# Georgia state Senator sneaks right-to-discriminate bill through while opponent is in the john. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [March 6, 2015, 4:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/georgia-state-senator-sneaks-right-to-discriminate-bill-through-while-opponent-is-in-the-john/714338 "2015-03-06T04:13:33Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2015, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/georgia-state-senator-sneaks-right-to-discriminate-bill-through-while-opponent-is-in-the-john/714338/21 "2015-03-06T19:23:52Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > TG, IANAL, but I’m gonna guess this bit of legislative whaledreck is doomed. They have Federal courts in Georgia, right? Or somewhere close by? They also have federal courts in Alabama, Arizona, Connecticut, Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia. Each of these states has passed nearly identical legislation, starting after the Supreme Court decided City of Boerne v. Flores, which held that the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act could not be applied against the states. It may interest you to learn that not one of those states’ law has been overturned, so far as I can recall. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2015, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/georgia-state-senator-sneaks-right-to-discriminate-bill-through-while-opponent-is-in-the-john/714338/22 "2015-03-06T19:49:10Z")
I think it’s important for people to get what these laws do: they effectively amend state laws regarding public accommodations and private discrimination. They don’t affect federal laws (other than the federal RFRA, obviously.) Georgia businesses with still be required to comply with the Civil Rights Act, Voting Rights Act, and so on. ---
**Author:** ![davidm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidm/32/225_2.png) [@davidm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davidm)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2015, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/georgia-state-senator-sneaks-right-to-discriminate-bill-through-while-opponent-is-in-the-john/714338/23 "2015-03-06T21:31:06Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > I think it’s important for people to get what these laws do: they effectively amend state laws regarding public accommodations and private discrimination. They don’t affect federal laws (other than the federal RFRA, obviously.) Georgia businesses with still be required to comply with the Civil Rights Act, Voting Rights Act, and so on. Right, but these laws could be attempts to use the RFRA as a way around those acts in at least some circumstances. I’m wondering which wins if there’s a conflict between federal civil rights laws and the RFRA. ---
**Author:** ![davidm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidm/32/225_2.png) [@davidm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davidm)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2015, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/georgia-state-senator-sneaks-right-to-discriminate-bill-through-while-opponent-is-in-the-john/714338/24 "2015-03-06T21:32:12Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > They also have federal courts in Alabama, Arizona, Connecticut, Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia. > > Each of these states has passed nearly identical legislation, starting after the Supreme Court decided City of Boerne v. Flores, which held that the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act could not be applied against the states. > > It may interest you to learn that not one of those states’ law has been overturned, so far as I can recall. Have any of them been challenged? ---
**Author:** ![monstro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@monstro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monstro)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2015, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/georgia-state-senator-sneaks-right-to-discriminate-bill-through-while-opponent-is-in-the-john/714338/25 "2015-03-06T22:02:56Z")
> [@suranyi](#): > > While the oppression was certainly real I don’t think it was religion that was used in this case to justify it. It was simply basic racial discrimination, which I don’t believe gets a pass under this new law. Institutional policy (in this case, laws) shouldn’t be based on what happened in the past. It should be about protecting society from what’s plausible. The bible was used to justify all kinds of shit in the country’s history, from slavery to segregation, but that’s beside the point. There’s nothing stopping a town from being taken over [ultra-orthodox Jews](http://m.forward.com/articles/196685/is-hasidic-board-to-blame-for-gutting-public-schoo/). Should the businessmen in that town be allowed to not serve women? There’s nothing stopping a town from being taken over by a [retro Christian sect](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kristi-upsonsaia/traditionally-christianity-is-against-all-marriage_b_3180600.html) that believes all sex is sinful. Should these crazies be able to discriminate aganst parents? Since religion is so personal, it’s hard for me to understand how an exception like this would work. Would it be enough for someone just to say “It’s against my religion!” or must they cite scripture and verse in their holy book? What if their religion doesn’t have a holy book, and they’re just operating based on what they’ve read off a Wikipedia or what Elder Cunningham told them? What if their interpretation of the holy book is not aligned with the mainstream interpretation? What if it’s clear they are perfectly willing to break their religion’s rules in some instances (they have married and divorced several times)? What if they are the spiritual leader of their religious faith and thus is the one who writes all the rules of what is and isn’t allowed? The difficulty in fairly implementing this policy alone makes religious exception a stupid, short-sighted idea. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2015, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/georgia-state-senator-sneaks-right-to-discriminate-bill-through-while-opponent-is-in-the-john/714338/26 "2015-03-06T22:15:48Z")
> [@Slow\_Moving\_Vehicle](#): > > …On March 2, after several hours of deliberations, Sen. Fort asked the committee to pause while he went to the men’s room. As soon as he had left, the fat Jesus-loving fuck from Columbus raised the bill, and the rest of the committee - Republicans to a pasty white man - passed it. Where were the rest of the committee’s Democrats? Is it true that only one Democrat made the effort to show up for the Georgia Senate Judiciary Committee meeting? ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2015, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/georgia-state-senator-sneaks-right-to-discriminate-bill-through-while-opponent-is-in-the-john/714338/27 "2015-03-06T22:26:37Z")
> [@davidm](#): > > Right, but these laws could be attempts to use the RFRA as a way around those acts in at least some circumstances. > I’m wondering which wins if there’s a conflict between federal civil rights laws and the RFRA. Which RFRA? The federal one? The RFRA wins, since it was passed last. ---
**Author:** ![silenus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/silenus/32/166_2.png) [@silenus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/silenus)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2015, 10:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/georgia-state-senator-sneaks-right-to-discriminate-bill-through-while-opponent-is-in-the-john/714338/28 "2015-03-06T22:28:10Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > Where were the rest of the committee’s Democrats? Is it true that only one Democrat made the effort to show up for the Georgia Senate Judiciary Committee meeting? This is Georgia. There might only be one Democrat! ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2015, 10:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/georgia-state-senator-sneaks-right-to-discriminate-bill-through-while-opponent-is-in-the-john/714338/29 "2015-03-06T22:32:44Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > Where were the rest of the committee’s Democrats? Is it true that only one Democrat made the effort to show up for the Georgia Senate Judiciary Committee meeting? There are only three of them, including Fort. Curt Thompson and Ronald Ramsey are the chairs of other committees so they may have been there instead. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2015, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/georgia-state-senator-sneaks-right-to-discriminate-bill-through-while-opponent-is-in-the-john/714338/30 "2015-03-07T19:31:31Z")
I strongly suspect this law hasn’t been challenged because it’s not been used. In theory it could be completely toothless pandering. You’d need someone to actually be adversely affected by this law to put forth a lawsuit before anything can happen. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2015, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/georgia-state-senator-sneaks-right-to-discriminate-bill-through-while-opponent-is-in-the-john/714338/31 "2015-03-08T17:22:31Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > I strongly suspect this law hasn’t been challenged because it’s not been used. In theory it could be completely toothless pandering. You’d need someone to actually be adversely affected by this law to put forth a lawsuit before anything can happen. This law hasn’t been challenged because it isn’t a law yet. The ThinkProgress article by Jack Jenkins indicates that the bill was moved out of the Georgia Senate Judiciary Committee because not one of the committee’s Democrats were present for the vote. Since then, SB 129 has passed the Georgia Senate but not the Georgia House. \*SB 129 “Georgia Religious Freedom Restoration Act”; provide for the preservation of religious freedom Current Status: Senate Passed/Adopted By Substitute Current Version: As passed Senate Official Summary: A BILL to be entitled an Act to amend Title 50 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to state government, so as to provide for the preservation of religious freedom; to provide for legislative findings; to provide for definitions; to provide for the granting of relief; to provide for a short title; to provide for an effective date; to repeal conflicting laws; and for other purposes\*. The Bill - (warning PDF file) [http://www.legis.ga.gov/Legislation/20152016/148347.pdf](http://www.legis.ga.gov/Legislation/20152016/148347.pdf) ---
**Author:** ![panache45](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/panache45/32/64_2.png) [@panache45](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panache45)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2015, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/georgia-state-senator-sneaks-right-to-discriminate-bill-through-while-opponent-is-in-the-john/714338/32 "2015-03-08T21:40:42Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > How the heck is anybody gonna know? What, a couple of guys driving a mauve Honda Civic with Broadway show tunes blaring out of the CD player? OK, maybe a twelve pack of Coors in the back seat, that’s a dead giveaway, but other than that… Homophobes have always targeted anyone they \*suspect of \*being gay. Even some straight people have been attacked because one or both of them was androgynous. Don’t expect these jerks to be concerned with facts. Of course all of this is irrelevant. It makes no difference whether the victims are in fact gay; it’s still homophobia. Isn’t a racist who attacks another white person by mistake . . . still a racist? Personally, I see no reason to have a law that protects the irrational, hateful beliefs of bigots . . . religious or otherwise. ---
**Author:** ![Zakalwe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zakalwe/32/270_2.png) [@Zakalwe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zakalwe)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2015, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/georgia-state-senator-sneaks-right-to-discriminate-bill-through-while-opponent-is-in-the-john/714338/33 "2015-03-08T23:12:29Z")
Actually he was just following the 11th Commandment: “You can ignore any of the above 10 as long as you stick it to people you don’t like.” The difference between this idiot and ISIS is only a matter of degree. ---
**Author:** ![carrps](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carrps/32/2957_2.png) [@carrps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carrps)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2015, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/georgia-state-senator-sneaks-right-to-discriminate-bill-through-while-opponent-is-in-the-john/714338/34 "2015-03-08T23:23:49Z")
> [@davidm](#): > > Which raises an interesting question: What if a person discriminates mistakenly based on their religious beliefs? Even better, what if they discriminate for other reasons but claim it was because of their religious beliefs? > > Example, two black men attempt to do business and are told “we don’t do business with your kind”. They then attempt to bring civil rights charges against the business. The owner’s religion is not against blacks (at least not explicitly) but is explicitly against homosexuals. As a defense against the charges, the owner claims that he believed the two men to be a homosexual couple and therefore was within his rights according to the beliefs of his religion. Reminds me of the story of George M. Cohan who was denied a room in a hotel in Florida. He told them: “You thought I was Jewish, and I thought you were a gentleman. We were both mistaken.” ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2015, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/georgia-state-senator-sneaks-right-to-discriminate-bill-through-while-opponent-is-in-the-john/714338/35 "2015-03-08T23:29:25Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > I’ve stated repeatedly on these boards that I am not religious at all, and practice no religion. And from that standpoint I don’t see what is objectionable about having a law that protects someone’s right to not go against his faith. As a fellow non-religious person, may I ask why you don’t (or at least seem not to) object to the notion that such a law would mean there is no protection for your right to not go against your personal philosophy - irreligious as it is? ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2015, 12:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/georgia-state-senator-sneaks-right-to-discriminate-bill-through-while-opponent-is-in-the-john/714338/36 "2015-03-09T00:41:25Z")
> [@Revenant\_Threshold](#): > > As a fellow non-religious person, may I ask why you don’t (or at least seem not to) object to the notion that such a law would mean there is no protection for your right to not go against your personal philosophy - irreligious as it is? Im not following your question. Can you perhaps give an example or two? ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2015, 12:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/georgia-state-senator-sneaks-right-to-discriminate-bill-through-while-opponent-is-in-the-john/714338/37 "2015-03-09T00:58:29Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Im not following your question. Can you perhaps give an example or two? The RFRA imputes rights to religious people that atheists cannot claim. ---
**Author:** ![Slow\_Moving\_Vehicle](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slow_moving_vehicle/32/291_2.png) [@Slow\_Moving\_Vehicle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slow_Moving_Vehicle)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2015, 3:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/georgia-state-senator-sneaks-right-to-discriminate-bill-through-while-opponent-is-in-the-john/714338/38 "2015-03-09T03:17:20Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > This law hasn’t been challenged because it isn’t a law yet. > > The ThinkProgress article by Jack Jenkins indicates that the bill was moved out of the Georgia Senate Judiciary Committee because not one of the committee’s Democrats were present for the vote. > > Since then, SB 129 has passed the Georgia Senate but not the Georgia House. > > \*SB 129 > “Georgia Religious Freedom Restoration Act”; provide for the preservation of religious freedom > > Current Status: Senate Passed/Adopted By Substitute > > Current Version: As passed Senate > > Official Summary: A BILL to be entitled an Act to amend Title 50 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to state government, so as to provide for the preservation of religious freedom; to provide for legislative findings; to provide for definitions; to provide for the granting of relief; to provide for a short title; to provide for an effective date; to repeal conflicting laws; and for other purposes\*. > > The Bill - (warning PDF file) > [http://www.legis.ga.gov/Legislation/20152016/148347.pdf](http://www.legis.ga.gov/Legislation/20152016/148347.pdf) Rep. Sam Teasley introduced the same bill into the Georgia House as HB 219 (or HB 218, I can’t remember and can’t be arsed to Google). That bill is currently before the House Judiciary Committee. And as my original link shows, the SB129 passed the Senate Judiciary Committee when the one Democrat had asked for a potty break. > [@doorhinge](#): > > Where were the rest of the committee’s Democrats? Is it true that only one Democrat made the effort to show up for the Georgia Senate Judiciary Committee meeting? I think you don’t realize just exactly how deeply red Georgia is. Not a single Democrat holds a statewide post, in the entire Georgia government. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2015, 3:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/georgia-state-senator-sneaks-right-to-discriminate-bill-through-while-opponent-is-in-the-john/714338/39 "2015-03-09T03:39:16Z")
> [@Slow\_Moving\_Vehicle](#): > > …And as my original link shows, the SB129 passed the Senate Judiciary Committee when the one Democrat had asked for a potty break. (post shortened) He left for a potty break according to the one Democrat who had walked out of the meeting. The article didn’t quote any other member of the Georgia Senate Judiciary Committee. Do Georgia Senate Committees require 100% yea votes before a bill escapes from committee or do they only require a simple majority? If it’s only a majority, then it seems that Vincent Fort (D-Atlanta), would have been outvoted even if he had been sitting in committee. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2015, 4:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/georgia-state-senator-sneaks-right-to-discriminate-bill-through-while-opponent-is-in-the-john/714338/40 "2015-03-09T04:29:15Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > The RFRA imputes rights to religious people that atheists cannot claim. Because atheists have no religious beliefs that they would like to protect, and therefore there is no need for such protection for atheists. It would be like saying that civil rights laws that protect blacks should be invalid because as a white person I cannot claim any rights under the law. It is already the law in many states and at the federal level that homosexuals have no protection under civil rights laws. I have yet to hear of any “sundown towns” or heard stories of gay couples having to travel many miles to find restaurants or hotels that will serve them, like blacks suffered pre-1964. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/georgia-state-senator-sneaks-right-to-discriminate-bill-through-while-opponent-is-in-the-john/714338.md?page=1)