Wednesday, September 16, 2009

Remember that Bill?

Remember my post back in July about Ohio HB 176? Click here if you want a refresher.

So, that bill passed in the House. Now it moved to the Senate. My representative, Joseph Uecker, voted no on it. So, I just sent him an e-mail thanking him for doing so. You can e-mail your representatives too, letting them know whether you agree or disagree with how they voted.

Here is information from the group Citizens for Community Values about Ohio HB 176.

Ohio House votes to take away freedom of religion and other constitutional rights; How did your Representative vote?

HB 176 moves to Ohio Senate

COLUMBUS, OH – Yesterday, September 16, 2009, the Ohio House of Representatives, by a margin of 56 to 39, voted to deny Ohio business and property owners their basic constitutional right to make decisions based on their personal religious convictions. The bill also lays aside personal property and freedom of association rights.

HB 176, the deceptively entitled “Equal Housing & Employment Act,” would add “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” to the list of protected classes under Ohio’s civil rights laws. Such an addition would be in contradiction to guidelines clearly established by our nation’s courts.

To qualify as a “protected class” under civil rights law our courts appropriately and consistently have maintained that a class must exhibit all three of the following criteria:

  • They must exhibit an unchangeable, non-behavior-based characteristic, such as skin color or gender.
  • They must have experienced a history of discrimination resulting in economic deprivation.
  • They must lack political representation.
Those who identify themselves by their sexual orientation, as well as those who are confused about their gender identity, do not qualify under any of these criteria.

To many employers and property owners across Ohio, the behaviors associated with homosexuality and other sexual orientations are contrary to God’s creative plan for mankind and thus morally wrong. Both our federal and state constitutions guarantee the right of conscience to make decisions based on such deeply-held religious convictions. The bill passed by the Ohio House would deprive Ohioans of that fundamental liberty.

As homosexual activists have clearly stated in their own organizational documents, the true purpose that drives legislative efforts such as HB 176 is not anti-discrimination. Rather, the stated goal of homosexual activists is to force complete societal acceptance of such lifestyles and behaviors. The Ohio House of Representatives moved homosexual activists one step closer to that goal through this disappointing vote.

For the Record

Below are lists of the YES and NO votes by each House member on HB 176. Please find your Representative below and click on the link to send a message of THANKS or DISAPPOINTMENT. Not sure who? Click here first.

Voting YES were (Republicans) Blair, Dolan, Hite, Lehner, and McGregor. (Democrats) Belcher, Bolon, Book, Boyd, Budish, Brown, Carney, Celeste, Chandler, DeBose, DeGeeter, Domenick, Dodd, Driehaus, Dyer, Foley, Garland, Garrison, Gerberry, Goyal, Hagan, Harris, Harwood, Heard, Koziura, Letson, Luckie, Lundy, Mallory, Moran, Murray, Newcomb, Okey, Otterman, Phillips, Pillich, Pryor, Sayre, Schneider, Skindell, Slesnick, Stewart, Sykes, Szollosi, Ujvagi, Weddington, B. Williams, S. Williams, Winburn, Yates, Yuko. Click here to send a message.

Voting NO were (Republicans) J. Adams, R. Adams, Amstutz, Bacon, Baker, Balderson, Batchelder, Blessing, Bubp, Burke, Combs, Coley, Daniels, Derickson, Evans, Gardner, Goodwin, Grossman, Hackett, Hall, Hottinger, Huffman, Jordan, Maag, Mandel, Martin, McClain, Mecklenborg, Morgan, Oelslager, Ruhl, Sears, Snitchler, Stautberg, Stebelton, Uecker, Wachtman, Wagner, and Zehringer. Click here to send a message.

HB 176 now moves to the Ohio Senate where the bill is expected to receive much greater scrutiny and evaluation.

2 comments:

  1. Do you have any emails to send to the Senate to let them know of your position?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I don't have a form letter for it, but I have a way to get the contact information, so I could. I assume that when it comes time for the Senate to review and vote on it, the group will send me a link on a way to contact them with the form e-mail, since they did that when it was in the House.

    ReplyDelete

What's on your mind?