Cheyenne's mayor should stand by her campaign pledge to fully back a nondiscrimination ordinance. Her stated support for this exemption is a poison pill that would nullify protections for the LGBT-plus community.
By D. Reed Eckhardt
Cheyenne's LGBT-plus community -- as well as its supporters -- have every right to be upset with Mayor Marian Orr.
After pledging to champion a nondiscrimination ordinance during her
Mayor Marian Orr talks to the media during last fall's campaign. |
Perhaps Orr doesn't know this -- though she probably does -- but demands by the religious community to exercise a "right to discriminate" based on their (usually fundamentalist Christian) beliefs has become the new mantra now that same-sex marriage has been upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court. Those who are offended by gay and lesbian couples, and in particular by the idea of them legally marrying, are fighting back by trying to disallow them access to their businesses and rental properties and by denying them jobs in their workplaces.
No doubt, these Christian people have sincerely held beliefs, and they honestly may not want to serve members of the LGBT-plus community, seeing that as a violation their faith. They argue that because it is THEIR business, and because they have a First Amendment right to religion, they can bar gays, lesbians, and others. But the courts already have made it clear that religion is not a legal basis for discrimination. That was decided in the South in the 1960s when residents there said it violated their beliefs to serve blacks or mixed-race couples. Indeed, the right to access public accommodations now is written into U.S. Code:
"All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, as defined in this section, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin." (Title 42, Chapter 21, Subchapter II)
And the Wyoming Supreme Court addressed this issue earlier in the year when it ruled Pinedale Judge Ruth Neely did not have a right to refuse to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples simply because such marriages violate her religious beliefs.
In the midst of censuring Neely for failing to do her job, Justice Kate Fox wrote the following: "In addition to protecting religious freedom, our (Wyoming) Constitution recognizes the importance of equal rights for all. ... we could not read the provisions regarding religious liberty to render those provisions recognizing equal rights and due process to be inoperative or superfluous."
Elsewhere in the ruling, the state's High Court says, "(W)hile the freedom to believe is absolute, the freedom to act cannot be." It adds, "(T)he Wyoming Constitution is construed to protect people against legal discrimination more robustly than does the federal constitution."
Elsewhere in the ruling, the state's High Court says, "(W)hile the freedom to believe is absolute, the freedom to act cannot be." It adds, "(T)he Wyoming Constitution is construed to protect people against legal discrimination more robustly than does the federal constitution."
So rather than being cowed by the fundamentalist Christian community, Orr would be wiser to show some leadership here. She should explain to them that they do, indeed, have a right to their beliefs, but their rights to do not trump the rights of LGBT-plus residents to be free from discrimination. The LGBT-plus community deserves that from Orr, given that they voted for her, believing she would properly handle this issue, which is so important to them.
As for waiting for the U.S. Supreme Court to rule in a case involving a bakery in Colorado that refused to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple, why? The Wyoming Supreme Court already has said religious belief does provide cover to discriminate. Let's get on with affirming the rights of ALL of this city's residents, not just those who sit in fundamentalist pews on Sunday.
D. Reed Eckhardt is the former executive editor of the Wyoming Tribune Eagle.
As for waiting for the U.S. Supreme Court to rule in a case involving a bakery in Colorado that refused to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple, why? The Wyoming Supreme Court already has said religious belief does provide cover to discriminate. Let's get on with affirming the rights of ALL of this city's residents, not just those who sit in fundamentalist pews on Sunday.
D. Reed Eckhardt is the former executive editor of the Wyoming Tribune Eagle.
No comments:
Post a Comment