Bill Allowing Religion-Based Discrimination Against Gays Introduced in Arizona

An Arizona lawmaker has introduced a bill that would allow religious-based discrimination against gays, the Arizona Daily Star reports:

YarbroughSB 1062 would allow businesses sued in a civil case to claim they have a legal right to not provide service to an individual or group because it would “substantially burden’’ their freedom of religion.

Sen. Steve Yarbrough, R-Chandler, said the measure is aimed specifically at preventing what happened in New Mexico, where courts said a gay couple could sue a photographer who refused to take their wedding pictures. But Yarbrough said his legislation could also be interpreted to allow motels with vacant rooms to refuse to rent to gays.

More details at The Daily Star


  1. Mike B. says

    Their hatred runs deep, and is super asinine. You can’t disprove religious animus, so I’m about to start a goddamn religion where we can refuse service to God-worshippers.

  2. Randy says

    Religion and race are two privileged classifications that receive the most protection in US courts. Although it is undeserving of any protection beyond any other speech or practice, it’s unlikely religion will be dethroned from its position of privilege. However, we can do just as well by elevating other classifications, like sex and sexual orientation to the same level.

    A broad coalition of women, men, straight and gay, could get a new ERA passed and ratified, which would require courts to treat these newer protected categories in the same way as the big two. (If you’re a straight male and don’t think this would benefit you, ask yourself who the homeless adults are in your municipality).

    The ERA was sunk in part because of fears about gay people. So let’s bring it back and spell it out.

  3. Bill says

    Can we make up a religion that bans any member of a religion that has ever had someone burned at the stake? Then you wouldn’t have to serve Christians.

    I can image the howls of anguish, but that’s just what this guy’s law seems to allow, and if some Christians sue, the end result might be to get the whole law tossed.

  4. Chris says

    It’s a stupid law. No one is preventing them from exercising their religious beliefs. If they don’t want to have gay sex according to their religion, then don’t. Case closed. No one is infringing on their freedom of religion. Alternatively, no where does the Bible say one can’t photograph two homosexuals. These bigots can’t hid behind the Bible when simple facts are presented.

  5. Bob says

    Not that I agree with it at all, equality for all I say, but if it passes the businesses should be required to advertise that they are disciminatory so that refused clients are not unsuspectingly humiliated. It should also be made lawful to discriminate against intolerant Christians.

  6. Tigernan says

    We knew it was going to get worse before it got better. The more that people can’t do their usual tricks, the more desperate they will be to come up with new ones.

  7. says

    It’s my sincere religious belief that Sen. Yarborough is a creature of the Devil, and that creatures of the Devil should be stripped naked, flogged through the streets before being drawn and quartered, and then buried in unmarked graves.

  8. stevetalbert says

    Plus. They are misreading their holy scripture. Nowhere in the bible does it say having gay sex or being gay is wrong. There are a couple of passages talking about other things and other places where the words used got translated wrong when going from hebrew to Aramaic to greek to Latin to archaic English to modern England.

    A number of religious groups point this out but never strongly enough because they are too nice to push back forcefully because if they aren’t “respectful” of other beliefs, it brings into question how anyone could seriously believe ANY of it.

  9. stevetalbert says

    The proper response is to say that basing any public action on a belief in mythology is delusional at best and they are guaranteed private worship of any type that doesn’t infringe in others. Having any business open to the public makes it a public matter. Same with schools, medical, and laws.

  10. Chadd says

    I think that privately owned businesses should be allowed to discriminate if they want to – provided that their discriminatory policies are included along with their business name everywhere it appears or is said. Jones’ Bakery – we don’t serve gay and lesbian customers. Thank you for calling Smith Florist – we don’t serve gay and lesbian customers. That way, we could avoid the embarrassment of being denied service and our allies could spend their money wisely. Let them discriminate, but make them display it proudly.

  11. Nelson says

    Look, this is PERFECTLY SIMPLE (are you listening Hobby Lobby?). Your BUSINESS is not a religion. You can hide in the walls of your church and discriminate al you want, but when you are serving the public in your secular business as a bakery, hotel, restaurant, dry cleaner…… are NOT a religion.

  12. disgusted american says

    ahh typical, Bigoted,and Discriminatory hateful GOP Neanderthals…….If they aren’t trying to tell Consenting Non-related adults, whom they can and cant marry …they’re Vaginally Probing Women’s VaJJs……they make me sick!

  13. MDNC says

    AWESOME! This means I no longer have to serve Christians because their beliefs are contrary to those of my congregation – the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster! No soup for you!

  14. Javier says

    There will be a strong attempt for Congress to pass a federal version of this bill, especially if Republicans take the Senate after this year’s elections.

  15. todd says

    I vote that all religious references to any law be immediately removed and all churches closed down. See that makes for all things to be equal as far as private is private and public is public.

  16. justinstl says

    So now we just need a publicized list of all businesses that discriminate on the basis of religious beliefs so we cal all send letters to their suppliers and credit card companies requesting the no longer provide services to these businesses that discriminate based on religious beliefs. Simply put them out of business. Oh no we can no longer take credit cards…oh no we can no longer get supplies…..Oh yes it was your choice!

  17. Ooma says

    Arizona’s most corrupt state senator, Steve Yarbrough (R-Chandler), who uses his position to write charter school bills to steer state funding to his Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization to benefit himself financially. It’s like writing checks to yourself.

    Unbelievably, this allegedly does not violate Arizona’s ethics rules for legislators!

    Yarborough benefits from tax credits he helped design. He is the executive director of the state’s second-largest tuition tax-credit organization, Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization, or ACSTO.

    An examination of the most recent tax return for ACSTO shows Yarbrough receives a salary of $96,000 per year. ACSTO also paid for his car. It paid $426,000 to a company called HY processing, which Yarbrough serves as part owner. The organization also paid $127,000 in leasehold improvements and $50,000 rent to the landlord. Yarbrough owns the building.

Leave A Reply