Ohio House Passes Bill Protecting Pastors From Penalty for Refusing Marriages Against Their Beliefs
The Republican controlled House in Ohio took one step closer to protect ministers from penalty if they refuse to perform a marriage that goes against their religious beliefs Wednesday when they passed a controversial Pastor Protection Act that some critics insist could lead to discrimination.
The bill, which legislators have been working on since the U.S. Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage in 2015, is to help prevent "tension" and lawsuits regarding religious entities and same-sex marriage, according to sponsor Rep. Nino Vitale.
"Do we want Ohio to be a state that imposes something on pastors that is against their deeply held religious beliefs?" Vitale asked Wednesday on the House floor prior to a vote on the bill, according to the Akron Beacon Journal.
Get Our Latest News for FREE
"This is not a sword. This bill is intended to be a shield to protect everyone's rights," he said. "Are we going to allow groups to sue each other and use the heavy hand of the courts?"
"This tension that now exists is what House Bill 36, or the Ohio Pastor Protection Act, seeks to relieve," Vitale explained according to NBC4i.
Dozens of pastors, many from Baptist churches, according to the Beacon Journal gave testimony in support of the bill over concern about future lawsuits due to the tension created from other Christian businesses that have been sued across the country, like wedding vendors such as florists and bakers.
Republican Rep. Mike Duffey of Worthington was among a minority in his party who did not vote for the bill.
"Our religious freedom is already fully protected in every way proposed, so let's not send a signal to our talented LGBT Ohioans that they are unwelcome," he said in a statement cited by the Beacon Journal.
Another provision in the bill would also make it so that "religious societies" could not be sued for refusing to solemnize the marriage of a couple that did not comply with the values of the given clergy or "religious society."
While arguing that "clergy absolutely have the right already in place, it's constitutionally protected to marry and not marry whom they want to marry and whom they do not want to marry," Democrat State Representative Janine Boyd said clergy and "religious societies" should not be protected from lawsuits if they refuse to allow their buildings or property to be used in that same marriage service that does not comply with their religious beliefs.
The American Civil Liberties Union in Ohio also insists that the bill does more than restate existing religious freedoms enjoyed by pastors in the state.
"It enters uncharted waters by protecting the rights of 'religious societies' to determine who they serve. With this vague provision, it seems likely that accommodations owned by churches could be rented out selectively, opening the door to discrimination in the public sphere. The ACLU of Ohio believes that when church-owned, non-worship spaces like gazebos and halls are advertised to the public, they should be available to the public. And that means everyone," the organization said in a statement.
House Bill 36 now goes to the senate, where Senate President Larry Obhof, R-Medina, said it likely would not have trouble passing his chamber.
