'Religious liberty' bill passes Georgia Legislature

[presence]

'Religious liberty' bill passes Georgia Legislature

Atlanta Journal Constitution-19 hours ago
The Georgia Legislature over the course of a few hours Wednesday unveiled changes to a controversial “religious liberty” bill and gave it final ...

Religious liberty bill passes Georgia Legislature
Religion News Service-3 hours ago
Religious liberty bills protect bigotry, not freedom
The Maneater-22 hours ago
GOP majority in Georgia Legislature passes 'religious liberty' bill
MyAJC-14 hours ago
Sweeping religious liberties bill passes Senate
The Courier-Journal-Mar 15, 2016
​Georgia's "religious liberty law" stirs backlash from business
In-Depth-CBS News-Mar 16, 2016


http://www.legis.ga.gov/Legislation/en-US/display/20152016/HB/757

AM 25 1379
- 1 -
                                           ADOPTED
Representative Tanner of the 9th offers the following amendment:
Amend the Senate substitute to HB 757 by deleting all matter from line 1 through the end and
replacing it with the following:

To protect religious freedoms; to provide for defenses and relief related thereto; to amend
Chapter  3  of  Title  19  of  the  Official  Code  of  Georgia  Annotated,  relating  to  marriage
generally, so as to provide that religious officials shall not be required to perform marriage
ceremonies, perform rites, or administer sacraments in violation of their legal right to free
exercise  of  religion;  to  provide  that  no  individual  shall  be  required  to  attend  the
solemnization  of  a  marriage,  performance  of  rites,  or  administration  of  sacraments  in
violation of their legal right to free exercise of religion; to amend Chapter 1 of Title 10 of the
Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to selling and other trade practices, so as to
change certain provisions relating to days of rest for employees of business and industry; to
protect property owners which are faith based organizations against infringement of religious
freedom; to protect certain providers of services against infringement of religious freedom;
to amend Chapter 1 of Title 34 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to labor
and industrial relations generally, so as to provide that faith based organizations shall not be
required to hire or retain certain persons as employees; to amend Title 50 of the Official
Code  of  Georgia  Annotated,  relating  to  state  government,  so  as  to  provide  for  the
preservation of religious freedom; to provide for the granting of relief; to provide for waiver
of sovereign immunity under certain circumstances; to provide for definitions; to provide for
ante litem notices; to provide a short title; to provide for related matters; to provide for an
effective date; to repeal conflicting laws; and for other purposes.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF GEORGIA:

SECTION 1.
This Act shall be known and may be cited as the "Free Exercise Protection Act."

SECTION 2.
Chapter  3  of  Title  19  of  the  Official  Code  of  Georgia  Annotated,  relating  to  marriage
generally, is amended by adding a new Code section to read as follows:

AM 25 1379
- 2 -
"
19-3-11.

(a)  As used in this Code section, the term 'government' means the state or any political
subdivision of the state or public instrumentality or public corporate body created by or
under authority of state law.

(b)  All individuals who are ministers of the gospel or clerics or religious practitioners
ordained or authorized to solemnize marriages, perform rites, or administer sacraments
according  to  the  usages  of  the  denomination  shall  be  free  to  solemnize  any  marriage,
perform  any  rite,  or  administer  any  sacrament  or  to  decline  to  do  the  same,  in  their
discretion, in the exercise of their rights to free exercise of religion under the Constitution
of this state or of the United States.

(c)
(1)  A refusal by an ordained or authorized individual pursuant to subsection (b) of this
Code section shall not give rise to a civil claim or cause of action against such individual
or result in any state action to penalize, withhold benefits from, or discriminate against
such individual based on such refusal.

(2)  A refusal by an ordained or authorized individual pursuant to subsection (b) of this

Code section shall not be grounds to:
(A)    Alter  in  any  way  state  tax  treatment  of  an  exemption  from  taxation  for  such
individual under state law;

(B)  Cause any tax, penalty, or payment to be assessed against such individual or deny,
delay, or revoke an exemption from taxation for such individual under state law; or

(C)  Disallow a deduction for state tax purposes of any charitable contribution made by
such individual.

(d)    All  individuals  shall  be  free  to  attend  or  not  attend,  at  their  discretion,  the
solemnization of any marriage, performance of any rite, or administration of any sacrament
in the exercise of their rights to free exercise of religion under the Constitution of this state
or of the United States.

(e)  An individual may assert a violation of this Code section by a government as a claim
or defense in a judicial, agency, or other proceeding and obtain a declaratory judgment or
injunctive relief in a court of competent jurisdiction.

(f)  When an aggrieved individual prevails in an action pursuant to this Code section, the
court may award reasonable attorney's fees and court costs.

(g)  No individual having a claim against a government under this Code section shall bring
any such action without first giving notice of the claim to such government, in writing, by
certified mail or statutory overnight delivery, at least 30 days prior to filing such action,
setting forth the particular prohibited action alleged to have been taken by the government
against such individual.
"

AM 25 1379
- 3 -
SECTION 3.

Chapter 1 of Title 10 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to selling and other
trade practices, is amended by revising Code Section 10-1-573, relating to day of rest for
employees of business and industry, as follows:

"
10-1-573.
(a)
  Any business or industry which operates on either of the two rest days (Saturday or
Sunday)  and  employs  those  whose  habitual  day  of  worship  has  been  chosen  by  the
employer as a day of work shall make all reasonable accommodations to the religious,
social, and physical needs of such employees so that those employees may enjoy the same
benefits as employees in other occupations.

(b)  No business or industry shall be required by ordinance or resolution of any county,
municipality,  or  consolidated  government  to  operate  on  either  of  the  two  rest  days
(Saturday or Sunday).
"

SECTION 4.

Said chapter is further amended by adding a new article to read as follows:
"
ARTICLE 35
10-1-1000.

As used in this article, the term:

(1)    'Faith  based  organization'  means  a  church,  a  religious  school,  an  association  or
convention  of  churches,  a  convention  mission  agency,  or  an  integrated  auxiliary  of  a
church  or  convention  or  association  of  churches,  when  such  entity  is  qualified  as  an
exempt religious organization under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986, as amended.

(2)    'Government'  means  the  state  or  any  political  subdivision  of  the  state  or  public
instrumentality or public corporate body created by or under authority of state law.

10-1-1001.
(a)    No  faith  based  organization  shall  be  required  to  rent,  lease,  or  otherwise  grant
permission for property to be used by another person for an event which is objectionable
to such faith based organization.

(b)    No  faith  based  organization  shall  be  required  to  provide  social,  educational,  or

charitable services that violate such faith based organization's sincerely held religious belief
as demonstrated by its practice, expression, or clearly articulated tenet of faith; provided,

AM 25 1379
- 4 -
however, that government may enforce the terms of a grant, contract, or other agreement
voluntarily entered into by such faith based organization.

10-1-1002.

(a)(1)  A refusal by a faith based organization pursuant to Code Section 10-1-1001 shall

not give rise to a civil claim or cause of action against such faith based organization or
an employee thereof or result in any state action to penalize, withhold benefits from, or
discriminate against the faith based organization or employee based on such refusal.

(2)  A refusal by a faith based organization pursuant to Code Section 10-1-1001 shall not
be grounds to:

(A)  Alter in any way state tax treatment of an exemption from taxation for such faith
based organization under state law;

(B)    Cause  any  tax,  penalty,  or  payment  to  be  assessed  against  such  faith  based
organization or deny, delay, or revoke an exemption from taxation for such faith based
organization under state law; or

(C)  Disallow a deduction for state tax purposes of any charitable contribution made by
or to such faith based organization.

(b)  A faith based organization may assert a violation of this Code section by a government
as a claim or defense in a judicial, agency, or other proceeding and obtain a declaratory
judgment or injunctive relief in a court of competent jurisdiction.

(c)  When an aggrieved faith based organization prevails in an action pursuant to this Code
section, the court may award reasonable attorney's fees and court costs.

(d)    No  faith  based  organization  having  a  claim  against  a  government  under  this  Code
section  shall  bring  any  such  action  without  first  giving  notice  of  the  claim  to  such
government, in writing, by certified mail or statutory overnight delivery, at least 30 days
prior to filing such action, setting forth the particular prohibited action alleged to have been
taken by the government against such faith based organization.
"

SECTION 5.
122
Chapter  1  of  Title  34  of  the  Official  Code  of  Georgia  Annotated,  relating  to  labor  and
123
industrial relations generally, is amended by adding a new Code section to read as follows:
124
"
34-1-9.
125
(a)  As used in this Code section, the term:
126
(1)    'Faith  based  organization'  means  a  church,  a  religious  school,  an  association  or
127
convention  of  churches,  a  convention  mission  agency,  or  an  integrated  auxiliary  of  a
128
church  or  convention  or  association  of  churches,  when  such  entity  is  qualified  as  an
129
AM 25 1379
- 5 -
exempt religious organization under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of
130
1986, as amended.
131
(2)    'Government'  means  the  state  or  a
ny  political  subdivision  of  
the  state  or  public
132
instrumentality or public corporate body created by or under authority of state law.
133
(b)  Except as provided by the Constitution of this state or the United States or federal law,
134
no faith based organization shall be required to hire or retain as an employee any person
135
whose religious beliefs or practices or lack of either are not in accord with the faith based
136
organization's sincerely held religious belief as demonstrated by practice, expression, or
137
clearly articulated tenet of faith.
138
(c)(1)    A  refusal  by  a  faith  based  organization  to  hire  or  retain  a  person  pursuant  to
139
subsection (b) of this Code section shall not give rise to a civil claim or cause of action
140
against such faith based organization or an employee thereof or result in any state action
141
to penalize, withhold benefits from, or discriminate against the faith based organization
142
or employee based on such refusal.
143
(2)    A  refusal  by  a  faith  based  organization  to  hire  or  retain  a  person  pursuant  to
144
subsection (b) of this Code section shall not be grounds to:
145
(A)  Alter in any way state tax treatment of an exemption from taxation for such faith
146
based organization under state law;
147
(B)    Cause  any  tax,  penalty,  or  payment  to  be  assessed  against  such  faith  based
148
organization or deny, delay, or revoke an exemption from taxation for such faith based
149
organization under state law; or
150
(C)  Disallow a deduction for state tax purpos
es of any charitable contribution made by
151
or to such faith based organization.
152
(d)  A faith based organization may assert a violation of this Code section by a government
153
as a claim or defense in a judicial, agenc
y, or other proceeding and obtain a declaratory
154
judgment or injunctive relief in a court of competent jurisdiction.
155
(e)  When an aggrieved faith based organization prevails in an action pursuant to this Code
156
section, the court may award reasonable attorney's fees and court costs.
157
(f)    No  faith  based  organization  having  a  claim  against  a  government  under  this  Code
158
section  shall  bring  any  such  action  without  first  giving  notice  of  the  claim  to  such
159
government, in writing, by certified mail or statutory overnight delivery, at least 30 days
160
prior to filing such action, setting forth the par
ticular prohibited action alleged to have been
161
taken by the government against such faith based organization.
"
162
SECTION 6.
163
Title 50 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to state government, is amended
164
by adding a new chapter to read as follows:
165
AM 25 1379
- 6 -
"
CHAPTER 15A
166
50-15A-1.
167
As used in this chapter, the term:
168
(1)    'Delinquent  act'  shall  have  the  same  meaning  as  provided  for  in  Code  Section
169
15-11-2.
170
(2)  'Demonstrates' means meets the burdens of going forward with the evidence and of
171
persuasion.
172
(3)  'Exercise of religion' means the exercise of religion pursuant to Paragraphs III and
173
IV of Section I, Article I of the Constitution 
of this state or the Free Exercise Clause of
174
the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
175
(4)    'Government'  means  the  state  or  any  political  subdivision  of  the  state  or  public
176
instrumentality or public corporate body created by or under authority of state law.
177
(5)  'Penal institution' means any jail, corr
ectional institution, or similar facility for the
178
detention of violators of state laws or local ordinances and any entity supervising such
179
violators placed on parole, probation, or other 
conditional release and any facility for the
180
restrictive  custody  of  children  and  any  entity  supervising  children  who  are  not  in
181
restrictive custody but who are accused of or adjudicated for a delinquent act.
182
(6)  'Restrictive custody' shall have the same meaning as provided for in Code Section
183
15-11-2.
184
50-15A-2.
185
(a)  Government shall not substantially burden a person's exercise of religion even if the
186
burden results from a law, rule, regulation, ordinance, or resolution of general applicability,
187
except as provided in subsection (b) of this Code section.
188
(b)    Government  may  substantially  burden  a  person's  exercise  of  religion  only  if  it
189
demonstrates that application of the burden to the person is:
190
(1)  In furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and
191
(2)  The least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.
192
(c)    A  person  whose  exercise  of  religion  has  been  burdened  in  violation  of  this  Code
193
section may assert that violation as a claim 
or defense in a judicial proceeding and obtain
194
a declaratory judgment or injunctive relief against a government.
195
50-15A-3.
196
In any action or proceeding to enforce a provision of this chapter, the court or tribunal may
197
allow the prevailing party, other than government, reasonable attorney's fees and court
198
costs.
199
AM 25 1379
- 7 -
50-15A-4.
200
No person having a claim under this chapter shall bring any action against government
201
without first giving notice of the claim to such government, in writing, by certified mail or
202
statutory overnight delivery, at least 30 days prior to filing such action, setting forth the
203
particular discriminatory action alleged to have been taken by the government against such
204
person.
205
50-15A-5.
206
(a)  With respect to interactions which affect the rights or interests of third persons, this
207
chapter shall be construed consistent with Article I, Section I, Paragraphs III and IV of the
208
Constitution of Georgia and consistent with decisions of the Georgia Supreme Court made
209
pursuant to said paragraphs.
210
(b)  Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to:
211
(1)  Permit invidious discrimination on any grounds prohibited by federal or state law;
212
(2)  Apply to penological rules, regulations, conditions, or policies established by a penal
213
institution that are reasonably related to the safety and security of incarcerated persons,
214
staff, visitors, supervised violators, or the public, or to the maintenance of good order and
215
discipline in any penal institution or parole or probation program;
216
(3)  Create any rights by an employee against an employer, if such employer is not a
217
government; or
218
(4)  Afford any protection or relief to a public officer or employee who fails or refuses
219
to  perform  his  or  her  official  duties;  provided,  however,  that  this  paragraph  shall  not
220
prohibit  any  person  from  holding  any  public  office  or  trust  on  account  of  religious
221
opinions, in accordance with Paragraph IV of Section I of Article I of the Constitution.
"
222
SECTION 7.
223
Said title is further amended by adding a new Code section to read as follows:
224
"
50-21-38.
225
The defense of sovereign immunity is waived as to any claim, counterclaim, cross-claim,
226
or third-party claim brought in the courts of 
this state by an aggrieved individual or faith
227
based  organization  seeking  a  declaratory  judgment,  injunctive  relief,  or  reasonable
228
attorney's fees and court costs against the state as provided for in Code Section 19-3-11,
229
Article 35 of Chapter 1 of Title 10, Code Sec
tion 34-1-9, or Chapter 15A of this title.  In
230
any such case, the applicable provisions of said Code sections, article, or chapter shall
231
control to the extent of any conflict with the provisions of this article.
"
232
AM 25 1379
- 8 -
SECTION 8.
233
This Act shall become effective upon its appr
oval by the Governor or upon its becoming law
234
without such approval.
235
SECTION 9.
236
All laws and parts of laws in conflict with this Act are repealed.
237

 

[tod evans]

Wonder if this applies to joos, mooslums and Buddhists too?

Druids, krishna's and wiccans?

 

[Origanalist]

The courts, he said, will likely ultimately decide how far the bill goes and whether, for example, it overrides local anti-discrimination laws such as the one in the city of Atlanta.

Pfffft, much ado about nothing....

 

[willwash]

The Georgia bill, reworked several times by lawmakers amid criticism that earlier versions went too far, declares that no pastor can be forced to perform a same-sex wedding.

The bill also grants faith-based organizations — churches, religious schools or associations — the right to reject holding events for people or groups of whom they object. Faith-based groups also could not be forced to hire or retain an employee whose beliefs run counter to the organization’s.

How is that not supportive of liberty?

 

[farreri]

How hypocritical. Religious bigots cry about gays getting special rights, yet this bill they support gives them special rights.

 

[pcosmar]

How hypocritical. Religious bigots cry about gays getting special rights, yet this bill they support gives them special rights.

What special right?

My reading It only prevents being forced against their beliefs to provide some service.

No one should be forced to associate with anyone against their will.

 

[farreri]

What special right? My reading It only prevents being forced against their beliefs to provide some service. No one should be forced to associate with anyone against their will.

Right, NO ONE should be forced to. This bill allows for only religious people to not be forced to.

 

[Origanalist]

Are gay pastors being sued for not performing hetero weddings?

 

[farreri]

Will atheist cake makers be able to refuse service to religious people?

 

[presence]

Will atheist cake makers be able to refuse service to religious people?

unfortunately, as worded, no

this applies to "religious officials"

 

[farreri]

unfortunately, as worded, no

this applies to "religious officials"

Then as I stated, it's a special rights bill!

 

[DamianTV]

Poll: 58% of “Liberals” Think People Should be Prosecuted For Criticizing Religion
http://www.infowars.com/poll-58-of-...hould-be-prosecuted-for-criticizing-religion/

The poll, conducted by Populus, found that almost half of respondents (46%) think that there are “some things” you should “not be able to say about religion”. This is an increase of 6 per cent on a previous poll in 2011 which asked the same question.

...

If anything is supposed to be beyond the scrutiny of the individual, corruption is guaranteed.

The reason, in essence, is similar between a drug addict and a dealer. Dealers financially profit by continuously enabling their clients with drugs, and the clients enable the dealers by paying for their products. Basically, a circle-jerk. The term "enabling" characterizes a behavior that prevents the identification of the moral responsibility of the consequences of their action. "I was angry so it was okay that I hurt someone else." By putting any behavior beyond reproach, it is an Enabling action that, on a psychological level, prevents an unbiased self evaluation where no progression past a state of Denial is ever experienced. "I'm a cop and although that kid wasnt armed when I killed him, I did the right thing." Now, just swap out Cop with Pastor or Politician or CEO, and you can see how this cycle of denial can continue forever, and ultimately lead to total moral corruption. The immoral actions wont be limited in scope to just one event. It becomes a justifier for the next immoral action. "He questioned my judgement so I shot him, and that is okay because the last kid I shot was also in the wrong." And that will be followed by a pattern of immoral actions without the necessary consequence to preserve moral equilibrium.

What is necessary is each person has to have the ability to derive an unbiased evaluation of a religion they are considering adopting. True religious freedom comes with the religious responsibility to see that the faith to be held does not cause the suffering of others. That religious responsibility is something that Sharia Law really appears to be lacking in.

 

[presence]

Then as I stated, it's a special rights bill!

I like the bill, I would prefer to see it apply to any "natural person" rather than any "religious official". But that is a few strokes of the pen away.

With that small change the sole proprietorship also gets property rights back lost in 1964.

 

[Cabal]

How hypocritical. Religious bigots cry about gays getting special rights, yet this bill they support gives them special rights.

Since when is the right to refuse special?

Will atheist cake makers be able to refuse service to religious people?

If they want to, they should be able to.


I don't like that this issue is always framed as a "religious liberty" issue. It's not. It's simply a liberty issue. The State shouldn't be forcing people to exchange with, associate with, and interact with one another. They shouldn't need "religious reasons" to refuse or say "no." They should be able to refuse and say "no" for whatever reason they want, and they shouldn't be required to explain themselves.

 

[otherone]

Wonder if this applies to joos, mooslums and Buddhists too?

you mean "Boodhists"?

 

[The Free Hornet]

Right, NO ONE should be forced to. This bill allows for only religious people to not be forced to.

False:

Some portions unambiguously apply to all "at their discretion". An atheist doesn't lack 'religious' rights they have not only freedom from religion but they may qualify their beliefs or lack of beliefs as faith-based (like positive atheism versus negative) or even religious based (like atheistic religions).

I could make certain religious claims on the basis of not having yet been excommunicated. I don't know what they put in holy water, but it has yet to burn me!

(d) All individuals shall be free to attend or not attend, at their discretion,

It is not clear to me if a lay person or judge that administers weddings in some 'atheistic' fashion is intended to be excluded:

All individuals who are ministers of the gospel or clerics or religious practitioners ordained or authorized to solemnize marriages, perform rites, or administer sacraments according to the usages of the denomination shall be free ...

That's a big fucking net and even a blind lawyer could catch an atheist with it (provided they are officiating a marriage and have any conscience-based objection. Perhaps a D&D player could 'role 20' to see if someone is permitted a marriage in their domain).

As a promoter of liberty, I don't expect one bill to free the world. As an atheist, this bill doesn't seem necessarily exclusive. It's easy to work around if needed (IMO).

unfortunately, as worded, no

this applies to "religious officials"

I disagree. But if you're right, try defining 'religious officials' to necessarily exclude atheists. It can be done, but this bill doesn't do that.

 

[presence]

I think the notion to deny other people religious belief and practice because they deny your conception of "god" is abhorrent.

yes, atheists should have religious freedom

just because someone doesn't believe in "god" does not mean they don't have profound beliefs, asceticisms, a developed and lived system of morality, and personally held religious practices.

 

[farreri]

Since when is the right to refuse special?

When it's only applied to certain people.

 

[Cabal]

When it's only applied to certain people.

So, you'd like everyone's right to refuse for any reason to be ensured? Good, me too.

And, in pursuit of this, you want to to make sure the right to refuse is denied to people until it is universal? Not sure that makes much sense. Usually, when you're pursuing equal rights, you don't do this by denying rights, but by expanding them, when they aren't already universal. For instance, the "right to vote" wasn't revoked entirely to achieve eqaulity, it was expanded to women and minorities to achieve equality.

That you're in favor of denying anyone's rights for any reason is rather alarming, quite frankly.

The reason anything like this bill even has to exist is because of anti-discrimination laws and judgements were written and passed to deny people the right to refuse in the first place, no?

 

[farreri]

So, you'd like everyone's right to refuse for any reason to be ensured? Good, me too.

Yes.

And, in pursuit of this, you want to to make sure the right to refuse is denied to people until it is universal? Not sure that makes much sense. Usually, when you're pursuing equal rights, you don't do this by denying rights, but by expanding them, when they aren't already universal. For instance, the "right to vote" wasn't revoked entirely to achieve eqaulity, it was expanded to women and minorities to achieve equality.

Only if it's not the majority that gets these rights first if a group has to get them first. That way, the majority will get this same rights probably by the next day whereas if it was the other way around, the minority would get this same right many decades later.

That you're in favor of denying anyone's rights for any reason is rather alarming, quite frankly.

Well I'd rather that not be the case. I just don't like it when a majority legally discriminates against a minority.

The reason anything like this bill even has to exist is because of anti-discrimination laws and judgements were written and passed to deny people the right to refuse in the first place, no?

Yes, I wasn't for those laws in the first place.