Discrimination | Elisa Chan | Greg Abbott | News | San Antonio | Texas

BigGayDeal.com

Texas AG Greg Abbott: San Antonio Ordinance Protecting Gays Would Curb Religious Expression

Texas Attorney General and gubernatorial candidate Greg Abbott spoke out on Monday against a proposed LGBT anti-discrimination bill in San Antonio. The measure  has been in the headlines recently because of City Councilwoman Elisa Chan's remarks on it, in which she called gays and lesbians "disgusting".

AbbottThe Dallas Morning News reports:

The ordinance mirrors language already adopted in five other large Texas cities, including Dallas. AG candidates Railroad Commissioner Barry Smitherman, Rep. Dan Branch of Dallas and Sen. Ken Paxton of Plano all have come out against the ordinance.

That chorus was joined by Abbott on Monday, who said it would impinge on religious freedoms. He also suggested it would run afoul of the Texas Constitution, which was amended in 2005 to define marriage as between a man and a woman.

“Religious expression is guaranteed by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and this ordinance is also contrary to the clearly expressed will of the Texas Legislature,” Abbott said.

“Although the proposal has been couched in terms of liberty and equality, it would have the effect of inhibiting the liberty of expression and equality of opportunity for San Antonians,” he said.

The San Antonio City Council is expected to vote on the ordinance on September 5.

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. I'd really like to see these people try to use "religious expression" as an excuse to own slaves. Because it's in the BIBLE, folks!

    Posted by: denizo | Aug 27, 2013 1:10:11 PM


  2. Perhaps it would be instructive to learn which mosques, temples and churches would be shut down by the AG should this legislation be passed? Yeah, I didn't think so.

    Posted by: Michael Barber | Aug 27, 2013 1:11:17 PM


  3. Another bigot using religious beliefs to justify discrimination against LGBT people. Of course it is only his religious beliefs he is concerned about, not the religious beliefs of those who believe in equal rights and equal justice.

    Posted by: john patrick | Aug 27, 2013 1:13:22 PM


  4. I wish all the religious people would be raptured already and leave us the hell alone.

    Posted by: Ryan | Aug 27, 2013 1:16:50 PM


  5. NONSENSE!! Religious expression and freedom of religion do not include religious oppression of others! Keep your religion to yourself!
    And don't you dare pass a law against ANY group based on your religious beliefs. This is America!

    Posted by: David | Aug 27, 2013 1:19:47 PM


  6. sounds like a publicity stunt. i suspect the tx ag has higher political ambitions, and is throwing bait to the opposition while tossing a bone to his base.

    Posted by: northalabama | Aug 27, 2013 1:20:30 PM


  7. This is complete garbage. If the nondiscrimination clause of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is lawful, then so is an identical provision at the city level. The government has a legitimate interest in nondiscrimination with respect to public accommodations, transport, housing, credit, etc.

    Posted by: Matt | Aug 27, 2013 1:23:47 PM


  8. No it wouldn't. It would curb illegal and un-American religious based discrimination and harassment by lawless uneducated barbarians who refuse to adhere to secular American law but demand citizens adhere to their religious law even though the Constitution says we do not have to and we cannot be forced to (see establishment clause)

    Posted by: Sean | Aug 27, 2013 1:26:17 PM


  9. Too bad Rev. Jim Jones isn't still around to offer this guy some grape Kool-aid.

    Posted by: Dan Mc | Aug 27, 2013 1:29:01 PM


  10. Nothing this bigot is saying has occurred in other cities with non-discrimination policies.

    What these religious bigots don't understand, or don't care to understand, is that their religious expression isn't being denied or taken away. They can continue being religious and anti-gay. Businesses can continue to promote themselves as religious with "traditional values". They simply cannot deny service to LGBT people, if they seek it. Businesses can't fire someone for being LGBT.

    These policies don't even stop discrimination, but give LGBT people some level of legal backup if it occurs to them. No threat to your religion, Mr. Abbott. Stop whining.

    Posted by: Francis #1 | Aug 27, 2013 1:30:04 PM


  11. Why the hell isn't this a federal law!!!! This should've been passed when DADT was repealed!!!!

    Posted by: Anthony | Aug 27, 2013 1:31:58 PM


  12. not allowing holy jihad on all non xtians would be curtailing religious freedoms

    damn the pesky enlightenment period

    Posted by: Moz's | Aug 27, 2013 1:38:46 PM


  13. In Texas hanging queers is right up there with baptism and communion. It's how a Texas Christian expresses their Christ like spirit. Here's another example of the LGBT community oppressing happy clappy Christians.

    Posted by: tery | Aug 27, 2013 2:02:08 PM


  14. "How can we give honor and praise to God if we can't make the lives of heathen f*gg*ts a living Hell?"

    Posted by: FuryOfFirestorm | Aug 27, 2013 2:08:22 PM


  15. Religion is the cancer eating away at civilized society. The ooga-booga Bronze Age is actually over.

    Posted by: Geoff | Aug 27, 2013 2:23:26 PM


  16. OK, so Equality threatens your religious expression. So what? Prove your religious beliefs are *true*, because if you can't show them to be true, then they don't matter more than Equality.

    Posted by: JJ | Aug 27, 2013 3:03:47 PM


  17. does the freedom for gentiles to be non-kosher infringe on the religious freedoms of kosher-observant Jews?

    Posted by: Little Kiwi | Aug 27, 2013 3:05:37 PM


  18. Here is his e-mail. Tell him what you think of his bigot statement;

    mailto:greg.abbott@texasattorneygeneral.gov

    Posted by: RK | Aug 27, 2013 3:06:05 PM


  19. Which AG doesn't have higher political ambitions? That's a HUGE problem with making this an elected position in the first place. They are supposed to be lawyers. Instead they are usually low-life politicians.

    Posted by: Steve | Aug 27, 2013 3:47:18 PM


  20. Religious expression is guaranteed by the first amendment of the US Constitution

    Posted by: william hamel | Aug 27, 2013 5:19:51 PM


  21. He's talking about the right to fire someone for being gay, which is what a lot of churches worry they will no longer be able to do if the law passes. This is a gray area in the law, but generally, churches are granted an exemption for their "core" employees (no Jews can become Catholic priests without converting, for example).

    Posted by: anon | Aug 27, 2013 6:35:01 PM


  22. so now bigotry and intolerance are religious expression but i am willing to bet if people expressed the same view toward religion they would be considered evil and religion would quickly play the victim

    Posted by: walter | Aug 27, 2013 7:16:12 PM


  23. Oh, poor religion! Always put upon...they never do anything to us...they never try to curb our expression...they never try to cut back the bombast so that people feel free to beat, murder, sanction, ostracize, keep us from housing, jobs, or our loved ones.

    why are we so meeeeeeaaaaaan!!!

    Posted by: woodroad34 | Aug 27, 2013 9:17:45 PM


  24. He's running forGovernor, it's grandstanding. Dan Branch is a Dallas legislator, his own city has a similar nondiscrimination policy without infringing on any religious freedoms, something I've been happy to remind him of. It's coattail season, that Chen woman is looking at the Mayor's office. They're all workin' the circus. He would be talking differently if we took his wheelchaired parking privileges away, which we may.

    Posted by: Chevytexas | Aug 27, 2013 10:36:54 PM


  25. After I posted comments on Elisa Chan's facebook page, commenting on her outrageous rants against gay American's, facebook blocked me from commenting or posting all together. Shame on you facebook.

    Posted by: Curt | Aug 28, 2013 1:05:19 AM


  26. 1 2 »

Post a comment







Trending


« «Cory Booker: 'I Hope That You are Not Voting for Me [on] the Presumption I'm Straight'« «