Breakthrough Web Design - 515-897-1144 - Web sites for businesses
News & Entertainment for Mason City, Clear Lake & the Entire North Iowa Region

Founded October 1, 2010

Democrats outraged at GOP bill they say would protect employers who fire unmarried pregnant women

This news story was published on July 25, 2015.
Advertise on NIT Subscribe to NIT

U.S. Capitol

U.S. Capitol

WASHINGTON – Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) and Rep. Raúl Labrador (R-ID), last week reintroduced legislation to clarify and strengthen religious liberty protections in federal law, by safeguarding those individuals and institutions who promote traditional marriage from government retaliation. The bill is co-sponsored by Rep. Rod Blum of Iowa – who represents Worth and Mitchell counties – among many other Republicans.

The First Amendment Defense Act (S. 1598, H.R. 2802) would prevent any federal agency from denying a tax exemption, grant, contract, license, or certification to an individual, association, or business based on their belief that marriage is a union between a man and a woman. For example, the bill would prohibit the IRS from stripping a church of its tax exemption for refusing to officiate same-sex weddings.

“There’s a reason the right to religious liberty appears first in our nation’s Bill of Rights,” said Senator Lee. “The freedom to live and to act in accordance with the dictates of one’s conscience and religious convictions is integral to human flourishing, serving as the foundation upon which America has produced the most diverse, tolerant, and stable society the world has ever known. The vast majority of Americans today still hold a robust view of religious liberty, yet across the country the right of conscience is threatened by state and local governments that coerce, intimidate, and penalize individuals, associations, and businesses who believe that marriage is a union between a man and a woman. The First Amendment Defense Act is necessary to ensure that this kind of government excess never occurs at the federal level.”

Not married?  GOP bill might allow unmarried pregnant woman to be fired.

Not married? GOP bill might allow unmarried pregnant woman to be fired.

“Religious freedom is at the heart of what it means to be an American,” Labrador said. “America set the standard for upholding freedom of belief and worship in a diverse society. No American should ever doubt these protections enshrined in the First Amendment. Our bill ensures that the federal government does not penalize Americans for following their religious beliefs or moral convictions on traditional marriage. Our bill shields against federal intrusion without taking anything away from anyone. In a shifting landscape, it’s time that Congress proactively defend this sacred right.”

Democrats cried foul, however, as pressure is reportedly mounting to call the bill for a vote, soon.

“Republicans have introduced a bill that will allow employers to fire an employee for being LGBT or an un-married pregnant woman,” Democrats said in a campaign mailer. “Currently, there are protections in place that prevent an employer from firing people due to a simple disagreement with the way they live their lives. Republicans want to REMOVE that protection, allowing bosses to fire employees if they ‘disapprove’ of their choices or values. Make no mistake – this bill could have disastrous effects on Iowa women and families.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

 characters available

5 Responses to Democrats outraged at GOP bill they say would protect employers who fire unmarried pregnant women

  1. maybe 2.0 Reply Report comment

    July 25, 2015 at 12:42 pm

    Without gay bashing, anti immigration rhetoric and gerrymandering, Republicans would be in the toilet.
    To garner votes from the most gullible, this is the stuff they have to promote.

    I could respect this if they discriminated against all sinners and refused service to all of them. Discrimination is about picking and choosing to hate some, not about religious conscience.

    • LVS Reply Report comment

      July 25, 2015 at 2:04 pm

      If they did liberals would be in a world of hurt. Notice I said liberals. Most Democrats are good, decent people. It is the liberals that are ruining the party.

      • Paul Schneider Reply Report comment

        August 22, 2015 at 7:59 pm

        You mean like FDR, JFK, the leaders of the Civil Rights Movement, and that would also include Johnson? You mean those who provided healthcare for the elderly through Medicare?

  2. LVS Reply Report comment

    July 25, 2015 at 11:56 am

    There the Democrats go again crying wolf over nothing. This country was founded on religious freedom and there is nothing wrong with that. They were all for it when they pushed through gay rights but now that the Republicans are using the same tactics they don’t like it.

    • Paul Schneider Reply Report comment

      August 22, 2015 at 7:57 pm

      This country was not exactly founded on religious freedom. Only one colony could be identified as being identified as having been founded for religious freedom and that was Maryland, so that it could be a colony that would welcome Catholics, and then when Protestants took over, Catholics were persecuted. I know that some of you will say what about the Pilgrims and the Puritans, but they only wanted religious freedom for themselves, and for those who didn’t believe the way they did, well they persecuted and expelled and this is how we eventually get Rhode Island.
      So now, an employers religious beliefs supersedes those of his or her employees. So, an unmarred women can be fired from her…