Corporate America: The LGBT Community's Most Powerful Ally

Here in Virginia corporations were not so long ago barred from offering domestic partner insurance benefits unless the corporations were large and basically self-insured.  What changed this?  Large corporations, including Capital One, demanding that the Virginia General Assembly repeal the ban and allow corporations to be competitive in recruiting the best talent and employees.  Another example of corporate America's blow back against anti-gay bigotry is the reason debacle in Arizona where GOP governor Jan Brewer was forced to veto a GOP backed bill.  Sadly, the Virginia GOP still has not gotten the larger message.  A piece in Metro Weekly looks at how corporate America has become, whether for the right reasons or not, become one of the LGBT community's most powerful allies.  Here are highlights:

While the debate over LGBT equality may continue to take place among the general electorate, that debate has reached its conclusion among corporate America. To be anti-gay increasingly means to be anti-business. 

According to Deena Fidas, director of the Workplace Equality Program for the Human Rights Campaign Foundation, the game-changing moment came when New York lawmakers approved marriage-equality legislation in 2011.

"That was really the first time there was a breakthrough of this being a relative fringe area of corporate support," Fidas tells Metro Weekly, noting that during the fight against Proposition 8 in 2008 only a handful of businesses weighed in. However, thanks to a collaborate effort by a number of LGBT-rights organizations, about 40 businesses from Wall Street to upstate New York publicly voiced their support for the state's same-sex marriage bill.

The tidal shift is apparent with adoption of nondiscrimination policies as well. In 2002, when HRC launched its Corporate Equality Index, which has come to serve as the national benchmark tool on corporate LGBT policies, only 13 businesses achieved a perfect score. In 2014 that number stands at 304 businesses. Among Fortune 500 companies, 91 percent have nondiscrimination policies that include sexual orientation and 61 percent include gender identity. Sixty-seven percent offer equivalent medical benefits between spouses and partners and 28 percent offer transgender-inclusive health care benefits, including surgical procedures. 

While the adoption of such inclusive policies has been on the rise, major corporations have also now begun to take their views on LGBT-rights out of the boardroom and into the public square. A month before the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the challenge to the Defense of Marriage Act's federal definition of marriage as between a man and a woman, in March 2013, nearly 300 businesses and city governments, including major businesses such as Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, Twitter, Starbucks, Morgan Stanley, Google and cities from Baltimore to Los Angeles, filed a brief with the Supreme Court calling for DOMA be struck down as unconstitutional. The brief argued in part that DOMA hurts workplace efficiency and employee morale, and thus forces employers to participate in the injury of their own workforce morale.

[W]hile many of these businesses have expressed a desire to be on the right side of history, their decision to take action on issues of equality is just as much pragmatic.

"As they've learned, there are a lot of very practical implications for businesses when we have uneven laws. There were very material challenges they were having to reconcile with differing state and federal tax systems," Fidas says. "So while there's certainly a more social justice and equality case to be made, there were also these very real administrative costs that were going toward renovating these uneven laws and how they impact the implementation of things like domestic partner benefits." 

But perhaps the greatest example of how powerful an alliance the LGBT community has forged with corporate America came this past February when lawmakers in Arizona approved anti-LGBT legislation that would have effectively made it legal for businesses to turn away customers due to their religious beliefs.

Brewer isn't the first member of a party with deep ties to the business community to find herself siding with equality following pressure from the nation's most profitable companies. Hedge fund billionaire Paul Singer, whose son is gay, has invested millions of dollars into forging GOP support for issues such as LGBT workplace protections and marriage equality. More than 120 leading U.S. employers have joined HRC's Business Coalition for Workplace Fairness supporting passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA).

"My interactions with business leaders have shown me that corporations want to attract the broadest pool of talent possible," says Angelo. "When there are exclusionary policies explicitly stated in state laws or constitutions, or the absence of inclusionary policies as part of company policy, they find less of a chance to attract talented workers who also happen to be LGBT."

U.S. Supreme Court Refuses to Hear Anti-Gay Photographer's Appeal

Anti-gay bigot, Elaine Huguenin

One of the lunatic wingnut justifications for Arizona's "turn away the gays" bill was that ultimately vetoed by Arizona Governor Jan Brewer was that "godly Christians" needed to be protected from serving those members of the public whose existence offended their religious sensibilities.  One of the instances cited for the need for the license to discriminate based on feigned claimed religious belief was the case involving Elane Photography which was found to have violated New Mexico's public accommodation statute.  The New Mexico Supreme Court upheld Elane Photography's conviction and the case was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court (Elane Photography was represented by the same whack jobs at the Alliance Defending Bigotry Freedom who are representing the Prince William County Clerk of Court in the Bostic v. Rainey case).  Today, the U.S. Supreme Court drop kicked Elane Photography and the Alliance Defending Freedom  by refusing to take the appeal from the New Mexico Supreme Court ruling.  The conclusion?  That the Arizona statute and Mississippi's new anti-gay statute were based on lies when they claimed that non-discrimination laws trample on the "religious freedom" of Christofascists.  The Washington Blade has details.  Here are excerpts:

The U.S. Supreme Court announced on Monday it won’t take up a case in which a New Mexico photography business alleges its rights were violated when it landed in hot water for refusing to shoot a same-sex wedding ceremony.

In orders published Monday morning, the court listed the case, Elane Photography v. Willock, without comment as among the cases it won’t consider.

The case was brought to the Supreme Court by Elane Photography, which was found to have violated New Mexico’s anti-discrimination law for refusing to take a photo for the same-sex wedding ceremony for Vanessa Willock and Misti Collinsworth in 2006. (The wedding was only ceremonial because the incident took place before the state legalized same-sex marriage.)

Elane Photography filed lawsuit in state court, alleging that its refusal to photograph a same-sex wedding is protected on religious grounds. However, the New Mexico Supreme Court ruled against the claims, saying the businesses service can be regulated because it’s a public accommodation. Following that decision, Elane Photography asked the U.S. Supreme Court to consider the lawsuit based on First Amendment protections under the U.S. Constitution.

To grant a writ certiorari, or a take up a case, at least four of the nine justices on the court must agree to consider lawsuit. It’s unknown what the vote was on denying certiorari in this case.  Had the court taken up the case, justices could have found a constitutional right across the country for individuals to discriminate against LGBT people or refuse services for same-sex weddings ceremonies on the basis of religion.

Anti-gay groups had pointed to the incident as a reason to enact laws in various states to allow individuals and business to refuse services to gay people without fear of reprisal, such as the controversial “turn away the gay” bill recently vetoed by Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer and signed into law by Mississippi Gov. Phil Bryant. Other bills along those lines are pending in numerous states — Kansas, Mississippi and Georgia — but have seen resistance going forward.

Bigotry is bigotry whether wrapped in claimed religious belief or not and it is fortunate that the Court rejected this case  and sent a message to the Christofascists that they are NOT above the law. 

Jan Brewer's Staff Helped Write Anti-LGBT Bill She Vetoed

In an interesting turn of events it turns out that Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer's staff worked with the anti-gay Center for Arizona Policy as early as January of this year to craft the language of SB 1062 which brought down a firestorm on Arizona and the Arizona GOP.  As noted before, like The Family Foundation here in Virginia, the Center for Arizona Policy is a ultra far right group that pushes a Christofascist agenda, is vehemently anti-gay and welds great power over the Republican Party in Arizona.  As the Arizona Daily Star reports, the version of SB 1062 which was passed by the GOP controlled Arizona legislature had been signed off on by Brewer's office. The obvious question becomes one of why Brewer's office did not kill the bill from the offset given its extreme silence to discriminate?  Here are some story highlights:

Top aides to Gov. Jan Brewer sought and got proponents of a “religious liberty” bill to make changes to SB 1062 more than a month before she vetoed the measure.

Documents obtained by Capitol Media Services show gubernatorial counsel Joe Sciarrotta and adviser Michael Hunter met with staffers from the Center for Arizona Policy as early as January about the legislation. The documents, mainly email exchanges before and after meetings, show the alterations made in the legislation at the behest of the Brewer advisers.

CAP President Cathi Herrod said her organization made every change sought by the administration to her proposal to expand the existing state Religious Freedom Restoration Act. She said that includes deleting phrases that concerned the governor’s staff and adding provisions designed to narrow who could legally deny services to someone based on a claim of religious freedom.

“But the intent of the meetings, the purpose of the meetings, was to thoroughly vet the language, address their concerns, and make changes in the language pursuant to their concerns,” Herrod said. She said her organization addressed every concern raised by Hunter and Sciarrotta with the idea that this year’s version would not meet the same fate as a similar bill Brewer vetoed last year.
What led to this year’s veto, Herrod insisted, had nothing to do with the wording of SB 1062.

“But the intent of the meetings, the purpose of the meetings, was to thoroughly vet the language, address their concerns, and make changes in the language pursuant to their concerns,” Herrod said. She said her organization addressed every concern raised by Hunter and Sciarrotta with the idea that this year’s version would not meet the same fate as a similar bill Brewer vetoed last year.

What led to this year’s veto, Herrod insisted, had nothing to do with the wording of SB 1062.

I beg to differ with Ms. Herrod.  The veto had EVERYTHING to do with the wording of SB 1062 which would have given Christofascist a wide license to discriminate against gays - and everyone else that they hate and about whom they could  cite a Bible passage to justify their bigotry.

Tea Party Nation Confirms The "Tea Party" is One and the Same as Christofascists

I have long maintained based on polls that show a roughly 85% overlap between Tea Party members and self-identified far right conservative Christians.   In fact, the cynical side of me believes that part of the rise of the Tea Party was by deliberate design as a vehicle to repackage Christofascists in a manner that would disguise their religious extremism form less informed and knowledgeable voters. Instead of wrapping themselves in the Bible and the cloak of religion, the new "Tea Party" would claim to wrap itself  in "freedom" and the United States Constitution.  No has made it clear that the Christofascists w, in the wake of Gov. Jan Brewer's veto of the religious extremist backed SB 1062, Judson Phillips, the head of Tea Party Nation, has made it perfectly clear that the Tea Party and the Christofascists are one and the same.  Here are highlights from a statement on the Tea Party Nation website attacking gays:

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer has vetoed SB1062, The Religious Freedom Restoration Act in Arizona.  No one has ever accused Governor Brewer of being the most courageous Republican around. Come to think of it, the word courageous and Jan Brewer have probably never been uttered in the same sentence.

 

The left and the homosexual lobby in America went into overdrive to kill this bill.  Conservatives rallied for this bill and Governor Brewer opted for cowardice instead of courage.

Why is this bill so important and what did it mean for not only Arizona but America?  The issue can be boiled down to one word: Freedom.

A free man or woman controls their labor.  A slave has no control over their labor.  A free man or woman decides who they will work for and under what conditions.  The slave cannot.

The left and the homosexual lobby are both pushing slavery using the Orwellian concepts of “tolerance” and “inclusiveness.”

The storm rose against Arizona and Jan Brewer proved she was no Ronald Reagan.  She has an honored place in the ranks of the French Republicans.  Corporations and business interests, many of whom support far left wing causes, like Apple demanded this bill be vetoed.  Apple gives 96% of its political giving to Democrats.  Why a Republican listens to a word from Apple or lifts a finger to help them is beyond comprehension.  The NFL threatened to pull the Super Bowl from Arizona in 2015.

Someone with courage would have called their bluff.  Arizona has Jan Brewer.

The most common victims of the left wing homosexual assault on freedom have been Christian bakers and photographers. 

Note the theme of Christian persecution - the same mantra that we hear more and more from far right "Christian" hate groups that incessantly demonize and denigrate LGBT citizens.   Anyone who thinks that the Christofascists and the Tea Party are two different groups is merely deluding themselves.

 

Gov. Jan Brewer Vetos Arizona "Turn Away the Gays" Bill

Apparently realizing that the Arizona GOP was on the verge of losing business community support and the potential cancellation of major events and conventions, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer vetoed SB 1062 which would have given Christofascists and Christofascist owned businesses to refuse to serve or provide services to gays - and potentially anyone else that they disapproved of based on "sincere religious belief."  Here is the text of Brewer's veto statement:

"Good evening, and thank you for joining me here today. 

"I am here to announce my decision on Senate Bill 1062. "As with every proposal that reaches my desk, I gave Senate Bill 1062 careful evaluation and deliberate consideration. I call them like I see them, despite the cheers or boos from the crowd. 

"I took the time necessary to make the RIGHT decision. I met or spoke with my attorneys, lawmakers and citizens supporting and opposing this legislation. "I listened ... and asked questions. 

"As Governor, I have protected religious freedoms when there is a specific and present concern that exists in OUR state. "And I have the record to prove it. 

"My agenda is to sign into law legislation that advances Arizona. "When I addressed the Legislature earlier this year, I made my priorities for this session abundantly clear…

"Among them are passing a responsible budget that continues Arizona's economic Comeback."From CEOs - to entrepreneurs - to business surveys - Arizona ranks as one the best states to grow or start a business. 

"Additionally, our IMMEDIATE challenge is fixing a broken Child Protection system."Instead, this is the first policy bill to cross my desk. "Senate Bill 1062 does not address a specific and present concern related to religious liberty in Arizona. I have not heard of one example in Arizona where a business owner's religious liberty has been violated. 

"The bill is broadly worded and could result in unintended and negative consequences.  "After weighing all of the arguments, I vetoed Senate Bill 1062 moments ago. 

I sincerely believe that Senate Bill 1062 has the potential to create more problems than it purports to solve.  "It could divide Arizona in ways we cannot even imagine and no one would ever want. 

"Religious liberty is a core American and Arizona value, so is non-discrimination. 

"Going forward, let's turn the ugliness of the debate over Senate Bill 1062 into a renewed search for greater respect and understanding among ALL Arizonans and Americans. "Thank you."

Not surprisingly, the Center for Arizona Policy, a far right Christian organization and the main backer of SB 1062 is not happy with the result and gave a very disingenuous and dishonest response in an effort to mask the anti-gay animus that was the real motivation behind SB 1062:

"Today's veto of SB 1062 marks a sad day for Arizonans who cherish and understand religious liberty. SB 1062 passed the legislature for one reason only: to guarantee that all Arizonans would be free to live and work according to their faith. Opponents were desperate to distort this bill rather than debate the merits. Essentially, they succeeded in getting a veto of a bill that does not even exist.

"When the force of government compels one to speak or act contrary to their conscience, the government injures not only the dignity of the afflicted, but the dignity of our society as a whole.  "SB 1062 made certain that governmental laws cannot force people to violate their faith unless it has a compelling governmental interest-a balancing of interests that has been in federal law since 1993. 

The religious beliefs of all Arizonans must be respected and this bill did nothing more than affirm that. It is truly a tragic day in our state and nation when lies and personal attacks can over shadow the truth."

 Meanwhile, even though SB 1062 has been vetoed, its passage may come back to haunt many Arizona Republicans.  Here are excerpts from the Arizona Republic:

But pollsters and candidates for office say the issue isn’t likely to disappear from the political conversation any time soon.

In an election year in which Arizonans will select a governor, attorney general and state and congressional lawmakers, SB 1062 will be part of the campaign-trail conversation, they say.

With campaigns already under way, candidates are quickly calculating how to best explain their positions on the divisive bill, which would offer a legal defense for individuals and businesses that face discrimination lawsuits if they can prove they acted upon a “sincerely held religious belief.”

Its impact will vary depending on the race and other issues that surface between now and the fall elections. But some political observers expect Republican candidates who face competitive August primaries will have to walk a political tightrope on SB 1062 between the moderates in their party and the social conservatives.

Others expect Democrats, who widely oppose SB 1062, to hammer Republicans on the issue as an example of a party that’s out of step with mainstream society.

And some say anger among opponents could translate into young and gay voters turning out in droves for Democrats in November’s general election.

In Arizona’s most hotly contested races for Congress, SB 1062 could become fodder for campaign ads and mobilizing donors and volunteers, despite Washington not having a say on the state legislation.

Democrats seized quickly on the outcry. They criticized Republican candidates for supporting the bill — or not taking a stand — and blasted notices to supporters to urge Brewer to veto the bill.

Some campaign watchers speculated GOP challengers could lose support from the business community, while comments on candidates’ social-media accounts overwhelmingly ran against the bill.

May SB 1062 come back and bite many Republicans in the ass and cause severe hemorrhaging of voter support. 

GOP on Arizona Anti-Gay Law: Make It Go Away

For years now the Republican Party at both the national and state level has been gleefully prostituting itself to Christofascists and theocrats and injecting foul and toxic religious belief into the civil laws.  Here in Virginia the Republican Party of Virginia has become little more than the legislative arm of The Family Foundation, a Christofascist hate group.  And for too long these political prostitutes in the GOP have gotten away with pushing religious based laws that make a mockery of the U. S. Constitution's guarantee of religious freedom for all citizens, not just Christofascists and Christian extremist.  In some ways Arizona's "turn the gays away" bill was a logical extension of what has been long occurring with GOP facilitation.  That the Arizona law has ignited a fire storm and an uprising by the business community has been nothing short of delicious to watch.  Indeed, the fall out has caused similar bills in Georgia and Indiana to get pulled or put on possible permanent by GOP sponsors.  Now, many Republicans want the Arizona bill to simply go away and have joined the chorus calling on Arizona Governor Jan Brewer to veto the bill.  Politico looks at the growing GOP stampede to see the bill killed.  Here are highlights:

As Republican Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer weighs whether to sign a bill that would allow businesses to deny services to gay customers, top national Republicans just want the issue to go away.

Proponents of the legislation — which Brewer has until Saturday to sign or veto and is reportedly leaning against — say the bill is designed to protect religious liberty. But many Washington Republicans see it as a political loser, giving the left another cudgel to attack conservatives as intolerant while motivating liberals and younger voters ahead of the midterm elections. It also threatens to widen the chasm between social conservatives and GOP operatives, who have become increasingly public in their support for gay marriage.

“There are lots of economic and fiscal issues that people care pretty deeply about. I think those are good issues for us to focus on,” Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) said Tuesday when asked about the bill, SB 1062. “We’ll stay focused on Obamacare. Those are the issues we want to talk about.”

The state’s Republican senators, Jeff Flake and John McCain, are prodding the governor to veto the bill on financial grounds, warning that boycotts of Arizona could do untold economic damage to the state. They even worried about losing next year’s Super Bowl.

“I know that the entire business community is galvanized, in a way that I’ve never seen, against this legislation,” said McCain.  “I hope she moves quickly,” Flake said. “I just don’t see any reason to wait.”

Still, the legislation puts other elected Republicans in a touchy spot, not wanting to antagonize social conservatives who oppose same-sex marriage or force business owners to go against their conscience.

A Republican strategist active in congressional races said the bill will most likely be a nonfactor in the midterms if Brewer vetoes it. Boycott threats and strong opposition from the business community in Arizona could deter other states from taking up similar legislation.

“If it becomes law, it will be a big issue,” the person said. “All indications are that she’s likely to veto it, and if she does … eight months from now, it’s pretty much ancient history.”

If Brewer signs the legislation, the major concern of party strategists is that opponents would launch an effort to overturn it. A referendum in November would allow the debate about whether denying services to gays is discriminatory to simmer through November, drawing global attention and increasing turnout among younger, liberal voters. This could complicate GOP hopes of holding the open governorship and picking up targeted House seats.

Republican consultant Steve Schmidt, a supporter of gay marriage rights who was McCain’s senior strategist on his 2008 presidential campaign, called the bill a political mess.  “It makes the party of Lincoln and Reagan look small, closed and intolerant and exacerbates our political differences with every single demographic group in America that is growing,” he said.

Mike Murphy, another prominent GOP strategist, said the bill makes holding the party’s 2016 convention in Phoenix “a terrible idea.”

 

Being shameless whores to ignorance embracing hate-filled Christofascists can carry a price - as the GOP is finding out in spades.  The perverse side of me hopes Brewer signs the bill and that the ensuing shit storm causes the GOP nothing but problems until the law is struck down as unconstitutional under the precedent of Romer v. Evans.

 

First They Came for the Gays

As students of history may remember, in Nazi Germany, it was first the Jews who were targeted for state sponsored discrimination and later far worse.  But once the Nazi regime got away with what was being done to Jews, others were then targeted: Gypsies, gays, Slavs, etc.  Here in America, American Christofascists are little different from the Nazi regime.  There are those they hate in particular, i.e., gays, but many others are also despised: non-Christians, Muslims, non-whites, independent women, etc.  The list is a long one.  A piece in The Daily Beast makes the case that, if the Christofascists are successful in enacting anti-gay laws that exempt Christofascists from compliance with non-discrimination laws and public accommodation laws, then other groups will be targeted in the future.  Here are excerpts:

If Republicans allow businesses to refuse people in the name of religious freedom, you can expect women, minorities, and others to get the cold shoulder. 

If the Republican-controlled Arizona state legislature has its way, gays could be thrown out of bars, restaurants, and hotels across the state.

Last week it passed a bill that would permit businesses to deny services to any person if doing so would substantially burden the business owners “exercise of religion.”  Why? Because the Bible condemns such homosexual unions. In essence, this measure would legally sanction discrimination against gay Americans by masquerading as a defense of religious freedom.

When I first read about this proposed law, my reaction was probably the same as many others: Are you f#@#ing kidding me?!  But they’re not. And even scarier is that Arizona isn’t the only state where Republicans are trying to to turn the Bible into the basis for American law. The Republican-controlled Kansas House of Representatives passed a similar bill two weeks ago, while Idaho and Utah have considered similar measures.

Who else can be denied services? The proposed Arizona also law doesn’t warn the public about which religions don’t approve of which people. Nothing could spoil a family vacation to Arizona more than going to check into the hotel and discovering that the owner doesn’t religiously approve of you. So, in an effort to help people, here are a few groups in addition to gays who should be concerned:

A. Interracial couples.  For many, the laws that deemed it a crime for blacks and whites to marry were grounded upon their religious beliefs.  For example, the trial judge in the famous case of Loving v. Virginia made that very point: “Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents… The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.” And the Bible appears to support this very proposition. 


B. Women who try to tell men what to do.  The Bible states: “…do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet.”  So ladies, if you start telling  your husband what to do while in an Arizona restaurant, you may find yourself sitting in the parking lot while he finishes his dinner in the establishment.

C. Jews, Muslims, atheists, Sikhs, and others.  The New Testament also tells Christians: “If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.”

Arizona’s Republican governor Jan Brewer should veto this bill when it comes to her desk in the next few days.  However, that’s not enough.  The Republican National Chair Reince Priebus and other GOP Leaders need to make it clear that their party will no longer tolerate discrimination against any American for any reason.

It’s truly time the GOP makes a choice:  Will they continue to be beholden to the extreme elements of their party? Or will they finally have the courage to stand up to the voices of intolerance and embrace the inclusivity that truly represents our nation today. What’s it going to be? 

Arizona Gay Discrimination Law Pits Big Business Against GOP Base

While I do not like Arizona Governor Jan Brewer whatsoever, it is somewhat delicious to see her find herself caught in a war between the Christofascists of the GOP base and big business which ultimately finances statewide and national campaigns.  And as Ken Cuccinelli discovered last year, extremism on social issues does not play well with big business outside of the circle of the Koch brothers and a few others.  Hence, Brewer faces being attacked by spittle flecked Christofascists if she vetoes SB 1062 on the one hand and alienating big business if she doesn't veto it.  Towleroad looks at the big businesses, including Apple and Marriott which are putting demands on Brewer for a veto of SB 1062.  Here are excerpts:

Earlier today we reported that the Arizona Chamber of Commerce was leading a call for Governor Jan Brewer to veto SB 1062, the heinous bill that would allow businesses to discriminate against gays based on religious beliefs.

Companies have been signing on all day and now Apple has joined the 83 other companies calling for a veto of the bill, the Arizona Capitol Times reports:

Brewer spokesman Andrew Wilder said the governor spoke on the phone with the company.

The request comes as Apple prepares to open a new sapphire glass manufacturing plant in Mesa. The plant, which Brewer and other political leaders have touted as economic development coup for Arizona, will employ about 700 full-time employees.

Also, Marriott, American Airlines, and the National Business Inclusion Consortium (NBIC) have called on Brewer to veto the bill. Scott Wooledge is keeping tabs on the state's top businesses insofar as who has urged a veto or taken a position on the bill.

Both Arizona Senators McCain and Flake have urged a veto. Three Republican state senators who originally voted for the bill have decided it was a mistake.

Obviously, I hope Brewer vetoes this foul piece of legislation which seeks to give far right Christians special rights and open a flood gate of anti-gay discrimination. 

Arizona Super Bowl Host Committee Denounces Arizon Anti-Gay Bill

The furor over Arizona's "special rights for Christifascist" a/k/a the "turn the gays away" bill continues to grow and both of Arizona's U.S. Senators have called on Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer to veto the bill.  Similar bills have been introduced at the demand of Christofascist organizations and their political prostitutes in the Republican Party, but the uproar taking place in Arizona may make some of these states to rethink such legislation.   WTAR News looks at the controversy, including the denunciation of the bill made by the Arizona Super Bowl Host Committee.  Here are excerpts:

After the weekly media meeting for House Democrats at the capitol Monday, Democratic House Minority Leader Chad Campbell said Senate Bill 1062 could affect the 2015 Super Bowl in Glendale, Ariz.

"I think that the sports community is going to start looking at this and take a serious second look at whether or not they actually want to have the biggest sporting event in the world hosted in a state that is openly promoting, bigotry and discrimination," Campbell said, adding that bill really makes the state look bad.

Campbell went further, calling SB 1062 a "horrible bill."

"Both morally and economically it is a horrible bill," he said. "You're talking about really putting a sign on the front door of Arizona saying ‘We don't want a certain group of people here.'"

In a statement, the Arizona Super Bowl Host Committee said it does not support SB 1062.

We share the NFL's core values which embrace tolerance, diversity, inclusiveness and prohibit discrimination. In addition, a key part of the mission for the Arizona Super Bowl Host Committee is to promote the economic vitality of Arizona. On that matter we have heard loud and clear from our various stakeholders that adoption of this legislation would not only run contrary to that goal but deal a significant blow to the state's economic growth potential. We do not support this legislation. Instead, we look forward to continuing to promote the NFL's values while focusing on the economic momentum apparent in Arizona and capturing the positive worldwide attention associated with hosting Super Bowl XLIX.

Campbell compared SB 1062 to Arizona not recognizing Martin Luther King, Jr. Day back in the 1990s. 

"We have a history of the legislature passing bills that end up in court and then being tossed," he said. "Senate Bill 1070 is another great example of that."

SB 1062 would make it legal for a business to deny services on the basis of someone's sexual orientation. Gov. Jan Brewer has until the close of business Saturday to sign it into law or veto it.

Will Arizona's "License to Discriminate Bill" Backfire

The far right and the Christofascists in Arizona are gushing with joy over the Arizona legislature's passage of the "license to discriminate bill" that is headed to Gov. Jan Brewer's desk.  Meanwhile, the Chamber of Commerce and business groups are aghast that, if passed into law, the bill would savage Arizona's economy and perhaps even jeopardize the state 's scheduled hosting of the Super Bowl.  In addition, some believe the law which is so blatantly targeted at gays could (i) end up eventual before the U.S. Supreme Court and lead to an expanded version of the ruling in Romer v. Evans, or (ii) influence the result in cases now pending before the Court where Christofascists are demanding special rights.  Should something like this happen, the Christofascists will have shot themselves in the longer term.  Think Progress looks at the possibility.  Here are highlights:

Arizona is likely to give many business sweeping new rights to discriminate against LGBT people. Yet, by calling attention to the link anti-gay groups hope to forge between “religious liberty” and a right to anti-gay discrimination, this bill could unintentionally wind up advancing the cause of women’s health and potentially even rescue LGBT people from similar efforts to protect discrimination in the future. Or, to be more precise, it could have that effect if Justice Anthony Kennedy is paying attention to what’s going on in Arizona.

A bill currently awaiting Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer’s (R-AZ) signature or veto has been labeled a “license to discriminate” and “state-sanctioned discrimination towards the LGBT community.” The Arizona Republic urged Brewer to veto it because it would “allow businesses to refuse service to gays and lesbians on religious grounds.” Yet, what is most striking about the bill is how closely it tracks a pair of cases currently pending in the Supreme Court that, at least on the surface, have little to do with gay rights — and everything to do with whether employers can deny birth control to their employees.

A key issue in this case is whether the Supreme Court will allow for-profit corporations to raise a religious liberty claim — something that no court had ever agreed to until religious employers started objecting to these particular birth control rules.

Current Arizona law closely tracks the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which forms the basis of the plaintiffs’ strongest claims in Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood. The bill on Brewer’s desk would amend Arizona’s religious liberty law in several ways, but the most significant change is new language expanding the scope of who is allowed to claim they are immune to complying with state law on religious grounds. Should Brewer sign the bill, “ANY INDIVIDUAL, ASSOCIATION, PARTNERSHIP, CORPORATION, CHURCH, RELIGIOUS ASSEMBLY OR INSTITUTION, ESTATE, TRUST, FOUNDATION OR OTHER LEGAL ENTITY” will be eligible to make religious liberty claims.

What’s significant about the debate over the Arizona bill is that it drives home the fact that allowing corporations to claim religious exemptions to the law is not just about birth control — it’s also about whether businesses with anti-gay owners will have the right to discriminate against LGBT customers or even LGBT workers. Indeed, the bill’s proponents don’t even really try to hide this fact.

[D]espite his largely conservative record on the bench, there are a handful of issues where Kennedy has genuinely moderate views — and on these issues, he quite often votes with the court’s more liberal bloc. Gay rights is one of these issues. Indeed, Kennedy’s written with genuine compassion toward gay men and lesbians in his three major gay rights opinions.

The last time a conflict between gay rights and religious conservatives reached the Supreme Court, Kennedy broke with his fellow conservatives and sided with gay equality.  

[I]f Kennedy views Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood and a broad attack on the idea that religious employers have to comply with the law, and specifically, with laws protecting gay people, then he is much more likely to uphold the birth control rules. 

The plaintiffs’ legal theory in Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood would, in the words of a brief filed by attorneys from Lambda Legal, “mark a sea change – not only in allowing business owners’ religious views about family planning to burden decisions employees are entitled to make for themselves, but also in opening the door to similar denials of equal compensation, health care access, and other equitable treatment for LGBT people, persons with HIV, and anyone else whose family life or health need diverges from their employers’ religious convictions.” If birth control loses in Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood, it is all but certain that gay rights will be next on the chopping block.

The bill on Brewer’s desk drives this fact home better than any brief or legal argument possibly could. Supporters of both gay rights and women’s health should hope that Kennedy is paying attention to Arizona.

Will GOP Gov. Jan Brewer Veto Arizona Gay Segregation Bill?

The degree to which Republicans will prostitute themselves to the ugliest elements of the Christofascists often knows few limits.  Indeed, I often note that a tawdry whore has more integrity than most GOP legislators.  With both houses of the Arizona legislature having passed a special rights for Christians, gay segregation bill that would allow Jim Crow like treatment of gays in Arizona, Gov. Jan Brewer will have to decide if she will join the ranks of the GOP prostitutes or do what is best for Arizona and veto the bill.  Brewer is receiving huge amounts of pressure from the Arizona business community to veto the bill which business interests rightly fear will harm the state economically and prompt a raft of boycotts.  Two stories in the Arizona Republic look at Brewer's dilemma.  Here are highlights from the first piece on the business community blow back:

Economic-development groups and business leaders, perhaps stung by memories of the backlash from a tough anti-immigration law in 2010, expressed concern over the latest controversial bill headed to Gov. Jan Brewer’s desk.

Just as the Arizona economy begins gaining momentum, the new legislation could hurt its recovery — and the state’s reputation as a place to do business — they said. In 2010, boycotts of the state hit the tourism industry especially hard after Senate Bill 1070 was passed.

The Greater Phoenix Economic Council urged a veto of the controversial legislation that would allow discrimination against gays, saying it could affect Super Bowl XLIX in Glendale and have “profound, negative” economic effects for years.

[M]any other business owners — and the Arizonans who buy from them — expressed frustration Friday over a potential law that could make the state and its people appear unwelcoming.

“The state already is known as being discriminatory,” said Howard Fleischmann, majority owner of six Community Tire Pros and Auto Repair outlets in the Valley. “This would muddy the water and give Arizona a more terrible reputation.”

The controversy comes at a time when Arizona’s economy appears to be shifting into higher gear. BMO Capital Markets, in a report this month, said Arizona’s economy is poised to grow faster than the nation both this year and next.  The legislation clouds the economic picture, some business leaders said.

Representatives of Arizona’s tourism industry are especially worried, with hotel occupancy and other measures on an upswing and with the nation’s biggest sporting event scheduled in Glendale on Feb. 1, 2015.   “We’re greatly concerned,” said Kristen Jarnagin, senior vice president of communications for the Arizona Lodging & Tourism Association. “We’ve already received countless phone calls and e-mails from people canceling trips or threatening not to return.”

Many of those raising objections Friday cited the impact of the right-to-refuse-service bill on the state’s reputation, the likelihood of the relatively affluent gay community to spend its dollars elsewhere, and the potential challenges in recruiting workers to a state that might feel less than inclusive.

“With major events approaching in the coming year, including Super Bowl XLIX, Arizona will be the center of the world’s stage,” the letter says. “This legislation has the potential of subjecting the Super Bowl, and major events surrounding it, to the threats of boycotts.

“In addition to the concerns with the growing negative attention already being portrayed across both national and social media, we have already been contacted by four companies we are working on with the Arizona Commerce Authority who will look to locate elsewhere if this legislation is signed.”

The second article looks at Brewer's double speak as she is facing sharp attacks from Christofascists if she vetoes the bill and perhaps even more dangerous attacks from the business community if she doesn't veto it.  Here are excerpts:

As usual, Brewer has been tight-lipped about how she will act — she rarely comments before bills reach her desk. But she told a cable news network she planned to closely review the “controversial piece of legislation” that, among other things, would allow individuals to use religious beliefs as a defense against a lawsuit. Gay rights activists say the law would permit outright discrimination.

The Republican governor plans to meet with advisers in and out of her office, members of the business community, lawmakers and others as she weighs whether to sign the bill into law, her advisers said.

“They’ll go over every aspect of the bill — the pros and the cons, the risks — all of it,” said one insider familiar with the inner workings of the Governor’s Office and how Brewer approaches legislation. “In this instance, you have a bill that had a party-line vote. It puts her in a difficult spot.”

Brewer was in Washington, D.C., attending a conference of governors and wasn’t expected to return until Tuesday. But some factions set to work Friday attempting to influence her decision.
Brewer’s Twitter feed blew up, with people from the business community, gay and lesbian activists and others urging her to veto the bill.

Business leaders, including the Greater Phoenix Economic Council, warned SB 1062 could have “profound, negative” effects on the state’s recovering economy by alienating businesses looking to relocate here and hurting tourism even as the state readies to host next year’s Super Bowl.

If the bill is not vetoed, I for one will make a point to NEVER visit the state (where I had relatives for over 60 years) or buy a product from an Arizona based business. 

 

 

Ninth Circuit: Arizona Same-Sex Partners Entitled to Health Benefits

In a common sense decision, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has temporarily ruled that an Arizona law that stripped same sex couples of partner health care benefits - while, of course leaving them in place of married couples - is unconstitutional under the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution. The ruling will hold until the larger trail on the issue is completed. The law, signed by extremist Arizona Governor Jan Brewer, targeted state employees and was (like all anti-gay measures) aimed at punishing LGBT couples for their failure to conform to conservative Christian moral views on marriage and same sex relationships. Should Arizona appeal the decision, the U. S. Supreme Court could either refuse the appeal or wade into the equal protection issue - something it might well prefer to avoid. Here are highlights from the Tucson Citizen:

Arizona must continue to provide health-care benefits to the partners of gay and lesbian government workers, at least for the time being.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday upheld a temporary injunction from a lower court that blocked a 2009 state law eliminating health-insurance coverage for same-sex partners of state employees from taking effect.

In its unanimous ruling, a three-judge panel of the appellate court noted that the state is not obligated to provide health-care benefits but said denying them to a specific group of employees violates the equal-protection provisions of the U.S. Constitution.

“When a state chooses to provide such benefits, it may not do so in an arbitrary or discriminatory manner that adversely affects particular groups that may be unpopular,” the court stated in its opinion.

It was not immediately clear whether the state would appeal the 9th Circuit ruling. If it does appeal, the state can choose to seek “en banc” review, a decision by the entire 9th Circuit, or it could choose to bypass that step and appeal directly to the U.S. Supreme Court.

When asked about next steps, Brewer spokesman Matthew Benson would say only that the Governor’s Office is “studying the ruling.” But he did question the foundation of the appellate court’s argument.

In its opinion, the court said the state’s policy unfairly impacted gay and lesbian workers because, unlike their heterosexual counterparts, they are not able to legally marry under state law.

Bigotry is Bad for Business - Jan Brewer and the Arizona Business Community

It seems that most bigots in politics are largely opportunists who often place personal advancement and/or media exposure ahead of the true best interests of their state or country. It's all about them and pandering to the lowest common denominator for short term political gain. It seems Arizona Governor Jan Brewer - a far right Missouri Synod Lutheran Christianist who is against LGBT equality - is a case in point. She jumped headlong into immigrant bashing and has seen an uptick in popularity in some circles, but the Arizona business community is none to happy with her because what's good for Brewer's ego satisfying celebrity is not so good for business. Newsweek has an article on the growing schism between Brewer - who seems to think she's the president of Concerned Women for America rather than the governor of a state where she is supposed to represent the needs of all citizens and residents - and the business community. Here are some highlights:
*
Back before they grew distant, Barry Broome, head of the Greater Phoenix Economic Council, would talk to Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer every few weeks. . . . he never imagined what was to come: that she would sign into law one of the nation’s most draconian illegal-immigration bills; pick a costly, high-profile fight with the federal government to defend it; and create a public-relations fiasco for the state.
*
Strains between Brewer and the state’s business community are starting to show. Though her championing of the immigration measure has proved politically popular and catapulted her to national prominence, that success has come at a price. . . . Several companies have packed up and left. At least 40 groups have canceled conventions and conferences, says Debbie Johnson, CEO of the Arizona Hotel and Lodging Association. And the Phoenix area alone is projected to lose $92 million in business, according to Mayor Phil Gordon. “Anyone who says our image has not been hurt is living in a bubble,” he says.
*
Many business leaders are reluctant to criticize Brewer publicly. . . . The state is perilously close to sealing a reputation as a bastion of intolerance. Phoenix “risks becoming the next Birmingham,” says Robert Lang of Brookings Mountain West, a think tank based in Las Vegas. Noting that Arizona is trying to diversify into the solar-energy and biotech industries, he adds, the state is “playing with fire…Who is in solar? Not the kind of people who are listening to Rush [Limbaugh].” It makes Gordon cringe.
*
Many Latino organizations, both local and national, are leading the charge to punish the state economically. In many ways, the effort is shaping up as a de-fining civil-rights struggle for Hispanics. They’re pressuring baseball teams to boycott the state. They’re petitioning cities and states to cut off business ties (many have done so, including Los Angeles and St. Paul, Minn.). They’re urging artists to forswear performing there (among those who have agreed are Kanye West and Rage Against the Machine). And they’re warning other jurisdictions considering similar legislation that an equally potent backlash would await them.
*
“We will make clear that the damage to Arizona can happen anywhere else that tries to pass a law like this,” says Alfredo Gutierrez, a former Arizona state senator . . . . He’s modeling his approach on the anti-apartheid campaigns against South Africa and has been reaching out to Latin American countries to discuss the possibility of sanctions. “We even have a committee in Rwanda,” he says. “I just discovered it while Googling.”
*
Brewer’s likely Democratic opponent, state Attorney General Terry Goddard, may yet prove to be a tough adversary. He has fought crime linked to illegal immigration for years—credentials that give him legitimacy to attack her and the GOP for their handling of the issue. “This is the worst thing that ever happened for business in Arizona,” he says.
*
One can only hope that Brewer and the forces of hate and intolerance lose in November. Arizona is certainly a state that the boyfriend and I won't be planning to visit anytime soon even though I have a family connection to the state that reaches back to the early 1920's. Meanwhile, Virginia's clinically insane Attorney General Ken "Kookinelli" Cuccinelli is encouraging police to stop and question those in Virginia who look like they may be immigrants and ask for their documentation.

Arizona Federal Judge Inundated with Threats

Can't you just feel the love? The far right elements who hate immigrants (and Hispanics in particular) seem to always lean towards violence against anyone who merely seeks to uphold the constitutional rights of those who don't fit the mold of the GOP/tea party base. Namely, white, conservative a/k/a delusional, Christian, homophobic, and heterosexual. And I must point out that this element clearly includes most of the largest self-proclaimed Christian, "pro-family" organizations if one follows their websites.

*

Now these self-described patriots and Christians are bestowing their "love" on U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton who struck down significant portions of Arizona's new racial profiling immigration law that would require citizens to carry proof of citizenship like something out of Nazi Germany or the former Soviet Union. It seems that Judge Bolton has received hundreds of threats, some of which sound like they include death threats. And people still refuse to admit that these far right elements aren't a clear and present danger to society? I sincerely hope that these threats are investigated and some folks criminally prosecuted with plenty of publicity for their hate motivated behavior. Obviously, it will be telling to see who some of these individuals are and the groups with which they have affiliations. Here are highlights from the Chicago Sun Times:
*
U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton received hundreds of threats at her court offices within hours of her ruling last week on Arizona's tough and controversial immigration law.
*
"She has been inundated," said U.S. Marshal David Gonzales, indicating his agents are taking some seriously. "About 99.9 percent of the inappropriate comments are people venting. They are exercising their First Amendment rights, and a lot of it is perverted. But it's that 0.1 percent that goes over the line that we are taking extra seriously."
*
Bolton put on hold key provisions, including the heart of the statute that would give police the authority to check a suspect's immigration status during routine stops if there was reasonable suspicion that the suspect was in the country illegally. Her decision also blocks sections of the law that would require documented immigrants to carry their registration papers.
*
The increase in threats coincides with more online use and the proliferation of blogs, he said. A quick scan shows many sites and discussion forums where Bolton is called a traitor or other, unprintable names. "She's tough as nails. She takes this as all part of her job," Gonzales said.