Religious Revival
May 26th, 2007 at 8:04 pm
Contrary to what was reported last night, the so-called “Religious Viewpoints Antidiscrimination Act” was really only mostly dead, and as we all know, there’s a big difference between mostly dead and all dead. So today Rep. Craig Eiland (D-Galveston) moved to reconsider last night’s vote to take up HB 3678. With a couple of extra supporting votes today, the bill squeezed through the two-thirds rule and got a vote. When it came to voting on the actual bill (rather than suspending the necessary rules to take it up), the support mushroomed from 94 to 108 votes. Members not wanting to be accused of voting against God, perhaps?
This time, the bill’s author Rep. Charlie Howard (R-Sugar Land) moved to concur with the Senate amendments, saying there was no time for a conference committee to work out the differences. It’s no secret that Howard liked the Senate version better, since it doesn’t have the amendment Rep. Yvonne Davis (D-Dallas) added on the House floor. The provision would have ensured that no student could use religious speech to discriminate on the basis of race, sex, religion or sexual orientation. Howard has made it clear that he thinks the amendment would make the bill unconstitutional.
Rep. Scott Hochberg (D-Houston) pointed out another change in the Senate version of the bill - more “may” turned “shall” language that would now require schools to allow students to speak at football games and morning announcements. The bill previously left the public forums to the school’s discretion.
Rep. Wayne Christian (R-Center) again said that not allowing for discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation would be discriminatory against the majority religion - Christianity.
The bill’s supporters referenced more affronts to children’s religious freedom at school - no candy canes or green and red napkins at Christmastime. Hochberg referenced the enforcement provision added by the bill’s authors - lawyers who profit from lawsuits - that would have made it easier for schools to get sued on this issue. “They saw a lot of opportunities for lawsuits,” Hochberg said. The provision was removed by the Senate sponsor and so isn’t in the final version, but speaks to the authors’ true intent. A student’s right to express religion, after all, is already protected by the First Amendment.
Rep. Lon Burnam (D-Fort Worth) said he would officially start a fundraiser for the ACLU - because this bill’s going to court.
