Connect with us

Lawmaker: Indiana Doesn’t Need LGBT Protections Because ‘It Is Legal To Fire Me For Being Straight’



Baptist Pastor, House Member Claims Anti-LGBT Discrimination Doesn’t Exist, Says Issue Is Media-Driven  

Republicans in Indiana are becoming increasingly defensive and hostile in the face of scrutiny from the media and the public over their refusal to pass legislation banning anti-LGBT discrimination. 

During a town hall on Friday, state lawmakers from Elkhart County were asked whether it should be legal to fire people based on their sexual identity.

GOP Rep. Tim Wesco, a Baptist pastor, quickly grabbed the microphone and stubbornly declared that Indiana doesn’t need such a law because it’s legal to fire him for being straight, and because anti-LGBT discrimination doesn’t exist.

“It is legal to fire me for being straight. Doesn’t mean it happens,” Wesco said, referring to nearby South Bend’s LGBT nondiscrimination ordinance. “There have been zero verified complaints against discrimination in the city of South Bend.”

According to a 2015 report from WNDU-TV, there were in fact four sexual-orientation discrimination complaints filed in the first three years after South Bend enacted its nondiscrimination law. All of the complaints were related to employment bias, and one was filed by a heterosexual person. 

Meanwhile, another member of the panel, GOP Rep. Curt Nisly, said LGBT people don’t deserve “collective rights” based on their “choices.” 

The disturbing remarks from Wesco and Nisly came a day after Indiana Gov. Mike Pence drew widespread criticism for awkwardly failing to answer a similar question.  

When Fox 28 tried to follow up with Wesco after Friday’s town hall, he brushed aside the station’s camera and accused its crew of being “very, very intrusive.” 

“I made my statements,” he said. 

Matthew Straw, a representative from the pro-LGBT business coalition Indiana Competes who posed the question to the lawmakers, told Fox 28 that Wesco’s statements were untrue. 

“People across the state face discrimination,” Straw said, adding that Wesco’s decision to dodge the media after the town hall was telling. “That sends a message to me that he’s not willing to have a discussion about this.” 

According to a report on the town hall from The Elkhart Truth, Wesco also said he believes the issue of LGBT rights is “Indianapolis-driven” and media driven, adding that constituents in his district aren’t clamoring about it. 

“To compare this to the black civil rights movement is ridiculous,” he said. “There is not a single, verifiable case of discrimination that has occurred in Elkhart County. It is not a problem. So why are we having this discussion?”

Wesco, who serves as senior pastor at Calvary Baptist Church in Elkhart, was an outspoken supporter of Indiana’s anti-LGBT Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 2015. After weeks of intense business backlash, lawmakers amended the RFRA to clarify that it doesn’t sanction anti-LGBT discrimination. 

Wesco has also said same-sex marriage will lead to polygamy, and his church’s Doctrinal Statement compares homosexuality to bestiality and incest, calling them “sinful perversions.” The church also claims God “disapproves of and forbids any attempt to alter one’s gender by surgery or appearance.” 

GOP Rep. Curt Nisly, also said during the town hall he believes LGBT protections are unnecessary — but for a different reason. 

“LGBT are individuals,” Nisly told Fox 28. “So they have individual rights. I don’t think that we should have collective rights just because you make certain choices.”



Breaking: Indiana Republicans Advance ‘Super RFRA’ Bill Masquerading As LGB Civil Rights Legislation

Mike Pence’s Anti-Gay RFRA Was A ‘Blockade’ That Cost Indianapolis $60 Million And 12 Conventions

Repeal, Replace, Reload: Indiana Lawmaker’s Bill Swaps RFRA For ‘Religious Liberty’ + Gun Rights Law


Image via Indiana House Republicans

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.


Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves Dismisses ‘Real Small, Minor Number’ of Rapes Requiring Abortions



Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves (R) declined to say on Sunday if he would sign a bill removing abortion exceptions for rape because they only represent a “real small, minor number” of cases.

During an interview on Fox News, host Mike Emmanuel asked Reeves if he would remove the abortion exceptions for rape in Mississippi.

Reeves sidestepped the question by insisting that the bill would never make it through the legislature.

“There’s a lot of effort, particularly in Washington and other places mainly by the Democrats, to try to talk only about the real small, minor number of exceptions that may exist,” he complained. “Over 90% of all abortions that are done in America, some 63 million babies aborted since Roe was wrongly decided in 1973, over 90% of those are elective abortions.”

Reeves argued that the “far-left” should not be talking about “all these exceptions and minor numbers.”

Watch the video below from Fox News.


Continue Reading


Trump Hinted Jan. 6 Would Be His ‘Last-Ditch’ Attempt to Overturn the Election Results: Filmmaker Alex Holder



In an interview with the Guardian’s Hugo Lowell, a British documentary maker who was filming behind-the-scenes footage in Donald Trump’s White House on Jan 6th claimed he knew something bad was about to happen before supporters of the former president stormed the Capitol and sent lawmakers fleeing for their lives.

Alex Holder, whose film crew was on hand and filming Trump and his children Don Jr, Eric and Ivanka on Jan 6th, stated there was a feeling among his people that something momentous was about to happen.

According to Lowell, “Holder was there for it all: three sit-down interviews with Trump, including one at the White House, numerous other interviews with Trump’s adult children, private conversations among top aides and advisers before the election, and around the Capitol itself as it got stormed.” adding, “The access to Trump, and listening to him and his inner circle, led him to suspect that the former president’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election would somehow culminate in some event at the Capitol on 6 January.”

Asked about what his feeling was prior to the riot that engulfed the Capitol building, Holder explained, “I wasn’t 100% sure, but it was sort of a feeling, so we prepared for that thing to happen. The reason we thought January 6 was because, in Trump’s mind, the last-ditch effort was to stop the process” of the vote certification by Congress.

RELATED: Man behind J6 documentary needs ‘two armed guards’ due to Trump supporters’ threats: BBC

He elaborated, “That ceremonial process that takes place in Congress on January 6, he felt, was the last time where he could, in his mind, stop the election going to the wrong person, as it were. The rhetoric that was coming out was that the election was rigged, [that] we need to fight.”

According to the Guardian report, Holder has, “testified for about four hours behind closed doors last week about his roughly 100 hours of footage, used for an upcoming documentary titled Unprecedented, and turned over to House investigators the parts demanded in a subpoena compelling his cooperation.”

Lowell added, “Holder said he additionally did a one-to-one interview with then-vice president Mike Pence, including a scene where Pence briefly reviews an email about the 25th amendment – which concerns the removal of a US president – which was privately discussed among senior White House officials in the wake of the Capitol attack.”

You can read more here.

Continue Reading


Meadows Allegedly Behind Possible Attempt at Witness Intimidation of Cassidy Hutchinson: Reports



Cassidy Hutchinson, the former aide and advisor to Trump White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, may be the victim of attempted witness intimidation, and the person who may have attempted to intimidate her may be her former boss.

The Guardian on Friday reports “Hutchinson received at least one message tacitly warning her not to cooperate with the House January 6 select committee from an associate of former chief of staff Mark Meadows.”

That message, according to both CNN and The Guardian, was delivered at the direction of Mark Meadows, according to sources both news outlets cite.

READ MORE: Secret Service Agents Confirm Details Hutchinson Shared About Trump Demanding to Be Taken to US Capitol Jan. 6

One of the messages that the U.S. House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack posted at the end of Hutchinson’s testimony read: “[A person] let me know you have your deposition tomorrow. He wants me to let you know that he’s thinking about you. He knows you’re loyal, and you’re going to do the right thing when you go in for your deposition.”

According to The Guardian, “The redaction was ‘Meadows,’ the sources said.”

READ MORE: Trump Declares Hutchinson ‘Totally Discredited’ as Former Aide Says Someone in His Orbit Tried to Influence Her Testimony

CNN similarly reports: “One of [the] people who may have been trying to influence Cassidy Hutchinson’s testimony did so at the behest of former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, according to multiple sources familiar with information gathered by the House select committee investigating the January 6, 2021, insurrection.”

Citing multiple sources CNN reports “the ‘person’ referred to in the message, which was redacted in the version projected on a screen during the hearing, was Meadows.”

Former FBI assistant director for counterintelligence Frank Figliuzzi Friday afternoon on MSNBC said there is “no question” that message constitutes “an attempt to intimidate a witness. No question about it,” he stressed.

“When you then add that to the fact that it appears that they provided, her initial attorney to her, Cassidy Hutchinson, you now have a without a doubt, predication to open a federal witness tampering investigation,” Figliuzzi added.

Thursday on Twitter Figliuzzi wrote: “This is witness tampering. Cassidy Hutchinson was the target. They picked the wrong young woman.”

Continue Reading


Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.