South Carolina, Texas would punish government employees for recognizing same-sex marriages

SC Rep. Gary Smith

Apparently some legislators in South Carolina got a real bee in their bonnet about losing the marriage equality fight.

And they are going to take it out on government employees who would recognized these marriages. On December 11, SC Reps Gary Smith and Bill Chumley filed House Bill (H3022)

TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 20-1-235 SO AS TO PROHIBIT THE USE OF TAXPAYER FUNDS AND PAYMENT OF GOVERNMENT SALARIES AND BENEFITS FOR ACTIVITIES RELATED TO THE LICENSING AND SUPPORT OF SAME-SEX MARRIAGE, TO PROHIBIT GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES FROM RECOGNIZING, GRANTING, OR ENFORCING SAME-SEX MARRIAGE LICENSES, TO PROHIBIT THE USE OF TAXES OR OTHER PUBLIC FUNDS TO ENFORCE A COURT ORDER TO ISSUE A SAME-SEX MARRIAGE LICENSE, TO REQUIRE COURTS TO DISMISS CERTAIN LEGAL ACTIONS RELATED TO THE LICENSING AND RECOGNITION OF SAME-SEX MARRIAGE AND TO AWARD ATTORNEY'S FEES AND COSTS IN THOSE ACTIONS, AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE STATE FROM LIABILITY FOR CERTAIN CONDUCT.

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of South Carolina:

SECTION 1. Article 3, Chapter 1, Title 20 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding:

"Section 20-1-235.    (A)    No state or local taxpayer funds or governmental salaries may be paid for an activity that includes the licensing or support of same-sex marriage.

(B)    No state or local governmental employee officially shall recognize, grant, or enforce a same-sex marriage license. If an employee violates this subsection, the employee must not continue to receive a salary, pension, or other employee benefit at the expense of the taxpayers of this State.

(C)    No taxes or public funds may be utilized to enforce a court order requiring the issuance or recognition of a same-sex marriage license.

(D)    A court of this State shall dismiss a legal action challenging a provision of this section and shall award costs and attorney's fees to a person or entity named as a defendant in the legal action.

(E)    No person employed by this State or a local governmental entity who violates or interferes with the implementation of this section may continue to receive a salary, pension, or other employee benefit.

(F)    The State is not subject to suit in law or equity pursuant to the eleventh amendment of the United States Constitution for complying with the provisions of this section, regardless of a contrary federal court ruling.

(G)    If a judicial officer violates this section, that judicial officer is disqualified from office pursuant to Section 19, Article V of the South Carolina Constitution, 1895."

Here is something interesting which should be known. In Texas, legislators are proposing pretty much exactly the same bill, albeit with different text:

A bill has been introduced in the Texas Legislature that if enacted would strip the salary of any Texas-government employee who issues a marriage license to a same-sex couple.

Known as House Bill 623, the recently introduced bill declares that no state funds will go to the distribution of gay marriage licenses.

"State or local taxpayer funds or governmental salaries may not be used for an activity that includes the licensing or support of same-sex marriage," reads HB 623.

"If an employee violates this subsection, the employee may not continue to receive a salary, pension, or other employee benefit at the expense of the taxpayers of this State."

Of course these bill are ridiculous and would totally undercut our system of checks and balances as well as infringe upon the rights of same-sex couples who have legally won or could win the right to marriage. But I think the lgbt community, particularly our leaders, activists, and bloggers, would do ourselves a favor to not focus on the "puppets" in this matter, i.e. the lawmakers proposing these bills.  Instead, we should focus on the "puppet masters."

I am betting that we will see more of these mean-spirited bills pop up in other states because some entity is maneuvering this mess behind the scenes, probably even to the point of providing language for the lawmakers to use.

And I am almost certain that this entity, whoever it or they (meaning more than one organization) may be is obscuring their behind-the-scenes work by continuously claiming that Christians will be "persecuted" because of the onslaught of pro-marriage equality decisions.

It would be certainly embarrassing if these entities were made public, wouldn't it? After all, you can't plead victimhood when it shown that you have state legislators in your hip pockets.

 But who ever it or they may be, their hypocrisy is duly noted. Gay couples have been winning the right to marry fair and square via the courts. Seems to me that if these folks proposing all of this nasty legislation had any legitimate argument against marriage equality in the first place, they wouldn't be in the position to have to stoop so low in order to stop it.

'Sneaky attempts at anti-gay laws desperate strategy by losers' & other Monday midday news briefs

More Sneaky Anti-Gay Laws Popping Up - DO NOT get discouraged because this only means that we are winning. You can't have the victory without the attempted backlash. History has repeatedly shown this. The only difference here being we know that it's coming and should prepare ourselves to fight it. In other words . . . let's rock! 

New Missouri Bill Would Permit Christian College Groups To Discriminate Against Gay Students - Oh yeah. Religious liberty . . . and everything . . . 

Stop with the false witness–bearing, Focus on the Family! - In my eight plus years of blogging, it is very rare that I would catch Focus on the Family distorting legitimate studies. But the organization would distort current events as if it were going out of style.  

NYPD Reps Held Secret Talks With Virginia Republican Who Calls Gays 'Very Sick' - Way to go, guys! (eyes rolling).

 Bryan Fischer's Incoherent Theory Of The First Amendment - Fischer has a screwed up concept of Christianity. Why should we be shocked that he doesn't know anything about the first amendment?

NYT column provides excellent counterpoint to 'religious liberty' sham

Bruni

The column in Sunday's New York Times by writer Frank Bruni -  Your God and My Dignity Religious Liberty, Bigotry and Gays - is a dignified, but still take-no-prisoners counterpoint on the anti-gay idea of religious liberty.

It is also an important piece because it is the first (and hopefully not the last time) I know of that someone from the lgbt community has articulated our view on this subject in the mainstream media. We need more of this because if there aren't our voices being heard on the concept of 'religious liberty,' the only voices heard will be those coming from the anti-gay right:

. . .  Baking a cake, arranging roses, running an inn: These aren’t religious acts, certainly not if the establishments aren’t religious enclaves and are doing business with (and even dependent on) the general public.

Their owners are routinely interacting with customers who behave in ways they deem sinful. They don’t get to single out one group of supposed sinners. If they’re allowed to, who’s to say they’ll stop at that group?

  . . .  I support the right of people to believe what they do and say what they wish — in their pews, homes and hearts. But outside of those places? You must put up with me, just as I put up with you.