Louisiana state Rep. Mike Johnson (R) defends his religious "freedom" bill

Louisiana state Rep. Mike Johnson (R) defends his religious "freedom" bill

Republican state Rep. Mike Johnson of Louisiana has laid out the goals of his "Marriage and Conscience Act" (HB 707) pretty clearly in a new video intended to defend the bill. Johnson highlights three stories in which a baker, a wedding photographer and the owners of an event venue were penalized for, he says, "politely refusing" and "respectfully refusing" to provide wedding services to same-sex couples. Just to clarify, that's known as discrimination to anyone who doesn't think they should have special rights based on their belief in God.

Zack Ford details what Johnson says next:



“It’s stories like these that have compelled us to introduce the Louisiana Marriage and Conscience Act,” he explains. “This new law, if enacted, would protect a Louisiana citizen or business from being punished by the state simply for abiding by their sincerely held religious beliefs about marriage.” In other words, Johnson wants to ensure that the kind of discrimination that has been outlawed in other states can continue in Louisiana.

HB 707 was the only bill Gov. Bobby Jindal (R) specifically identified as a legislative goal in his State of the State Address last month. “I absolutely intend to fight for the passage of this legislation,” he said, explaining. “I think we can all agree that the government should never force someone to participate in a marriage ceremony against their will.”

Exactly. It's a bill that Gov. Bobby Jindal is clinging to as his last great hope for generating enthusiasm around a potential presidential bid.Can we please lay the "participation" ruse to rest? When someone "participates" in a wedding, you don't pay them. The exchange of money is what separates participation from a business transaction.

In any case, here's what the law really does, via Equality Louisiana:

•Non-profit organizations, like adoption agencies, could not lose their tax exemptions or state contracts for discriminating against same-sex couples.

•Employers may not be sanctioned or pay a tax penalty for denying employee benefits, including the same partner benefits employees in different-sex marriages enjoy.

•People who work for the state may not be disciplined or face consequences on the job for discriminating against individuals whose marriages they do not agree with.

•Professionals accredited, licensed, or certified by the state may not be sanctioned by accrediting bodies for refusing services or discriminating against clients.

•Businesses and individuals may not be disadvantaged in any other way by the state, even if they deny services or privileges to customers.

