Flake votes for ENDA


We have reported that Congressman Flake may face a possible primary challenge from State Representative Russell Pearce. Despite Flake’s support for open borders and amnesty Pearce faced an uphill battle. Yesterday Flake voted FOR HR 3685, Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA.) The bill was strongly opposed by many Christian lobbying groups and is a somewhat surprising vote in CD-6. We called the Congressman’s office for a response but have not yet heard back. We can imagine that Pearce is pondering this gift.

Update: Mr. Specht with the congressman’s office did promptly return the call and sent us the following statement from the congressman.

“One of the most important constitutionally-mandated functions of the federal government is to protect the rights of individuals. The Employment Non-Discrimination Act is consistent with that function.

While I did have serious concerns with the version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act that was originally introduced, substantial changes were made before it was passed by the House: language regarding ‘gender identity’ was removed, language was added to strengthen the exemption for religious organizations, and the definition of marriage as defined by U.S. Code was reiterated. These were important changes and had they not been made, I would not have supported the bill.”

We did speak with Matt Barber at Concerned Women for America for a response to Jeff Flake’s statement that the flaws within the bill had been fixed.

Mr. Barber stated “we felt that the religious exemption is wholly inadequate.” He was concerned about the impact on the Boy Scouts, Christian schools and bookstores that may not be affiliated with a specific denomination and are therefore not eligible to a religious exemption under the bill. The bill tried to address the First Ammendent issues by exempting religion organizations but Barber added the “First Amendment applies to individual business owners” as well as established religions.


Comments

  1. A gift with a big bow on it!

    Is anyone else surprised by the high profile endorsements that Pearce is getting for his exploratory bid?

    The County Attorney, Sheriff, and four state legislators?

  2. SonoranSam says:

    Geeze. A Congressman who supports equal protection under the law for everyone.

    Clearly, he deserves to be kicked out of office for the aggregious offense.

  3. I never got a copy of this agenda. Where is it? Is there a heterosexual agenda too? I didn’t get that one either. I feel so left out!

  4. The day the federal government starts protecting certain types of behavior, every nut job out there will demand that their behavior gets protection. For example, hygenic orientation, dietary orientation, nocturnal orientation, and how about polysexual orientation or interspecies sexual orientation or multigenerational sexual orientation?

    ENDA opens up a Pandora’s Box to moral confusion.

  5. YIKES! The party line vote on that one was pretty severe for a non-defense bill. I have to wonder what the motivation was for the “YEA” when he had to know how this vote would play out back home. It could just be he believes in the bill and has the courage to vote his conscience. If so, then he must be prepared to defend it; and I would suspect he is. Time will tell.

  6. Mike Triggs says:

    However, when the votes were counted none were defeated. Governor Carlson went on to win his Republican Primary by a two to one margin and won re-election by the largest margin of any governor in the state’s history. One of the GOP legislators that supported the act went on to become the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and another, Tim Pawlenty followed in Carlson’s footsteps and is Minnesota’s current Governor.

    I found it interesting that a poll released this summer by leading Republican pollster, Tony Fabrizio shows that Republican voters support basic fairness for all Americans, regardless of sexual orientation. The poll found 77% of Republicans believe an employer should not have the right to fire an employee based solely on their sexual orientation. Even among social conservatives, 67% don’t believe an employer should be able to fire someone for being gay.

    In that same poll 53% of the Republicans polled said: “the Republican Party has spent too much time focusing on moral issues such as abortion and gay marriage and should instead be spending time focusing on economic issues such as taxes and government spending.” This could be the reason Rudy’s message is selling so well with rank and file Republicans.

    And for what it’s worth, I think Rudy should seriously consider Governor Pawlenty as his running mate.

  7. What is Mike Triggs talking about? It looks like we just joined a conversation he was already having?

  8. GOP Boomer Gal says:

    So most Republicans believe that Christian bookstores have no right to hire people who believe in their mission?

    And Tim Pawlenty bought Al Gore’s agenda; he would be a horrible VP candidate; according to Jason Lewis, radio talk show host from Miinesota, Pawlenty has swung way left.

    Michael Steele would be a superb choice, IMO

  9. So I fire someone who then claims that he is gay… How do I know he’s telling the truth or lying? Anyone can pretend to be gay. The idea that you can now sue your boss, landlord, or whoever, for discriminating against you for something you can just pretend to be is garbage. You can’t pretend to be a woman and claim sex discrimination. You can’t pretend to be black and claim racial discrimination.

    Shame on Flake for voting for this junk.

    Quit wasting our time Russell and get into this race so we can get to work on your campaign!

  10. Zachary Vang says:

    7vs2bo37wvx7b3b6

Speak Your Mind

*