The fate of Arizona’s SB 1062 — a bill meant to extend the freedom to practice religion into the realm of discrimination — has been sealed. Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, in an exciting turn of events, opted to veto the reprobate legislation, an action which was wholly unexpected from her. Utah had its own equally unexpected response to the growing voice of its LGBT population. Despite our reputation of being the most conservative state in the country, Utah legislators proposed SB 100 last month before the state Senate. This bill is meant to extend equality to all people regardless of sexual orientation and gender identification. However, before we uncork the champagne, we need to examine the situation in order to gain proper perspective.
Arizona’s current state of affairs is deplorable. The very fact that SB 1062, which would have permitted business owners to refuse service to anyone based on religious reasons, passed both legislative bodies and wormed its way to the executive desk is alarming. As revealed in an interview between Anderson Cooper and Arizona State Sen. Al Melvin, the broad language of this bill could have allowed an individual to discriminate against anyone not protected by federal or state laws so long as there is a sincere religious belief behind the discrimination. This could extend to unwed mothers, divorcée and divorcé and left-handed people. Of course, the good senator denied the allegations that such discrimination would occur, obviously not understanding the implications of the Pandora’s box the legislation would have opened. Old white conservative Christians would have had a field day of oppression should the measure have been enacted.
SB 100 puts Utah leagues ahead of Arizona in terms of progressive laws. However, we need to view the bill realistically. Firstly, the measure has not yet been passed. According to the congressional website’s bill-tracking feature, this legislation was only introduced on the senate floor about a month ago. In an interview with The Salt Lake Tribune, Senate president Wayne Niederhauser (R-Sandy) said the issue may not be addressed until next year. The old maxim of counting one’s poultry prematurely seems appropriate in this instance.
Furthermore, should the measure pass, I think celebration would not be in order. Rather, the Utah legislative body should prostrate themselves in shame and apologize to the public that this issue has taken so long to address. This is not progressive legislation — this is a necessary addition to the law that respects the inherent human rights extended to all people. Granted, this bill is a step in the right direction, but this is not a Little League soccer game where everyone is entitled to a participation trophy. These are issues that affect people’s lives. As it stands now, I have many friends who could be fired at any point for their sexual orientation. And even worse, the very roofs over their heads could be under threat, as they have no guaranteed protection of housing.
Of course, the bill faces opposition. Leading the pack of bigoted, antiquated waste is the organization Fair to All. They state that by passing this bill, Utah is creating a protected class, extending special rights to some by sacrificing rights for others. And they are right, to some degree. The Utah legislative body is extending to members of the LBGT community the “special” right of being treated with dignity, respect and equality while refusing obsolescent sections of society the right to act on their oppressive dispositions.
Overall, I’m happy about this action. But that cannot dispel the frustration I feel over the time it took to get here. Furthermore, it does nothing to quell my anger towards the fanatics who would still see a section of society treated as less than human. All I can say is that it’s about time.
[email protected]