TN Senate Republican Caucus Rushes to Defend "Turn the Gays Away" Bill with Stale Facts and Bad Logic

The internet is abuzz (at least in Tennessee) with news of a bill filed by Sen. Brian Kelsey R-Germantown and Rep. Bill Dunn R-Knoxville. Dubbed the "Turn the Gays Away" bill by the Tennessee Equality Project, the proposed legislation:

permits persons and religious or denominational organizations, based on sincere religious belief, to refuse to provide services or goods in furtherance of a civil union, domestic partnership, or marriage not recognized by the Tennessee Constitution.

Put simply, SB 2566/HB 2467 gives businesses free reign to deny services (any service!) to couples or individuals who are in a committed relationship, based solely on the nature of that relationship. Ignoring for the moment that, under current state law, they already have that right (I'll get to that shortly), this bill is essentially a knee-jerk reaction to the slow but steady advances we're making on the Equality front in TN. It's political posturing and butthurt backlash.

Knowing that they would face stiff opposition from Equality advocates around the state, the State Republican Caucus issued a disjointed press release, published by Humphrey on the Hill this past Friday, February 7th. This latest word salad brought to us by the Tennessee GOP is so chock full of stale facts and logical fallacies that's impossible to swallow in a single indigestible bite. So we'll take it in slowly, piece by piece. Maybe even Sen. Kelsey will be able to follow along.

Let's same-sexplore together:

(NASHVILLE, TN), February 07, 2014 – The Religious Freedom Act would protect the religious freedom of individuals regarding marriage ceremonies that violate their personal religious beliefs. It does not change current law. In 2006, over 80% of Tennesseans voted to define marriage as a union of one man and one woman. In October, a federal lawsuit was filed challenging that provision of the Tennessee Constitution.

Ah, there's nothing quite like opening your argument with 7 year-old data. While it is true that the mouth-breathers of this fine state did, in fact, saddle us with this unfortunate bit of codified bigotry by an overwhelming margin in 2006, things have taken an encouraging turn in recent years. If we look at  more recent polling, like, oh let's say the May 2013 statewide public opinion poll by Vanderbilt  University, we see a very different story.

Source: May 2013 VU Poll Slides

Public opinion has shifted so dramatically in the past 7 years, that support for at least some level of legal recognition for same sex partnerships now enjoys a 49% - 46% advantage. A plurality of support. In Tennessee. And look at those numbers supporting employee benefits! The times they are a-changin', Sen. Kelsey. The good people of this state no longer blindly swallow your particular brand of anti-gay vitriol.

With stale facts checked off their list, the GOP Caucus moves on to their next tried and true tactic, Concern Trolling:

The Religious Freedom Act will protect Tennesseans from being dragged into court for their sincerely held religious beliefs regarding marriage. In New Mexico, a photographer was recently sued for declining to photograph a same-sex commitment ceremony, even though such ceremonies were not recognized by New Mexico law at the time. This bill would protect Tennesseans from similar lawsuits and from harassment by the government.

This is the "Bad Liberals like the ACLU are going to sue you dead!!!" argument. The reality? In Tennessee, we already can't. New Mexico (which is NOT Tennessee, in case you hadn't noticed) has on the books a state anti-discrimination law which prohibits discrimination in public accommodations on the basis of sexual orientation. The photographer was (rightly) sued under this law for discriminating against this couple based solely on their sexual orientation. While I dearly wish we had the same protections codified in Tennessee, unfortunately, no such statute exists. Businesses in this state are already free to deny services to you just because they think you're "icky."

Old data, check. Fear mongering, check. Next up, I don't even know...:

As clarified in a proposed amendment, the revised bill would ensure that whichever side prevails on the issue of the definition of marriage, the heavy hand of government will not be brought down in retaliation against the other side’s religious freedoms. For example, a florist who opposed the Catholic Church’s stance on marriage could not be sued for refusing to provide flowers at a ceremony held in a Catholic church.

There are no many things wrong with that paragraph, I don't know where to start. It's sort of a mashup of "hey, we're trying to protect you, too" and same old, tired anti Big Government arguments. First of all, if your "religious freedoms" are in direct conflict my or my friends' civil rights, then I fully expect the Heavy Hand of Government to step in. There were plenty of Southern lunch counter proprietors and public transportation officials in the fifties and sixties who were pretty sure their religious liberty was under attack, too. Second, I would totally use that florist all the time.

And then we have the argument every parent loves to hear, "everybody else is doing it":

All states that have enacted same sex marriage have included a religious freedom exception. Currently, 11 other states and Washington, D.C. have expressly protected individuals from private lawsuits. The list includes: Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island, Washington, Vermont, and Washington, D.C.

That's great. So let's enact same sex marriage just like them. Until then, nice false equivalency you've got there. Yes, every state which has decided to be on the right side side of history has included some form of religious freedom exception. And well they should. For religious organizations like churches, clergy, etc. No one believes that we should force the Catholic Church to perform same sex weddings in a cathedral, complete with a full mass and all of that god-forsaken stand-up-sit-down-stand-up-sit-down-stand-up-sit-down-stand-up-sit-down that goes with it. Those types of religious exceptions make sense and are in complete alignment with the First Amendment. SB 2566/HB 2467 goes far beyond that. And in a state where we're not even enforcing the right to same sex marriage at any level.

Then they tie up this little package of derp with this little bow, just in case you can't already guess who actually wrote this thing (emphasis mine):

Senator Kelsey represents Cordova, East Memphis, and Germantown. He is Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Well, THERE'S your problem.