I became aware of the “Protecting Freedom of Conscience” law about the time the Governor signed it. If you are a Mississippian, you have seen the accusations of hate. The word “hate” has become the mantra for people who do not like other people’s opinions. Frankly, words like hate, intolerance, stupidity, etc., when used to shut others up has reached the levels of buffoonery.

Let’s face reality. Christian/Judeo Culture has adhered to a stated and ingrained moral code for over 4,000 years. It is no secret that homosexuality, as well as other conduct, is viewed as sin by most Christianity. This is not hate though. Yes, all people, including Christians, do not adhere to their own moral standards at times. I find all people can be hypocrites. Also, this does not mean that gays should be treated with anything less than respect and dignity.

Charges of hate against opinions of others just inflames the issue. Look at the 43 years we have argued back and forth over abortion.

I know for a fact that Christianity in America is experiencing discrimination. This is the catalyst — not hate — behind this new law.

This law allows churches to hold only traditional marriage and employ only people of its faith without fear of lawsuits on the state level. It allows foster parents to teach traditional marriage to children without fear of lawsuits. It allows only businesses involved in weddings to participate in only traditional marriages without fear of lawsuits. It requires transgender people to use the restroom of the sex of their birth. It protects state employees’ free speech on the topics of traditional marriage. Yet, the state ensures that all legal marriages will be issued marriage licenses. Its main purpose is to allow people their conscience without fear of litigation.

Why would anyone want to force anyone else to do something that violates their faith? This is where we find ourselves in America. There is a great abyss between hate and disagreement.

Is anyone aware that the federal government passed a law in 1993 called the “Religious Freedom Restoration Act”? It was sponsored by Congressman Schumer and Ted Kennedy — yes, Ted Kennedy —and signed by Bill Clinton. Its goal is to prevent the federal government from violating someone’s religious conscience although it does not apply to states. Did you know there are 14 other right to conscience laws passed by the federal government? Did you also know that at least 14 other states have various conscience laws? Yet, Mississippi is still the hate mongering whipping boy.

So, the next question becomes, was this law necessary? Well, I can tell you that President Obama just issued an executive order protecting gays from discrimination within the federal government. Why can’t Mississippi pass laws to try to ensure that there is no attempt of discrimination against “any” religion from that which violates their faith and conscience. Some would argue that churches could already hire and fire anyone they want (although I am not so sure), but in today’s legal climate, without this law, what church wants to be the test case and spends tens of thousands of dollars on lawsuits to be prove a point?

Other than weddings, this law is neutral on serving gays. But on that note, should The Natchez Democrat have the right to turn down advertisement business, from say, the KKK, which I am sure the editors have a strong disagreement? If they do turn down this business, does that mean that the editors “hate” the individuals in the Klan? Hate is such a strong word. As for me as an attorney, I have always found my gay clients’ money was green.

Finally, is this law necessary? It would not be except for a nationwide boycott of Chick-Fil-A when its owners simply declared that they believe in traditional marriage; or except for Audrey Jarvis being ordered to remove her cross necklace on the campus of Sonoma State University in California; or John McAdams, a professor at Marquette, who was suspended for uttering in a blog that he stood by a student’s belief in traditional marriage; or two students arrested in Hemet, Calif., for reading their Bibles to each other on public property.

As blacks felt they needed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to protect them from hate and just as gays thought that sexual preference needed to be included under Title 7 to protect them from hate, so do Christians feel they need legislation to protect them from hate as well.

 

Sam Gwin is a Natchez attorney.