PD Editorial: Paying the price for discrimination

Nutty, revolting, reprehensible.

These are just a few words that aptly describe the “shoot the gays” initiative submitted by an Orange County lawyer named Matt McLaughlin.

Attorney General Kamala Harris is seeking a court order relieving her of the duty to prepare an official title and summary, which would effectively block McLaughlin from circulating petitions to put his hateful initiative on the ballot.

The fact is, this measure has no chance of passing, or even qualifying for the ballot.

If it weren’t for McLaughlin’s outrageous rhetoric - calling homosexuality “a monstrous evil” and declaring that gays and lesbians should be “put to death by bullets to the head or by any other convenient method” - his measure would have died anonymously, just as scores of other ill-conceived initiatives have come and gone unnoticed.

Unfortunately, the same can’t be so easily said of anti-gay measures that have started popping up around the nation as federal courts strike down laws prohibiting same-sex marriage.

In Texas, lawmakers are considering a bill that would strip public employees of their salaries, pensions and other benefits if they issue marriage licenses to gay or lesbian couples - even if the U.S. Supreme Court throws out the state’s ban on same-sex marriage.

When the high court overturned Alabama’s law earlier this year, the state’s chief justice ordered clerks to ignore the justices.

This week, Indiana is making headlines with its Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which says that government must have a “compelling interest” to infringe on an individual’s religious practice. Similar measures are under consideration in about 10 other states.

Indiana Gov. Mike Pence, who signed the law last week, says it’s not a license to discriminate. But he ducked a series of yes-or-no questions about the law’s implications on ABC’s “This Week” program, and now he’s calling for clarification from Indiana lawmakers. When the bill was introduced in December, the Indianapolis Star reported that its sponsor said it would allow small businesses - such as bakeries, caterers, florists and wedding chapels - to refuse service to gay couples.

The intent seems pretty clear. No wonder the law has generated protests from advocacy groups, politicians, celebrities and commercial interests ranging from Apple Inc. to Yelp to the NBA. The Indianapolis-based NCAA raised the possibility of relocating, and Angie’s List, a consumer review service based in Indiana, suspended plans for a $40 million local expansion.

There is, however, a way to protect civil rights and religious principles.

As supporters of the Indiana law point out, there is a federal version of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Some states have similar laws. But they also have laws prohibiting discrimination in employment, housing and public accommodation based on sexual preference or sexual identity. With an exemption for religious organizations, these laws leave it up to churches to determine whether they will perform or bless same-sex unions.

However, these laws neither create nor imply a legal defense of religious conviction for refusing to sell or rent property or do business with someone on the basis of sexual orientation.

Indiana has no such law, and Pence evaded questions about whether he would sign one.

There will continue to be conflicts that defy reconciliation - just as there were conflicts in the not-so-distant past over inter-racial marriage and allowing minorities to buy homes in certain neighborhoods.

Disputes over same-sex marriage will fade, too. The trends are clear in the court of public opinion and in courts of law. And, as the reaction to Indiana’s law shows, those who try to pass such misdirected legislation are likely to find it’s not just bad for their state’s reputation, it’s bad for business.