Pennsylvania Votes Forum

 According to PA Family Institute, this bill is set to be voted upon today, Wed, March 11th by the Pennsylvania House State Government Committee and is a radical gay-rights bill that would add “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” to the state’s Human Relations Act.

"It is laws like this one in other states (like Massachusetts and California) that paved the way and greased the skids for courts to legalize same-sex marriage. And it is laws like this one that are being used as hammers to force Christian ministries and charities to either operate in ways contrary to their faith and doctrine, face fines and/or prison, or cease the ministry work," explains PA Family Institute President, Michael Geer.  "Proponents of the “gay agenda” are systematically setting the stage for same-sex marriage and the silencing of those who would call their lifestyle immoral or sinful. HB 300 would be a key and very dangerous foundation to their efforts, and it must not be allowed to pass."

I care about religious liberty and traditional marriage being upheld, therefore I strongly oppose this bill.  I urge all representatives to see this for what it is, an infringement of our constitutional rights and freedom of religion, and stop this bill.

 I agree with you when you said,

I care about religious liberty and traditional marriage being upheld, therefore I strongly oppose this bill.  I urge all representatives to see this for what it is, an infringement of our constitutional rights and freedom of religion, and stop this bill.

Please read HB 300.  It in fact protects against discrimination on the basis of religion and is no way an infringement on the freedom of religion. It merely provide protection in employment, housing and public accommodations to all citizens in the State of Pennsylvania. As for the rest of your message, it is not clear that these things are happening because of violating God's Law. I understand that sometime, I will stand before my maker and be judged for my actions and the way I have lived my life. And I'm good with that. It is not our government's job to do God's judgement, only God's. And I'm comfortable that my life will be seen by God as moral and just. God can decide. Our country was founded on freedom from religious persecution. What we name as freedom of religion is the right to worship as we each individually choose, or to not worship as well.  We do not have the right to force our religious views upon others in the name of freedom of religion. To act that way would be to act in the act way that our founding fathers and mothers left to come to this country.

Thomas Waters

thomascwaters.com

 Again as it has been stated before on this forum, your opinions about gay marriage are strictly based on YOUR religious beliefs. According to the constitution, you cannot deny someone legal right based on your personal beliefs. You complain about this 'gay agenda' trying to silence you, yet you have no qualms about silencing them. Can you not see how unacceptable this is based on the American view point? Based on civil liberty? Are you blind to any views and beliefs but you own? Religious freedom does not just apply to Christians! I think you need to rethink your definition of religious liberty.

 The agenda behind HB 300 is easily known as its argument has been used in courts in other states to legalize "same-sex marriage".  As a result in those states, laws like HB 300 have been used to revoke part of the tax-exempt status of a Methodist ministry in NJ just because they chose not to allow a same-sex couple to use their facilities for a wedding ceremony.  Religious adoption agencies have been forced out of business. In NM a photographer was fined $6,000 for refusing to photograph a homosexual wedding....and numerous other cases.  Is any one of these not an infringement of religious liberty??  Is this not one group (homosexuals) forcing their beliefs on other groups and individuals?  Just because homosexuals want to believe that their "sexual expression" is okay, doesn't mean that everyone has to agree with them.

As for these being MY religious or personal beliefs, the fact is that every society and every major religion for thousands of years have defined marriage as being a unique relationship by which a man and a woman are joined together for the primary purpose of producing and maintaining a family. The very institution of marriage pre-exists and is antecedent to the institution of government.  Therefore, the argument that gay marriage is somehow a 'civil liberty' is in error not only logically, but with common sense and the most basic and evident truths of human nature.

Those who continually tout that civil liberties are granted by the Constitution are also ignorant. America's founders were very clear on this point...they are God-given, inalienable (which means they cannot be given away or transferred) rights.  They don't descend from government.  Congress did not invent them.  They are not even granted by our Constitution.  They cannot be created by man.  They are inherent, universal, and permanent.

Only the naive think that this bill is about anti-discrimination.  The motive behind this bill is to force everyone - every business, every church or religious organization, every school, public or private, every man, woman and child - to accept and affirm the homosexual lifestyle.

HB300 is about three decades too late. Despite what some are posting on here, this bill is about real discrimination that gay, *** and transgender people face every day of their lives. It is currently legal for GLBT persons to be fired for being who they are, and that is wrong.

This bill is not about gay marriage, and is not about general discrimination. It is about very specific instances of discrimination in housing and employment. Read the bill. It's only 20 pages long.

Also, you'll notice in section 5.3 that specific provisions are given for religious exemption. It will not force churches to hire gay people, just like it does not force them to hire black people or women. It will also not force church facilities to support gay unions.

And as for "accepting the homosexual lifestyle" I'd challenge "Sacred Honor" (pretty conceited screen name, my friend) to find any tangible difference between our lifestyles. If working hard, paying my taxes, being a supportive uncle, volunteering for my community, going to church every week, eating as healthy as I can, and jogging on the weekend sounds like an abhorrent lifestyle that we need to deny every bit of civil decency and equality that we can muster, then we really are a backwards state. If your hermaneutics decry us as abhorrant, than fine--you're entitled to your opinion--but stop pretending that discriminating against people for being who they are is morally justifiable in every instance.

You are the extreemist, not us. We're just trying to support ourselves and our families.

Please support HB300: the families of thousands of GLBT Pennsylvanians will be better off for its passage.

Most of what you right here is utter nonsense. Anti-discrimination laws have in no way been used to legalize gay marriage. This legislation demands that all people, regardless of sexual orientation or gender expression be treated fairly in housing, employment, and public accommodations.

It DOES mean that businesses can not discriminate. Thus, a business that is for profit can not discriminate. That is the case in both the NJ case as well as the New Mexico case. Because the Campground had opened it's facilities to the public, it was a violation of NJ law to discriminate. It was acting like a rental hall that even the non-religious/non-believers could rent.

It is a lie to say that a photographer was sued. A photography business was sued. Individuals are allowed their own religious beliefs, but businesses may not discriminate on the basis of an assortment of protected classes. Imagine if it was a Jewish photography studio who refused a christian wedding job. That wold be discrimination based on religion.

A business owner does not have to believe that everything a patron does is OK. A restuarant owner may think that adultry is a sin, but the restaurant owner may not refuse to serve a man who is having dinner with an extramarital date. I don't care if a business owner thinks my sexual orientation is OK, I expect to be treated with dignity and respect as a human being.

It is hogwash to cite that marriage has traditionally been between one  man and one woman. In many cultures even today, polygamy is practiced and accepted. Since Biblical times, in Judeo-Christian faiths, marriage was a business transaction where the woman became the property of the man so that he could have children and protect his family name. In our great country, slave owners frequently had children by slaves since the women slaves were their properties. Marriage served one purpose- to protect the property of the male owner.

We live in a vastly different time and space from historic cultures. In earlier times, families needed to have many children and especially sons to fight wars and work the land as farmers. In these eras of history, it would have been unthinkable for two men to be married, as it would not have allowed for the production of children to work the family farm. Times are different today. Also, historically, marriage was arranged. Young people married who their parents selected for them. This was to bring greater wealth to the family name, gain property and influence.

But- this bill isn't about gay marriage. It is about the right for individuals to life and work and be productive members of society without the fear of being fired or thrown out of their living space simply because they are gay and ***.

Religious fanatics desire the right to discriminate from their holier-than-thou righteousness. They used the same arguments to try and maintain slavery; maintain segregation, keep worm from having equal rights; and to prohibit inter-racial marriage. The time is now for all Pennsylvanians to have the basic human rights of the ability to work, live and live life free of discrimination in housing, employment and public accommodations.

You know, this is all very interesting. First, I think we all realize how wonderful this country is. This site itself is a wonderful example of how we Americans have the freedom to speak our mind. It's fantastic and I'm proud of it.

However, I will now speak my mind. It's funny because the last time I checked, we live in a country where we can discriminate if we'd like to. Yeah, people don't like the fact that we should have the freedom to hire whoever we'd like to hire, but it's completely true and completely consitutional. If the US Government has the power to tell me who to hire and who not to hire, in my own private business, then the government is way too big.

The fact is, most normal Americans will not discriminate, because most normal Americans are good people. Debate that if you wish. However the real issue is that the homosexual community wants special rights. Think about it. They ask for... marriage. I don't care what you do in private. I simply don't care. But when you ask for the right to marry, you're really asking the whole world to throw out the definition of marriage. If the gay people all want to have "garriage," then I don't care. However, don't try to force my hand through fancy legislation--just say what you mean and mean what you say.

Every business owner or hiring agent expression a discernment process to pick the most qualified candidate to do a job, but that is a far cry from discrimination. Every applicant deserves an equal chance based upon their ability to do the job. If the hiring agent decides against an applicant, because they are a christian for example, that is unacceptable, because religion is a protected class. If the agent doesn't hire someone because they are a woman, or a man, that is discrimination.

The government isn't, nor wishes to tell you who you can or can not hire. But if you refuse to hire someone and the reasons are because of their sex, race, (list of protected classes), I hope you can justify it, because the person has grounds to file a complaint. But this law is far more needed to help people keep their jobs. I'm aware of someone who was called the most important employee the company had. He was always being written up for being an outstanding employee. Then his boss found out he was gay, and they fired him. That is wrong. This is not a request for special rights.

PA HB does exactly what you ask for. It says what it means, and it means what it says. There is nothing about this bill which is about marriage, nothing at all. 

tcwaters:

The government isn't, nor wishes to tell you who you can or can not hire. But if you refuse to hire someone and the reasons are because of their sex, race, (list of protected classes), I hope you can justify it, because the person has grounds to file a complaint. But this law is far more needed to help people keep their jobs. I'm aware of someone who was called the most important employee the company had. He was always being written up for being an outstanding employee. Then his boss found out he was gay, and they fired him. That is wrong. This is not a request for special rights.

Listen, it really depends on the job, like what if it was at a public pool, no one wants a gay person in the locker rooms or in the bathroom. That boss obviously had a very good reason for firing him (or should I say her). No one wants a person that thinks they are some other gender. God created man for a woman, and a woman for a man. It is just so sick when you see gay people and the way they act. It is just WRONG.

Freedom Writer:

Listen, it really depends on the job, like what if it was at a public pool, no one wants a gay person in the locker rooms or in the bathroom. That boss obviously had a very good reason for firing him (or should I say her). No one wants a person that thinks they are some other gender. God created man for a woman, and a woman for a man. It is just so sick when you see gay people and the way they act. It is just WRONG.

No,

It really doesn't depend upon the job. It DOES depend upon treating all employees based upon their ability to do a job and not expressing bias because of someone's personal life.

The "God created.." argument is totally and completely irrelevant. We live in a country free of religious tyranny- this is not a theocracy. And there is no validation that God did or did not do anything. Since gay and *** people are born gay and ***, God is responsible for it. The Bible also says that God looked at all that God created and called it ALL good.

You, are just a bigot. You are intolerant of allowing GLBT people to be who they are. That is your right to be a bigot. But not your right to force your personal beliefs onto everyone else.

Now, now, don't get all mad because you know i'm right!!

People are not born gay. There are born either a man or a woman....there is not an in-between sex. And you can call me whatever you like, I don't care you you think i am. God said his work was good because he made Adam a MAN and Eve a woman, and they were made for each other.  And if it wasn't for Adam a MAN and Eve a WOMAN...no one would be here. Don't you know how babies are made or didn't you mother a WOMAN tell you that?

I'm not the least bit mad,nor do I think you are right. Actually, the longer this exchange continues, the less I understand what your point it.

People are born gay, but that has nothing to do with gender, male and female. Sexual orientation and Gender are not one in the same thing. As for in-between sex- I don't know??? I do know there are many babies born of indeterminate sex. Babies born with both male and female genitalia. But, again, this has nothing to do with being gay or ***. Did you notice that this blog prohibits the "L" word? That's funny.

As for Adam and Eve, again- that s a matter of personal faith. Biologically, we know that there is no way possible that all of the inhabitants of the planet can be traced to two human beings, one of which was crafted from the rib of the other. Not enough genetic variability. The story is but that, a story, used by devout people to pay homage to the greatness of creation and the creator as they understood the creator.

Again, everyone is entitled to their own personal beliefs, and I respect totally your right to hold whatever personal beliefs that you do. 

 BTW God said it was good before Adam and Eve sinned. Ever since Adam and Eve sinned there has been sin in the world. Are you following? And now that there is sin in the world, some sick people have the idea that it is okay for women to marry or date or whatever other women, same thing for the men!