The next Texas legislative session is almost a year away, but Senate Republicans are already zeroing in on proposals to bolster legal protections for religious opponents of same-sex marriage after its legalization by the U.S. Supreme Court last year.
At a hearing of the Senate State Affairs Committee on Wednesday, some Republicans appeared to endorse a piecemeal approach to passing legislation shielding religious objectors to same-sex marriage instead of pushing for more comprehensive state constitutional amendments like Indiana’s embattled “religious freedom” law.
Republican state Sen. Joan Huffman of Houston appeared to support prioritizing “targeted pieces of legislation” like last session’s Pastor Protection Act, which codified protections for clergy members who refuse to conduct same-sex marriages, “rather than to try to redefine anything.”
“I think that was an approach that would be a path for the Legislature, for this committee to examine,” said Huffman, who chairs the committee. “I don’t think we really took that push in the last Legislature.”
Piecemeal measures could include protections for faith-based adoption agencies that refuse to place children with same-sex couples, tax accommodations for religious organizations and housing policies at religious schools.
LGBT rights activists have described some of those proposals as “license to discriminate” laws. At Wednesday’s hearing, they reiterated that state lawmakers are still required to strike a balance between religious rights and equal rights, particularly when it comes to behavior by government employees.
There is nothing in the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling on same-sex marriage that “deprives someone of their right to religious liberty,” Rebecca Robertson, legal and policy director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas, told the committee. But “people who are acting on the behalf of the government are not free to impose their religious beliefs,” she added.
At Wednesday’s hearing, Bill Hammond, chief executive of the Texas Association of Business, warned lawmakers against picking up that mantle in the next legislative session. He recalled Indiana’s religious freedom law, which opponents have claimed enables discrimination against the LGBT community, and the economic fallout that state faced when that law came under scrutiny.
Huffman retorted that the committee’s charge was to focus on religious protections and “not to discriminate.”
“Perception is probably greater than the facts, and that would be the perception around the country that Texas is no longer a welcoming state,” Hammond responded.
Etymological question: If their genders had been reversed, we’d call what Sen. Huffman did with Bill Hammond “mansplaining”. What is the correct technical term for her condescending insistence that she knows better than he does – that in effect, she knows his business better than he does? I’m thinking no such word exists, so what should we call it? Senatorsplaining? There’s an essence to that exchange that I can’t quite isolate, and with it lies the key to identifying the trope. Any suggestions here would be appreciated.
Such questions aside, it’s clear we’re going to get a lot more of that next session. Dan Patrick and his acolytes know what they were elected to do, and “govern” isn’t really on their list. And in case Bill Hammond needs someone else pointing out his business to him, that exchange was with one of his group’s supposed friends. If only your enemies cared so little about your group’s goals and values, Bill.