The liberty principle for this
Freedom Friday concerns the conflict between freedom of religion and how to
protect gay, lesbian, and transgender workers from discrimination. There has
long been a debate between lawmakers and legal experts on whether the laws
protect the LGBTQ community, but the decision is going to the Supreme Court.
Justices announced Monday that they will
hear three cases involving employment discrimination claims this fall. Two
feature gay men who were fired soon after their employers learned of their
sexual orientation, and the third involves a transgender woman who was let go
soon after her transition.
The Supreme Court’s eventual rulings
will hold significant consequences for LBGTQ employees and their employers,
including people of faith, legal experts said….
If justices rule that “sex
discrimination” includes sexual orientation and gender identity-based
discrimination, religiously affiliated businesses or schools could face
lawsuits if they refuse to hire gay or transgender employees. But if the
rulings go the other way and limit the scope of sex discrimination protections,
LGBTQ workers may have no legal recourse to being fired or mistreated.
One may ask what the problem is.
Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Acts “prohibits employment discrimination
based on race, color, religion, sex, and national origin.” Since the big
problems in 1964 involved “unequal treatment of male and female employees or
mistreatment of pregnant workers,” the law did not include mention of the LGBT
community.
Efforts have been made to broaden
the interpretation to the rights of the LGBTQ community, but the results have
not been consistent. Various Circuit Courts across the nation have made
opposing decisions about it. The administration of Barack Obama supported a
broad sex discrimination definition, while the Donald Trump administration “argues
that sex discrimination does not include discrimination based on sexual
orientation or gender identity.”
Many people that any change to
broaden the interpretation of sex discrimination should be done through the
legislative branch of the federal government, not the executive branch or the
judicial branch. John Bursch, attorney for the Alliance Defending Freedom, is
one of them: “Neither government agencies nor the courts have authority to
rewrite federal law [to] replace ‘sex’ with ‘gender identity.’”
A huge obstacle to having Congress
solve the problem is the inability of the Democrats and Republicans to work
together for the good of Americans. The obstacle appears to be in the state
legislatures also because “only 10 of 37 LGBTQ rights bills considered by state
legislatures last year had bipartisan sponsorship.” Less than half of the
states – 21 of them – currently prohibit employment discrimination because of
sexual orientation or gender-identity.
There is currently a bill in
Congress – the Equality Act – that would give protection. It may be passed by
the Democrat-controlled House, but it is not expected to pass in the
Republican-controlled Senate.
The debate surrounding the Equality Act
illustrates how new protections for LGBTQ Americans can clash with religious
freedom laws. If it passes, religiously affiliated schools and other
faith-based organizations could face lawsuits for refusing to hire gay workers
or limiting which facilities transgender students can use, even if these
policies were tied to religious beliefs.
The Justices accepted the three
cases for the 2019-2020 Court season that starts in October 2019. Their
decisions are not expected the end of June 2020.
The clash between rights of
different groups is not just about employment rights. A case concerning the
rights of LGBTQ couples to adopt or foster children through faith-based agencies was recently settled in Michigan. However, the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty announced this week that it is
filing a new case. The organization is suing Michigan and the U.S. Department
of Health and Human Services on behalf of St. Vincent Catholic Charities and
two adoptive families it served.
The reason for the new lawsuit is the belief
that faith-based adoption and/or foster care agencies should not “miss out on
government contracts simply because they won’t work with same-sex couples for
religious reasons.” Mark Rienzi, Becket’s president, made the following
statement in this “years-long clash between religious freedom and LGBTQ rights
in Michigan and across the country.”
Faith-based agencies like St. Vincent
consistently do the best work because of their faith, and we need more agencies
like them helping children – not fewer. The actions by the Attorney General of
Michigan do nothing but harm the thousands of at-risk children in desperate
need of loving homes….
Apparently, the goal of the LGBTQ
community is not to shut down religious-based adoption and foster care agencies
but to stop them from receiving tax dollars. They believe that they should be
served by organizations that receive tax dollars. Many of the faith-based
organizations cannot operate without government contracts and would have to
shut their doors.
I can understand what the LGBTQ
community is saying about tax money, and I can understand why the faith-based
organizations are concerned putting children with members of their faith
community. However, it is the good of the children that must be considered. It
would be really nice if a solution could be made that would do right by the
children. I do not know if there is a solution that would serve both
communities well.
No comments:
Post a Comment