illegal. Or something. I forget how the argument goes. Anyway I hope the bill doesn’t include lunch counters or drinking fountains. Or I hope does include them. I’m not really sure because the bill appears to have originated from la-la backwards-ville-land judging by the very first paragraph of it.

    AN ACT Relating to the right to engage in commerce free from discrimination;

    • Rain

      IANAL, but it does say “free from discrimination”, not “free of discrimination”. So I think they might be in the clear! Obviously it was drafted by a very clever lawyer! j/k

  • http://www.facebook.com/andrew.kohler.338 Andrew Kohler

    As a native of Washington state who worked with Equal Rights Washington for a year, I think I can say that it is very unlikely this bill will pass the legislature, if it is even brought up, and it is even less like that Jay Inslee would sign it into law. Sorry, JT–we’ll have to wait a while longer before something like this goes before the SCOTUS. I’d not be surprised, however, if a legislature in a more conservative state likes the idea and tries the same stunt, perhaps with better chances.

  • http://twitter.com/the_final_pope Ben Roy

    Until all religions fall into history we’ll have to deal with this stupidity and ignorance. I doubt I’ll live to see the day the last place of worship closes it’s doors for the last time, but I can do what I can to make sure my decedents are able to celebrate that day…the day America finally became free.

  • http://www.facebook.com/brett.falkenberg Brett Falkenberg

    It’s not fair. The ex-Catholic gay florist should be able to tell the straight Catholic couple that their weekly disordered cannibalism is immoral and refuse to provide them flowers for their nuptials without a lawsuit too!

  • John H

    I have a religious* objection to serving bigoted assholes, who thankfully are not a protected class. It might look like I’m discriminating against fundamentalist Christians, but that’s a false correlation, the appearance of which is caused by heavy overlap between the two groups.

    *See, my total lack of religion has left me to make decisions based on reasoning from reality (as opposed to claims of special, supernatural knowledge), and such reasoning has convinced me that bigoted assholes are bad for a society.
    (Damn, I see Loqi basically beat me too it.)