By KATHERINE BAKAITIS
Staff Writer
Earlier in the month of February, the Arizona state government presented and passed a bill that would have allowed businesses that asserted their religious beliefs the right to deny service to gay and lesbian customers. When it was time for Arizona Governor Jan Brewer to sign it into law, she thankfully vetoed it. “I sincerely believe that Senate Bill 1062 has the potential to create more problems than it purports to solve,” according to Governor Jan Brewer. I can only imagine great discourse and upheaval that would arrive if the legislation were to become a law.
What could a bill as medieval as this actually plan to solve, anyway? The main points of the bill say that it intends to protect the religious freedom rights of every citizen. It explains that while in America, people should be free to live and work according to their faith and they shouldn’t forfeit their religious freedom rights simply because they go to work or start a business. It also says that “no one should ever be forced to choose between their conscience or religious beliefs and their profession.”
Doug Napier, an attorney representing the Alliance Defending Freedom, which helped create the bill, criticized the governor’s decision to veto it. “Freedom loses when fear overwhelms facts and a good bill is vetoed,” he said in a statement. “Today’s veto enables the foes of faith to more easily suppress the freedom of the people of Arizona.” Cathi Herrod, president of the Center for Arizona Policy, accused opponents of the measure of distorting facts. “The religious beliefs of all Arizonans must be respected and this bill did nothing more than affirm that,” said Herrod, whose conservative organization also lent a hand in writing the bill. “It is truly a disappointing day in our state and nation when lies and personal attacks can overshadow the truth.” Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh said on his show that Brewer was “being bullied by the homosexual lobby in Arizona and elsewhere.” To put it in laymen’s terms, the pious and far right possess this notion that if businesses and the people who run them have strong “religious” core values, then forcing them to accepted business from people who don’t follow their lifestyle (i.e. homosexuals) is limiting and trampling on their religious freedom to choose not to serve them. If you can’t separate your personal beliefs from your business, such as the bill’s supporters believe, then you shouldn’t be running one. Besides, the religious have always been in the majority and it’s clear that they don’t need strong government protection.
Shortly after she vetoed the bill, Jan Brewer wrote to Arizona Senate President Andy Biggs (must be short for “bigot”) explaining why she turned away the law, though her decision shouldn’t need an explanation. Brewer exhausted her conservative stance on religious freedoms and what she has done as governor to protect them, but even this conventional governor had her sincere reasons for opposition. “Furthermore, the bill is broadly worded and could result in unintended and negative consequences,” Brewer stated in her letter the Senate President. “The legislation seeks to protect businesses, yet the business community overwhelmingly opposes to proposed law.” The governor also made it a point to mention how “some legislators that voted for the bill have reconsidered their votes and now do not want this legislation to become law.”
The fact that the bill “does not seek to address a specific and present concern related to Arizona businesses,” according to Brewer, is a worry that echoes among other Arizona politicians. Supporters of the bill seemed to have overlooked the harmful economic implications of the legislation. Republican Arizona United State Senators John McCain and Jeff Flake publicly advised Brewer to veto the legislation, citing worries about the economic impact on the state’s businesses. McCain praised Brewer’s decision, saying that “I hope that we can now move on from this controversy and assure the American people that everyone is welcome to live, work and enjoy our beautiful state of Arizona,” in a written statement. These supporters were clearly blinded by their need to “preserve religious freedoms” in Arizona that they didn’t think about dangerous economic-based chain reactions of eliminating an entire customer base and losing precious revenue from businesses who would decide to enforce the law.
Even outside politicians weighed in on the controversial bill. Former Massachusetts governor and 2012 Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney recently tweeted that a veto of the bill was the right course, and even Republican US Representative Michele Bachmann made a comment in opposition of the bill. “I think what we need to do is respect both sides. We need to respect both opinions,” Minnesota Republican Michele Bachmann said on the subject. “Just like we need to observe tolerance for the gay and lesbian community, we need to have tolerance for the community of people who hold sincerely held religious beliefs.” This is no doubt the sanest and most compromised statement Bachmann has, or probably will, ever make. That being said, if someone as intolerant as Michele Bachmann can comprehend understanding and compassion, then there is no excuse for anybody else.
During times of advancement, and when the old-world order is challenged, reactions such as the vetoed Arizonan law is somewhat typical, especially when the old-way movement is dying and has not yet accepted defeat. This bill seems to have sounded like a good idea in someone’s head at the moment, but soon after the idea was transferred to paper and spread around, supporters quickly learned the error in their decision. If this bill had been signed into law, Arizona would plummet to mirror a civil-rights era south and, if enough businesses chose to enforce the law in their own establishment, the state could have seen some more economic dark days.
