Thursday, May 21, 2015

Gov. Jindal's Religious Liberty Bill Defeated By Republicans

Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF

It was a sad day in Louisiana.

Republican lawmakers sided with Democrats, big business and LGBT activists to kill a bill that would have protected individuals and religious institutions opposed to same-sex "marriage."

The proposed law was very clear, stating that its only purpose was to prevent the government from discriminating against a person or a non profit because of their support for traditional marriage.

Governor Bobby Jindal said, "I'm issuing an Executive Order to prevent the state from discriminating against those with deeply held religious beliefs."

A house legal committee of 12 people, including several Republicans, voted 10-2 this week to shelve the bill, effectively killing it and the Order.

Tony Perkins says, "Those ten legislators voted against freedom and against two-thirds of Louisianans who support the Marriage and Conscience Act."

He says, "This is a failure of leadership and goes to the heart of what's wrong with American politics today."

Why would Republicans go on the record in public opposition to the most fundamental value---faith and freedom, that the Party claims to stand for?

Some of the Republicans who killed the bill say they were strong armed by IBM and other big businesses.

Perkins says these elected leaders effectively endorsed government discrimination against individuals and non profits simply for believing in marriage between a man and a woman, "The same thing President Obama believed in just three years ago."

IBM, who is currently expanding in Baton Rouge, had written a strongly worded letter to the newspaper warning that "IBM will find it much harder to attract talent to Louisiana if this bill is passed and enacted into law."

Gov. Jindal strongly supported the bill and said in an April 23 op--ed in the New York Times he did not believe Republican lawmakers would cave to homosexual activists.

He said in the NYT op-ed, "As a nation we would not compel a priest, minister or rabbi to violate his conscience and perform a same-sex ceremony. But a great many Americans who are not members of the clergy feel just as called to live their faith through their businesses. That's why we should ensure that musicians, caterers, photographers and others should be immune from government coercion on deeply held religious convictions."

He was wrong. They caved. Including Republicans. It was a bitter setback for the very popular governor.

Here is a snapshot of how bad it was this week in Louisiana.

State Representative Mike Johnson, Republican, authored the bill. He expected to take a hit from some Democrats, although many Democrats in the legislature supported the bill, but it was a Republican City Councilman in Baton Rouge who went public calling Johnson a "despicable bigot of the highest order."

Johnson said the city councilman has never even met him, and admitted he didn't even read the legislation.

In a recent survey, 67% of likely voters approved of the bill, including 63% of the Democrats.

A few highly funded homosexual activists intimidated and struck fear into the hearts of those politicians, including some Republicans who had no problem putting politics above principle.

Johnson says he has seen the future of religious liberty in America---and it is grim.

God help us.


  1. Jindal - "As a nation we would not compel a priest, minister or rabbi to violate his conscience and perform a same-sex ceremony."

    Of course not, but if they do refuse to, their church should lose its public funding (tax exempt status).

    1. No church should looks it's tax exempt status for doing what's right.

  2. Here is the problem.....Christians are not backing up brave patriot leaders who stand on the Constitution! Every time there is a battle over Bibical truth, Christian leaders are mum and Christian rank and file often run fo the hills. Case in point: Six nude barrista coffee stands in Spokane...the girls hang out over the counters of these businesses to attract customers. Some citizens complained, and a brave City Councilman Mike Fagan ran an ordinance to counter public nudity and set a standard of decency in our fair city. The left wing City Council slam dunked it. Then a local mother of four tried to get signatures on petitions to put the public nudity issue to a leaders ran for cover, not even allowing the petitions in their church foyers. The effort to cloth the nude barristas failed. Now another ordinance has been put forward, and it is going to be tabled next Monday night....due to lack of support. ELECTING BRAVE GOD HONORING LEADERS IS A MUST....but where are they? Who will help them get elected? Who will vote for them??

  3. Sad day. They voted against the constitution. So I assume this is unconstitutional and should not go anywhere, right?

  4. Unless I'm missing something, it appears as if they are saying that they would rather go along with the gay agenda, and have that instead of a constitution, or that they do not wish at this time to risk scuffing their knuckles against the jaws of the wicked. (see Job 29 :17 KJV)

    Why give a blank check to the gay agenda?

    I think they ought to talk this out amongst themselves and run this thing through again.

  5. Where are the sheep dogs in government? (see Dog kills two wolves defending sheep, you tube)

  6. Sounds like IBM is looking for the wrong kind. They should have told them to put their letter into some back port of their computer or something.

  7. Shouldn't Washington's state governor do the same as Louisiana's? I'm going to try to contact the governor.

  8. I guess what the state has been saying lately is that business is not for Christians anymore, in America.

  9. It seems to me that so many in government have lost their minds. They messed with marriage and everything went bonkers.

    In this dark age of the Obama administration, it seems so many people are hoarding .22 ammunition in case they have to defend against an army of Obama zombies led by their "health care" leader.

    It's past time to get back to the constitution. We're late already.

  10. The state seems intent on forcing hypocrisy upon Christian businesses. I suppose this is so the owners and employees will become hypocrites as they are, all because of the gay agenda.

  11. It must be that kind of arbitrary power the state hungers for....and if it can be against a Christian? a double portion for them or something.

  12. I've sent the governor a few e-messages asking him to do as the governor of Louisiana did, to protect religious freedom, and to stop the unjust harassment of Christian businesses by unconstitutional means, but now I find that I'm not able to type a message on the governor's site.

    Has anyone else had that problem?

    I'm not sure why we haven't seen on the news somebody talking to the governor, or trying to talk to him about this matter. I know a lot of people have to go to work and don't have the time, but what about some pastors? I don't know their schedule during the week, but I would think that they could find the time and just "wing" a sermon on Sunday.

    This really should be a matter of discussion with those people in power in government who have the ability to make changes.

    What was wrong with the actions of the state A/G in regards to a flower shop in Richland? There's so much wrong with that, one only needs to begin, and I would like to hear the reasons a governor might have to do nothing about it.

    Did he talk to the state A/G about it? Did he see nothing wrong with it's actions? Should all Christian businesses in Washington be thrown to the wolves simply because they are Christian?

    I've seen somewhere in the past on TV where someone made someone a "poop" cake as a joke. (Let's remember that good people put their heart and soul into their work and that a businesses name goes on it's work.) Are we now at the place where a bakery could not refuse to do that kind of work? And could the bakery get sued for all they are worth over a cake? Is that where we are at ? Is that where we should be? Is that where we should be going? And should the reason be because the one who asked for that kind of cake, was what? ...short, fat, tall, skinny, black, white, male, female, young, old, what?...What difference does it make?

    But people want special rights that throw everyone else's rights away as if they have no value, and as if their agenda is worth so much, and everyone else's rights, life, and happiness are worth nothing.

  13. The whole gay agenda is obviously contrary to Romans 14.....and the entire Bible.

  14. Homosexual marriage is simply wrong, no matter if people are heterosexual or homosexual. It's wrong for a man to marry another man regardless of his sexual preference. That's just common sense, and it has nothing at all to do with anybody's sexual preference.

    Don't people in government know that anymore?

  15. I think we all know, if we are willing to get real, that Christian businesses are getting sued, not because they mistreated a homosexual, but because they are Christian.

  16. Please read Psalm 45, and then write the state governor.


Faith and Freedom welcomes your comment posts. Remember, keep it short, keep it on message and relevant, and identify your town.