- Associated Press - Tuesday, February 11, 2014

TOPEKA, Kan. (AP) - The state’s business climate would suffer if legislators grant special legal protections to Kansas residents, companies and groups that object to gay marriage for religious reasons, critics argued Thursday in a failed attempt to block the plan from advancing.

The Kansas House gave first-round approval to the so-called “religious freedom” proposal to shield people who don’t want to participate in same-sex weddings should the courts eventually overturn the state’s gay-marriage ban. The bill would prohibit government sanctions or anti-discrimination lawsuits against Kansans citing religious beliefs about marriage for refusing to recognize a union or to provide goods, services, accommodations or employment benefits to couples.

After approving the measure 72-42, the House is set to take another, final vote Wednesday, when it’s expected to pass and go to the Senate. Supporters described the bill as a narrowly drawn measure that allows Kansans to live out their religious beliefs when it comes to marriage.

Critics argue the bill would encourage discrimination against gays and lesbians. They also zeroed in on language extending some legal protections to individual workers and government employees, even if their views and the boss’ conflict.

Rep. Susan Concannon, a Beloit Republican, said small business owners have told her they’re concerned that they’d be unable to enforce their own policies.

“They are stakeholders and have an interest in this particular piece of legislation,” she said.

Rep. John Wilson, a Lawrence Democrat, said enacting the measure will drive away businesses committed to equal treatment for gays, lesbians, bi-sexual and transgender employees.

“We must create a pro-business environment,” he said, adding that non-discrimination policies are routine for large companies.

Business groups didn’t testify on the measure during House committee hearings. The bill says if an individual employee or government worker cites religious views about marriage in refusing to provide a legal service, an employer must find a work-around, if it is not an undue burden.

Supporters of the bill said any scenarios involving widespread discrimination are far-fetched. They also said nothing in the bill prevents a business owner from disciplining an employee for violating company policies.

“This Pandora’s Box - the ominous scenarios - is not going to happen,” said Rep. Charles Macheers, a Shawnee Republican and the bill’s main advocate.

Meanwhile, backers of the bill said the state needs to act quickly. Federal judges in Oklahoma and Utah recently struck down those states’ gay-marriage bans, and they’re covered by the same federal appeals court circuit as Kansas.

“It’s substantially likely that within a year or so, court action will be taken that will change the definition of marriage in the state of Kansas,” said House Judiciary Committee Chairman Lance Kinzer, an Olathe Republican who opposes gay marriage.

Backers haven’t cited cases in Kansas of threatened lawsuits or government sanctions over someone’s refusal to provide goods or services to same-sex couples.

But a state agency in Oregon and a Colorado administrative law judge recently found that bakers refusing to make wedding cakes for same-sex ceremonies had discriminated against the couples, though neither state recognizes gay marriages. Cases in other states have involved refusals to provide flowers or take photos.

Kansas’ anti-discrimination laws don’t cover bias based on sexual orientation or gender identification. But Michael Schuttloffel, executive director of the Kansas Catholic Conference, said if a court strikes down the state’s gay-marriage ban, “the legal landscape dramatically changes.”

“The whole point of this is to provide some clarity,” he said.

___

Information about the marriage bill: http://bit.ly/1dhFdQi

Kansas Legislature: http://www.kslegislature.org

___

Follow John Hanna on Twitter at www.twitter.com/apjdhanna .

Copyright © 2016 The Washington Times, LLC.

blog comments powered by Disqus

 

Click to Read More

Click to Hide