MY NEW HERO
Oklahoma State Rep. Emily Virgin (D)
Oklahoma Democratic state Rep. Emily Virgin wants Christian businesses to post a public notice of discrimination if they intend to claim that they have a religious right to refuse service to LGBT people. State Rep. Chuck Strohm (R) introduced a bill, the Oklahoma Religious Freedom Act, earlier this year that would allow businesses like wedding cake bakers and photographers to deny services if it was “against the person’s religious beliefs.”…. State Sen. Joseph Silk (R), who introduced a similar bill in the Oklahoma Senate, told The New York Times recently that new laws were necessary because the LGBT movement was “challenging religious liberties and the freedom to live out religious convictions.”…. The amendment to HB1371 introduced by Virgin on Tuesday would require religious businesses to come out of the closet.
I’m not sure where Oklahoma’s good, God-fearing patriots got the idea that homophobia and hatred are Christian qualities, but “religious freedom” in the Sooner State is not what you might think it would be. It also seems that the thing Jesus taught- things like tolerance, love, and acceptance- are things Oklahoma’s cafeteria Christians have chosen to ignore. “Love thy brother as thyself” is evidently only for losers and Liberals, because REAL Christians don’t take kindly to Teh Gayz thinking they deserve equality. If you can’t keep “those” people away from good Christians, how can you be certain they won’t try to recruit our children and destroy traditional marriage by forcing gay marriage down your throat (unfortunate analogy alert)?
As far as the idea of “Christian” businesses go, I always thought a business existed to make money. By picking and choosing who they’ll accept as customers, won’t that ultimately result in a business being less (or even un-) profitable? Is “gay” money worth less than “straight” money? And how does a business know someone’s gay? Not everyone “advertises” their sexuality, so how do you determine if someone is worthy of shopping at your fine establishment? Can you sniff out “the gay?” Could it be that people you’re serving RIGHT NOW are gay…and you don’t even know it? OMG…What would Jesus do??
Beyond that, shouldn’t customers be able to know which businesses are “Christian?” Shouldn’t potential customers be made aware of what types of people a business will refuse to serve? After all, if you’re one of “them,” wouldn’t you want to know who a business discriminates against prior to entering an establishment only to be refused service? Rep. Virgin’s amendment would require businesses who would claim “religious freedom” to post signs announcing who they refuse to serve because Jesus told them to.
Those conversant with history might be able to harken back to another time and place, when businesses posted “JUDEN VERBOTEN!” signs as a way of making it clear who wasn’t welcome in their establishment. All Rep. Virgin’s amendment would do is force the hatred out into the open. If you’re going to discriminate, why should you be forced to own it and be up front about it?
“Any person not wanting to participate in any of the activities set forth in subsection A of this section based on sexual orientation, gender identity or race of either party to the marriage shall post notice of such refusal in a manner clearly visible to the public in all places of business, including websites,” the amendment states.
“The notice may refer to the person’s religious beliefs, but shall state specifically which couples the business does not serve by referring to a refusal based upon sexual orientation, gender identity or race.”
This makes sense; after all, wouldn’t you want to know if a business will serve you or kick you out prior to entering and facing the possible indignity of being expelled because you’re “less than?” Shouldn’t haters who use “religious freedom” as a smoke screen for their bigotry, hatred, and homophobia be forced out into the open?
At least the Nazis had the decency to make it crystal clear where Jews weren’t allowed. All Rep. Virgin is asking for is a similar level of honesty from those who believe “religious freedom” means the right to discriminate against and treat someone as “less than” because of who they are and whom they love. That she’s also using her amendment to spotlight the absurdity of creating a new level of legalized discrimination is laudable. Her efforts will likely go for naught in Oklahoma’s hyper-Jesus-y legislature, but sometimes forcing bigots out into the light will make them scatter like cockroaches.
Business owners should be required to own and be up front about their bias. Perhaps then they’ll be forced to face the reality that their bigotry is reminiscent of a time and place where shouts of “JUDEN RAUS!” were commonplace. Maybe when those who oppose bigotry and discrimination realized who the haters are, they’ll take their money elsewhere. When businesses go under because their “religious freedom” is causing their customers to go elsewhere, perhaps they’ll begin to realize that bigotry isn’t profitable.
