Brad Polumbo

Opinion contributor

The future of the "Equality Act," the landmark LGBT rights bill passed last week by the House, is uncertain. Even if could somehow pass the Republican-controlled Senate, President Donald Trump would likely veto it.

And that would be the right thing to do, no matter what the backlash. From my vantage point as a gay conservative, I can see that the Equality Act goes too far for any level-headed gay rights advocate to support, and its blatant disregard for the basic right to religious freedom is appalling.

The bill purports to protect LGBT Americans like me by prohibiting discrimination “based on sex, sexual orientation and gender identity in areas including public accommodations and facilities, education, federal funding, employment, housing, credit and the jury system.” On the surface, this sounds unobjectionable — after all, no one deserves to face discrimination. Yet the bill defined “public accommodations” so loosely and called for regulations so sweeping that it would crush religious freedom and radically reshape American society.

Read more commentary:

We can protect LGBTQ people and religious freedom. Pete Buttigieg and Utah show the way.

America is at a gay rights crossroads, thanks to Pete Buttigieg and the Supreme Court

Don't let Trump hide brutal LGBTQ record behind 'religious freedom' rhetoric in 2020 race

For example, the Equality Act undermines the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which established a balancing test for religious freedom claims. It established a process for the litigation of discrimination grievances, where religious employers could appeal if found responsible for an offense and their actions could be fairly evaluated.

No protections for religious beliefs

This helped ensure that reasonable invocations of religious freedom are permitted, such as a private, Catholic school only wanting to hire teachers who live in accordance with biblical values, but blatant discrimination, such as a grocery store randomly firing someone for being gay, is not. Yet in any of these situations, the so-called Equality Act would mandate that an LGBT person’s claim wins by default — therefore not ensuring equality but elevating their rights over those of religious Americans. This alone is unacceptable, but the Equality Act’s dysfunction doesn’t stop there.

According to the Institutional Religious Freedom Alliance, the Equality Act could potentially see houses of worship deemed “public accommodations” and subjected to anti-discrimination law if they dare to occasionally rent out space or host voting stations on Election Day.

It would also declare any hospital or establishment providing medical services a “public accommodation,” which would include religious organizations and hospitals. And in fairness, it is completely reasonable to require that all doctors and nurses provide everyday treatment to gay and transgender people.

However, the Equality Act goes much further and could potentially force religious medical professionals and faith-based institutions to provide sex-change surgeries and gender transition hormones against their will. This eviscerates freedom of conscience and tramples over the basic constitutional rights of religious Americans who work in the health care industry.

We need 'Fairness for All' approach

The bill could also endanger the rights of religious adoption agencies to refer same-sex couples elsewhere and make faith-based decisions regarding child placement. Even if you — like me — think this is something adoption agencies ought not to do, we all must accept that they have the right to do it. Attempting to strong-arm them into ideological compliance will only prove self-defeating when those same religious adoption agencies close down rather than violate their beliefs, leaving more kids without homes. Given the reality that gay people have no shortage of adoption agencies willing to work with them, this would represent just another case where the Equality Act’s benevolent intentions have disastrous consequences.

There is an alternative: We don’t have to choose between respecting religious freedom and protecting LGBT Americans under the law. The Institutional Religious Freedom Alliance outlines a “Fairness for All” approach that would make “changes to federal civil rights laws to ensure that LGBT people can enjoy the same basic rights as other Americans,” but “be carefully designed so as simultaneously to protect the legitimate rights of people and organizations that hold to a traditional sexual morality.” The organization says alternative draft legislation to this effect is forthcoming, and assuming the proposal holds to these principles, it’s something that conservatives should support.

Our laws can mandate that secular employers and public venues treat LGBT people fairly, yet also maintain exceptions for bona fide religious claims. This is what true equality would look like — and notably, you won’t find it anywhere in the so-called Equality Act.

Brad Polumbo is an editor at the libertarian media nonprofit Young Voices. Follow him on Twitter: @Brad_Polumbo