The Senate voted on Wednesday to advance the Respect for Marriage Act, a bill that would codify the legality of same-sex marriage, with 12 Republicans joining the Democratic majority after an amendment was added to the bill in an effort to protect religious rights.
The problem is that the amendment’s supposed protections are woefully insufficient and vague. They apply only to “nonprofit organizations” that conscientiously object to providing “services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods, or privileges for the solemnization or celebration of a marriage.” As National Review’s John McCormack noted earlier this week, the amendment would not have, for example, protected Colorado baker Jack Phillips, who is still in court fighting for his right to operate his business according to his beliefs. Nor would it protect faith-based adoption agencies that believe marriage is between one man and one woman.
I suppose we should be thankful a dozen Republicans who voted for this bill didn’t acquiesce to Democratic demands to gut the Religious Freedom Restoration Act as well. But all the RFRA can do if this law passes is grant religious objectors a leg to stand on in court; it does nothing to prevent them from having to go to court in the first place.
In other words, this amendment, which is supposedly meant to protect religious liberty, does nothing of the sort, and will instead leave millions of men and women of faith out to dry, as it offers them no meaningful protection from the legal harassment that religious persons like Phillips have faced for years.
The amendment also fails to protect religious organizations, businesses, and individuals from the threat of government retaliation. Even though religious nonprofit organizations are not required under this law to provide services for the solemnization or celebration of same-sex marriage, there is nothing to stop the IRS from stripping these organizations of their nonprofit status if they choose to operate according to their beliefs.
Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) gave the Senate an opportunity to close this loophole and adopt an amendment specifically designed to protect religious individuals, businesses, and nonprofit organizations from government discrimination. But, according to Lee, his colleagues refused even to consider it.
This is a shame. It is bad enough that the government wants to redefine the institution of marriage to be something it is not, but it is even worse that it would do so at the expense of religious Americans, whose only crime is holding a belief that, until very recently, had governed every civil society for tens of thousands of years.
* Article from: The Washington Examiner
