Add Georgia—with Republicans in control of both legislative chambers and the executive—to the list of GOP-led states trying to pass a bill that will expand religious "freedom" at the expense of just about every marginalized group in the country.
These bills, typically called Religious Freedom Restoration Acts (RFRAs), have flourished recently as a backlash to the success of the marriage equality movement. But the Georgia bill's breathtaking breadth shows why this expansion of religious "freedom"—very much playing off the Supreme Court's ruling in Hobby Lobby last year—will turn into a license to discriminate against anyone (not just LGBT Americans) on the basis of one's religious beliefs.
Without getting into legal jargon, these bills generally aim to keep the government from protecting certain groups of people from discrimination, as long as someone claims they discriminated due to their religious beliefs. Georgia's definition of those beliefs is particularly problematic since it comes down to: because I said so. Jay Michaelson explains:
Georgia’s RFRA also specifies that “exercise of religion” can be just about any “practice or observance of religion, whether or not compelled by or central to a system of religious belief.”
The law's language also makes it particularly difficult for the government to meet the legal test of having a good reason, or a "compelling governmental interest," for saying someone can't discriminate against others as long as that person says they did so based on their religious beliefs.
The combination of these factors has led to a curious result: a law so strict that it will lead to a host of unintended consequences—and has even led some Republicans to oppose it.
Some legal commentators have said that the law would give a pass to spousal and child abusers, as long as the husband (or father) has a religious pretext. Which is easy to provide; the Christian Domestic Discipline Network, for example, offers a host of rationales for “wife spanking.” And let’s not forget Proverbs 13:24: “He who spares his rod hates his son. But he who loves him disciplines him diligently.”
Georgia has numerous laws protecting child welfare, which is arguably a compelling state interest. But are such laws really the “least restrictive means” of protecting it? Not necessarily. At the very least, the laws offer a novel defense against assault and battery.
Everyone should be paying attention to these religious "freedom" laws. As LGBT activists have noted, they amount to nothing more than a "license to discriminate." Though some are specific to LGBT Americans, many are not. And most importantly, right-wing conservatives are seeking to expand the definition of what qualifies as a "religious liberty" and is also legally defensible as an act of religious liberty. These laws will have consequences for virtually every marginalized group in the nation.
