Connect with us

Kansas Republican Promises To Pass Anti-Gay Marriage ‘Religious Freedom’ Bill

Published

on

A veteran Kansas state lawmaker is promising to bring back a bill that would discriminate against gay people under the guise of “religious freedom.”

The “Protecting religious freedom regarding marriage” bill, also known as the “religious freedom bill,” passed in the Kansas House in February by a strong margin, 72-49. It died in the Senate. But now, Rep. Steve Brunk is promising to bring it back and pass it.

“This is an ongoing conversation,” Brunk told KWCH. “We’re working on the best way to protect Kansan’s first amendment rights.”

Brunk may change some of the bill’s text, but the title alone should make every LGBT person in Kansas, their supporters, and supporters of true religious freedom, concerned.

As it stands now, here’s how the bill could impact a same-sex couple:

Say John and Steve are legally married in New York, and John gets a great job at a company in Kansas. The couple decide to move – perhaps John was raised in Kansas – and so they pack their things and head to the Sunflower State. The couple want to rent a hotel, but the manager of the hotel they drive to refuses them a room, claiming his company has sincerely held religious beliefs against same-sex marriage. After searching for another hotel, the couple check in. They go to a restaurant, but are refused service because the waitress sees them holding hands and claims she has sincerely held religious beliefs against same-sex marriage.

The couple need to rent a home, but the real estate broker when the two pull up for an appointment claims he has sincerely held religious beliefs, so the couple are forced to find another agent. Once they do, the company that owns the apartment building says they won’t rent to a same-sex couple, because of their sincerely held religious beliefs. Let’s not forget that John and Steve have already quit their jobs and packed their belongings. Kansas is starting to look pretty unfriendly.

Perhaps John’s employer learns John is married to Steve after John fills out his new-hire paperwork, putting Steve down as his emergency contact, or adding him to his health insurance. John gets fired because the company knew he was gay and could “tolerate” it, but marriage violates the owner’s sincerely held religious beliefs.

Perhaps you say, this is an extreme story and could never happen. Perhaps, but even if only one instance did, it would have the effect of the State of Kansas telling a same-sex couple they are not entitled to live with the same assumptions or protections of basic living that different-sex couples assume every day of the year.

Why?

As it passed the House, the “Protecting religious freedom regarding marriage” bill allows any “individual or religious entity” to deny services to anyone “if it would be contrary to the sincerely held religious beliefs of the individual or religious entity regarding sex or gender.”

The definition of a “religious entity” in the bill is broad, so, not just churches or synagogues or mosques, etc., but any “privately-held business operating consistently with its sincerely held religious beliefs.”

Think of it as a Hobby Lobby-type bill against same-sex marriage.

Specifically, it states, no governmental entity, or law, could require them to “[p]rovide any services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods, or privileges; provide counseling, adoption, foster care and other social services; or provide employment or employment benefits, related to, or related to the celebration of, any marriage, domestic partnership, civil union or similar arrangement.”

It also allows people to refuse to “solemnize any marriage, domestic partnership, civil union or similar arrangement,” or “treat any marriage, domestic partnership, civil union or similar arrangement as valid.”

Not only that, but if they sue, the individual or religious entity refusing to provide services gets the cost of their lawsuit, including attorney fees, paid for.

Yes, Kansas is starting to look pretty unfriendly.

As for Rep. Brunk, on his campaign website he states, “I believe government should be limited to core functions and accomplish what the private sector cannot. Our policies should protect individual freedoms, expressions of faith, traditional family values, and promote free markets. A primary function of government is to promote justice while protecting people and property.”

It’s unclear how this legislation could possibly be said to do that.

 

Image via YouTube
Hat tip: Joe Jervis

 

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

‘Absolutely Blockbuster Evidence’: Experts Stunned Over Trump ‘Espionage Act’ Bombshell That Pressures ‘DOJ to Indict’

Published

on

Legal experts wasted no time Wednesday responding to an exclusive CNN report revealing federal prosecutors have obtained audio evidence of Donald Trump in a 2021 meeting at his Bedminster golf course admitting he had held onto a classified Pentagon document about a potential attack on Iran, admitting he wanted to share the document, and admitting he knew he legally could not because he did not have the authority to declassify it post-presidency.

“War plans are among the most highly classified documents. Puts pressure on DOJ to indict, and a jury to convict,” writes NYU Law professor of Law Ryan Goodman, a former U.S. Dept. of Defense Special Counsel.

“Make no mistake. This is squarely an Espionage Act case,” Goodman continues, calling the news a “bombshell.”

“It is not simply an ‘obstruction’ case,” says Goodman. “There is now every reason to expect former President Trump will be charged under 18 USC 793(e) of the Espionage Act. The law fits his reported conduct like a hand in glove.”

READ MORE: ‘Will Make a Great Trial Witness’: Experts Thrilled Jack Smith Is Investigating Trump’s Firing of Election Security Expert

“Audio recording is a meeting with several people who don’t have security clearances. If Trump discussed content of document it is even worse – and raises its own criminal exposure,” Goodman also writes.

On-air, CNN reported in the audio recording a piece of paper could be heard ratting in the wind.

Calling it “a critical find,” MSNBC legal analyst Lisa Rubin says the alleged audio recording of Trump “reveals another new, significant fact: In summer 2021, Trump had at least one classified document with him at Bedminster. Trump lawyers told DOJ in December 2022 that a search of Bedminster by private investigators yielded no such records.”

Rubin sums it all up: “That DOJ & the Special Counsel have apparently spoken to witnesses from Milley to Fitton and back suggests they have evidence regarding Trump’s motives and state of mind in addition to his actual taped statements.”

Rubin is not the only one focused on the Bedminster aspect.

Pete Strzok, the former FBI Counterintelligence Deputy Assistant Director, pointed to a tweet he wrote last year that reads: “Better check Bedminster… On May 6, NARA [the National Archives] emails Trump to say material is missing and may be at MAL [Mar-a-Lago].”

“On May 9, Trump gets on a private plane from Palm Beach to Bedminster. On video, several boxes are seen loaded onto the plane,” Strzok also tweeted.

READ MORE: ‘I Don’t Want Reality’: Senate Republican Explodes Over Origin of Concept of Race – Calls to Teach ‘Jesus Loves Me’ Instead

On Wednesday he wrote: “AND the meeting in question appears to have been at Bedminster. As I’ve said for a while, better check Bedminster.”

“Appears Trump – in his own voice,” Strzok adds, “- knew the procedures for declassifying information – knew he hadn’t done it – may have disclosed it to someone not authorized to receive it Huge. Filling in those 18 USC 793 elements of the crime.”

18 U.S. Code § 793 is the federal statute for “Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information.”

Other experts also weighed in.

“Holy shit,” exclaimed white collar criminal defense attorney Robert Denault, “Hugely significant piece of evidence.”

Attorney George Conway appeared to agree, citing the late, iconic Washington Post executive editor: “Fair to say Ben Bradlee would have called this a ‘holy-shit story.'”

Conway, a former Republican and devout never-Trumper did not hold back: “It would actually be perfect for the most colossally nihilistic moron the world has ever seen to go to prison for doing something so brazenly illegal, yet at the same time so unimaginably pointless and stupid.”

READ MORE: DeSantis Kicks Off Presidential Campaign Tour With Claim Teachers Are ‘Forcing’ Students to Pick Pronouns

Richard Painter, the former Bush 43 chief White House ethics lawyer points out that Trump “lied about it,” and called that a “felony.”

Former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti calls it “absolutely blockbuster evidence.”

“It proves that Trump *knew* he kept highly classified documents after he left office, that he shared the classified info with people who didn’t have clearance, and ‘suggests … he was aware of limitations’ on his ability to declassify.”

Image via Shutterstock

Continue Reading

CRIME

Feds Have Trump on Tape Admitting He Kept Classified Pentagon Document of Possible Iran Attack: Report

Published

on

Federal prosecutors have an audio recording of Donald Trump admitting in 2021 that he had kept a classified Pentagon document about a possible attack against Iran.

CNN, which published the exclusive report, notes the recording undercuts Trump’s “argument that he declassified everything.”

“The recording indicates Trump understood he retained classified material after leaving the White House, according to multiple sources familiar with the investigation. On the recording, Trump’s comments suggest he would like to share the information but he’s aware of limitations on his ability post-presidency to declassify records, two of the sources said,” CNN adds.

READ MORE: ‘I Don’t Want Reality’: Senate Republican Explodes Over Origin of Concept of Race – Calls to Teach ‘Jesus Loves Me’ Instead

“Prosecutors have asked witnesses about the recording and the document before a federal grand jury,” CNN also reports. “The episode has generated enough interest for investigators to have questioned Gen. Mark Milley, one of the highest-ranking Trump-era national security officials, about the incident.”

The recording was apparently made in July of 2021 at a Trump golf course. People without security clearances were part of the meeting during which it was discussed.

The damning revelation gives credence to political analysts who pointed to Trump’s recent remarks at the highly-controversial CNN town hall, when he was asked if he had shown classified documents to anyone.

“Not really,” Trump said. “I would have the right to,” he claimed, falsely.

“By the way, they were declassified after,” he also claimed, falsely.

Watch CNN’s report below or at this link.

 

 

Continue Reading

News

‘I Don’t Want Reality’: Senate Republican Explodes Over Origin of Concept of Race – Calls to Teach ‘Jesus Loves Me’ Instead

Published

on

U.S. Senator Markwayne Mullin (R-OK) exploded in a committee hearing on child care on Wednesday after he introduced a book designed to help children understand race, and declared he opposes socialism and wants schools to teach about Jesus Christ instead.

Sen. Mullin, a former U.S. Congressman who once told a House Democrat to “shut up,” began by explaining how expensive it is for private companies to set up child care – the topic of the hearing – but quickly transformed the hearing into one on race, socialism, and religion.

He wove a web that started with his concerns over “federalizing” education, which he declared is socialism. He then attacked the committee chairman, Bernie Sanders (I-VT), who heads the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP), for being a “self-declared democratic socialist.” That led to his claim that the book he opposes, “Our Skin: A First Conversation on Race,” would be taught nationwide.

Sen. Mullin said he opposes the book because it teaches young children that the concept of race, especially the white race, was created by white people to place themselves above other people with different skin – which has been documented in numerous studies, reports, articles, and books.

READ MORE: DeSantis Kicks Off Presidential Campaign Tour With Claim Teachers Are ‘Forcing’ Students to Pick Pronouns

Senator Mullin, who supports a federal vigilante “Don’t Say Gay” bill,  tried to get members of the panel to support his desire for schools to teach about Jesus instead.

“I have a book here in here in front of me called ‘Our Skin,'” Mullin told the committee, “and I’m going to read exactly what this book says. You guys might find it interesting. ‘A long time ago, way before you were born, a group of white people made up an idea called race. They sorted people by skin color and said that white people were better, smarter, prettier, and they deserved more than everybody else.’ This would be taught if we socialized our pre-K system, this would be taught.”

“How about we teach Jesus Loves Me?” Mullin demanded. “How about how about this? And teaching ‘Jesus Loves the Little Children.’ The lyrics go, ‘Red and yellow, black and white. They’re all precious in our sight.’ Now, which one would you think would be better? I’ll ask everybody on the panel, which is better to teach? This, that is a story that was made up to teach kids, three year olds who have no idea what race is.”

“Now all of a sudden being taught that white people said this as a truth, someone pointed me that this being a truth, that white people developed race, that white people develop that. That all of a sudden that was our word that we developed. By the way, I’m Cherokee, Native American. I think we have experienced a little bit of racism before in my life,” Mullen said.

READ MORE: ‘Will Make a Great Trial Witness’: Experts Thrilled Jack Smith Is Investigating Trump’s Firing of Election Security Expert

“So I ask everybody on the panel, which one is better to teach? This,” referring to the book he had brought, “or the ‘Jesus Loves Me’ lyrics? Ma’am. I’ll start on here.”

“I think it’s important to teach that all children are seen and valued for who they are,” one panelist told Sen. Mullin. He was not pleased.

Another panelist who appeared to agree with Sen. Mullin on teaching Jesus responded, “It is important that we teach Jesus. Jesus is what we teach. But the reality is –” she said before being interrupted by Mullin.

“I don’t want reality,” Mullin proclaimed, which evoked immediate laughter.

“Got it on tape,” one person announced.

“I misspoke,” Mullin claimed.

Watch portions of Mullin’s remarks below or at this link.

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.