Dear Friend,
Thanks to North Carolina's Senators
Burr and Tillis, the misnamed dis-"Respect for Marriage Act" (HR8404)
has passed the Senate and now returns to the House for approval of
their amendments. That vote is likely to occur this week.
HR8404 redefines marriage between
one man and one woman to include same-sex couples, and puts freedoms
of religious entities at grave risk. Unfortunately, changes to the
bill do not address the underlying threats to marriage and religious
freedom. As a result, another one of the 47 House Republicans who
initially voted for HR8404 announced their withdrawal of support. In
his announcement, Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-Fla.) claimed Democrats
failed "to provide legitimate safeguards for faith-based
organizations” that hold “deeply-held religious beliefs” about natural
marriage. All Republican Congressmen from North Carolina voted
against the bill the first time it came up in the House, and we expect
them to do so again.
We have received numerous emails
from many of you asking about Senator Tillis’ justification for voting
for HR8404. We want to give you specifics so you can discuss
it with your Congressman and keep him or her from veering off course,
like Senator Tillis did. We also want you to know the truth about
Senator Tillis’ remarks.
In a letter emailed to constituents who
asked Senator Tillis to vote NO on HR8404, he made some misleading and
illogical claims. First, he said, “I worked to secure a
bipartisan compromise to protect the religious freedoms of churches
and religious organizations.” This is circular logic. Senator
Tillis is essentially saying, “I protected religious freedom by
voting to legalize same-sex marriage, allowing radical activists to
sue people of faith who believe marriage is the union between a woman
and man."
There was no need to pass a bill
legalizing same-sex marriage in federal law, because the 2015 Supreme
Court case of Obergefell v. Hodges legalized same-sex
marriage and struck down North Carolina’s marriage amendment along
with 30 other states’ marriage amendments. As Roger Severino of the
Heritage Foundation put it,
“Seeking to entrench the Supreme Court’s
ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges and beyond in national
law—while declining to press the sociological, biblical, and
biological arguments favoring conjugal marriage—suggests these
advocates believe that further recognizing same-sex marriage in law is
a positive social good. If so, they should own up to that in candor
and out of respect to those they seek to influence.”
Senator Tillis claimed,
“A bipartisan amendment I helped
negotiate will ensure robust protections for churches and religious
organizations – protections that are more robust and expansive than
what currently exists in federal law.”
This claim is untrue.
The bill only protects churches and
religious organizations from refusing to provide “services,
accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods, or privileges for the
solemnization or celebration of a marriage.” The First Amendment
protects the rights of free speech and free exercise of religion in
all aspects of public life—not just solemnization or celebration of
marriage. The dis-"Respect for Marriage Act" thus reduces First
Amendment protections only to the solemnization or celebration of
marriage.
Tillis’ amendment is inadequate to
address many of the gravest risks posed by the bill, particularly the
threat to tax exempt status and religious non-profits like adoption
agencies and foster care agencies. HR8404 only exacerbates and
nationalizes the discriminatory policies that have essentially shut
down religious adoption and foster care agencies unless they place
children for adoption with same-sex couples. It would also subject
countless faith-based organizations to revocation of their tax-exempt
status, because the IRS could view the adoption of a national policy
favoring same-sex marriage as a basis for denying such status to
organizations that refuse to advocate for it. Senator Mike Lee from
Utah offered an amendment to cure this defect, which Senator Tillis
voted for, but the amendment failed. Senator Tillis should have voted
against the bill without Senator Lee’s Amendment in place.
Senator Tillis also stated that the bill
doesn’t support polygamous marriages. The latest version of the bill
would not grant federal recognition of “marriages between more than
two individuals,” which would cover unions where three or more persons
are married to each other as one family unit. However, the bill
leaves open the possibility that one person can be in multiple
two-person marriages at the same time, which would trigger federal
recognition if a state legally were to recognize such consensual,
bigamous unions.
Would you consider using
this handy tool to contact or recontact your member of the U.S. House
and ask them to vote against HR8404 again? The U.S. Senate has not
cured the defects, and the threat to religious freedom is still alive
and well. Help us defeat this harmful bill that has been advanced
during the lame duck session of
Congress.
Thank you for supporting marriage the way
God created it—the union of only one man and one woman!
|