FamilyFoundationBlog.com

Late Wednesday afternoon, amidst growing tensions on college campuses, Governor Bob McDonnell issued a “Governor’s Directive,” ordering those in the executive branch not to discriminate in their hiring practices (see here). His directive specifically referenced “sexual orientation.”

Governor McDonnell issued his directive in an apparent effort to ease the hostile atmosphere on our campuses and in the General Assembly. Four years ago, then-Attorney General McDonnell challenged Governor Tim Kaine’s executive order that added sexual orientation to the anti-discrimination policy, saying he didn’t have the authority to do so. It is still unclear exactly what legal weight, if any, a directive has, but media reports indicate that it does not have the same force of law of an executive order.

Much of the anger among college students has been generated by those who are supposed to be in authority at those schools — college presidents and administrators — who have criticized the advisory letter Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli sent them last week. The letter stated that public colleges and universities with anti-discrimination policies that include sexual orientation are in conflict with state law. Instead of providing leadership, the college presidents and administrators have provoked anger and outrage with inflamed rhetoric.

A media backlash also was fed by heated and often mean-spirited rhetoric by a handful of General Assembly members, including Senator Donald McEachin (D-9, Henrico) who, in a floor speech earlier this week, referenced Governor McDonnell’s graduate school thesis, yelling on the Senate floor, “We are being governed by the thesis!” Joining in the daily diatribes were Delegate David Englin (D-45, Alexandria) and Delegate Joe Morrissey (D-74, Henrico). It was often insinuated that anyone who disagrees with adding sexual orientation to the non-discrimination policy is hateful and bigoted. But truth has been difficult to find in this debate.

In addition, some legislators made the outrageous claim that, without a non-discrimination policy that included sexual orientation, Virginia is not “business friendly” and would not be able to attract new jobs. But several publications and organizations currently recognize Virginia as the best state in America to do business without having this policy.

Nonetheless, yesterday morning, Senator Tommy Norment (R-3, Williamsburg), in a clear conflict of interest as an employee of the College of William and Mary, one of the colleges expressing outrage over the AG’s letter, amended an economic development bill introduced by the Governor with: “The Commonwealth of Virginia maintains an ecumenical atmosphere in its sexual orientation hiring policies in the private and public workforce.”

Besides being a bizarre statement, it is a frightening overreach into the private workplace, which would include religious-based ministries and churches. Fortunately, on the floor of the Senate — because of the Governor’s directive — Senator Norment removed his amendment from the bill.

The Family Foundation has and continues to maintain that there is no need for special protections for homosexuals. As the issue was thoroughly debated and voted on multiple times throughout this year’s General Assembly, no evidence of discrimination was presented.

We absolutely agree with one statement in Governor McDonnell’s directive — that state employment should be based on “qualifications, merit and performance,” regardless of one’s immutable or unimmutable characteristics.

Over the next several days, we will consult with experts to determine the legal ramifications of this directive, but we are concerned when the Governor’s action is being heralded as a step forward by the ACLU and the state’s largest homosexual lobby, Equality Virginia (Pilot on Politics).

In a statement, Kent Willis of the ACLU said, “We hope this is only the beginning, and that the Governor’s example will inspire legislators to finally pass a law prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in both private and public sector employment.”

Any thought that the groups and organizations behind this effort will stop at public employment is naive. It is very clear that they want to force private businesses — including churches — to abide by their morality.

Late last week, Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli sent a letter to the state’s taxpayer funded colleges and universities informing them that, without General Assembly approval, they do not have the authority to issue non-discrimination policies that include sexual orientation (see Washington Post). Apparently, the state’s public colleges and universities had issued such policies without the approval to do so (see Richmond Times-Dispatch).

His opinion, initiated at the request of several interested parties, started a media firestorm. Essentially, the Attorney General, the office designated to instruct state entities on the law, told them to actually follow the law — Virginia law does not carve out discrimination protections for homosexuals, as it does for race, color, creed and national origin. But Democrat leaders and homosexual activists immediately pounced, calling Cuccinelli’s advice “hate,” and vowed to revive legislation that died last week which would add sexual orientation to the Commonwealth’s anti-discrimination policy.

Today, several legislators literally screamed about the issue on the floor of the House of Delegates, all but accusing Attorney General Cuccinelli of hatred. They urged the House General Laws Committee to act on SB 66, which was defeated in sub-committee last week. However,  committee chairman Delegate Chris Jones (R-76, Suffolk) cancelled the committee’s last meeting. As today was the last day for committees to act on legislation in order for them to get to the floor before session ends, the issue is dead, again, for this year.

It is quite interesting to listen to proponents of this major change in Virginia’s public policy. In three separate presentations before committees and subcommittees, advocates for making sexual orientation a protected class have admitted that 90 percent of Virginians don’t think there should be discrimination. They have admitted that the last three governors have had policies, either written or verbal, that they will not allow such discrimination. At no point has any actual evidence of discrimination been presented. Late last year the Washington Post editorialized that there are “thousands of homosexuals” working in state government.

Usually, the General Assembly passes legislation to remedy a problem. They often defeat legislation that, as is said, is a “solution in search of a problem.” That is exactly the problem with this legislation.

So what is the goal? It really is not about discrimination. It is about government recognition — acceptance — of the homosexual lifestyle. Make no mistake, this debate is a serious one and it will have long term consequences, not just for state government, but private businesses and, ultimately, our Marriage Amendment. The goal is not anti-discrimination — it is forced acceptance of a lifestyle that many Virginians find antithetical to their faith.

The rhetoric in the capitol today was heated and not very tolerant. It seems that those who oppose creating a special class for homosexuals are hateful and bigoted, which is an easy accusation to make when you have no other argument and no ability to make your case.

The past 24 hours have been good for Virginia’s homosexual lobby, at least in the Virginia Senate, where two key legislative initiatives passed. But there also is positive news for values voters in the House of Delegates.

Yesterday, the Senate passed SB 66, legislation that would add sexual orientation (and “gender identity or expression”) to the state’s non-discrimination in hiring laws (see Richmond Times-Dispatch). Despite no evidence being presented anywhere in the process that discrimination is taking place, the bill passed 23-17, with one Republican, Fred Quayle (R-13, Suffolk), joining all 22 Senate Democrats who favored the measure.

Senator Mark Obenshain (R-26, Harrisonburg) argued against the bill during the floor debate, adding the fact that should this bill become law, the Commonwealth would open itself up for extensive litigation by those who claim they have been discriminated against regardless of their job qualifications.

Today, SB 451, legislation that would allow local governments to offer domestic partner benefits, and patroned by Senator Mary Margaret Whipple (D-31, Arlington), passed the Senate 26-14. This took place despite the fact that this legislation could have a significant fiscal impact on the Commonwealth through increased Standards of Quality funding. Republican Senators Quayle, John Watkins (R-10, Midlothian), Harry Blevins (R-14, Chesapeake), and floor leader Tommy Norment (R-3, Williamsburg) joined the 22 Democrats.

These bills still must be vetted in and voted on in the House. We encourage you to contact your delegates to defeat these unnecessary bills. If you do, we are quite hopeful that these bills will not find equal favor there.

In fact, earlier this evening, a House General Laws Sub-committee defeated HB 1116, mirror legislation to SB 66. It was patroned by Delegate Adam Ebbin (D-49, Arlington). The vote was 5-3 with Delegates John Cosgrove (R-78, Chesapeake), Bill Carrico (R-5, Galax), Ed Scott (R-30, Culpepper), Todd Gilbert (R-15, Woodstock), and Rich Anderson (R-51, Woodbridge) voted against the bill. This indicates that SB 66 has little hope for success in the House.

Legislation introduced by Senator Donald McEachin (D-9, Richmond), SB 66, seeks to add sexual orientation to the state’s hiring policy of non-discrimination. The bill was scheduled for a vote in the full Senate earlier this week but it was delayed, likely due to grassroots pressure. Certainly, thanks to concerned Virginians, there are some senators feeling the heat from home.

After Senator McEachin withdrew an attempted floor amendment, SB 66 made it through the second read on the floor of the full Senate and is up for a final vote on Monday. If this unnecessary legislation is successful, it would be the first time in Virginia history that sexual orientation would be elevated to a protected class. Furthermore, there is no evidence that discrimination is taking place.

Even if you have e-mailed your senator, it is critical that you contact him or her again over the weekend and urge a vote against this impractical bill. We can prevent this legislation from crossing over to the House if we work together to stop it now. Additionally, the impact of defeating this bill on the Senate floor, rather than in the House, a more likely scenario, may provide needed momentum to defeat the rest of the pro-homosexual agenda. Click here for your senator’s contact information or here to determine who your senator is.

Last week the Senate General Laws committee passed (see vote) legislation, SB 66, that will add sexual orientation to the state’s hiring policy of non-discrimination. If this bill is successful, it would be the first time in Virginia history that sexual orientation would be elevated to a protected class.

The full Senate will vote (see contact list) on this legislation tomorrow! We urge you to ask your senator to vote against this unnecessary legislation.

While no one endorses discrimination of any type, there is absolutely no need for this proposal. In fact, according to the Washington Post, there are “thousands of homosexuals” working in state government. Both previous governors, Mark Warner and Tim Kaine, signed executive orders against discrimination, and Governor Bob McDonnell has said publicly that his administration will not discriminate against homosexuals (see Washington Post). No evidence of discrimination was presented in committee when the bill was debated.

This is a solution in search of a problem. In addition, this legislation will open the Commonwealth of Virginia to costly litigation by people who fail to qualify for employment but sue the state based on this proposal. It also is a first step toward adding sexual orientation to private business hiring practice. We have seen in other states this gradual progression.

The bill also is impractical. To protect themselves against litigation, state agencies would have to begin asking job applicants about their sexuality, a clear invasion of privacy. State employment applications would have to be changed to include boxes to check for one’s sexual orientation, “actual or perceived,” gender identity or expression.

Elevating sexual orientation to a protected class, despite the fact that homosexuality is not immutable, would create an entirely new level of protection — protection based on one’s sexual behavior. So, please contact your senator now and urge him or her to vote no on SB 66 — unnecessary legislation that elevates sexual orientation to protected status in Virginia law.

This is the fourth in a series of five policy statements on issues that will come before the 2010 General Assembly. The third, regarding constitutional government, can be found here. Each statement covers one of The Family Foundation’s five areas of principle. We will post the fifth issue by early next week.

As with every General Assembly session, the usual suspects will show up promoting legislation that The Family Foundation believes would be harmful to the family or to the values that we share. Of particular note this year, there again are several bills that attempt to extend special rights to homosexuals based on their lifestyle choice.

In the aftermath of Congress passing and President Obama signing legislation that added sexual orientation to federal hate crimes laws, there is legislation that would do the same in Virginia. As we argued against the federal extension, this is a solution in search of a problem. There is absolutely no evidence anywhere that crimes against homosexuals are not being prosecuted, which was the original point of hate crimes statues.

There also is an effort to add sexual orientation to anti-discrimination laws, both for state government and localities’ hiring practices. This annual attempt at “gotcha politics” is of course intended to make anyone who opposes it appear discriminatory. Elected officials often are quizzed on whether or not they discriminate against homosexuals as if that should be a question on the employment application. Unfortunately for proponents, one of their biggest allies — The Washington Post — admitted in an editorial recently that there are “thousands of gays in state government.” There is absolutely no need for this legislation and no evidence of any discrimination given the lack of claims from these thousands.

Also this year, there are additional attempts at expanding so-called domestic partner benefits. Several years ago, despite our warning that such a change would open a floodgate, the General Assembly passed legislation that allowed some businesses to contract with health insurance companies to grant benefits outside of the longstanding standards of “blood, marriage or adoption.” Those standards were always intended to encourage and support marriages and families. Since then, there have been several attempts at expanding this loophole to life insurance, and there will be new attempts this year as well. Already, we’ve seen outgoing Governor Tim Kaine’s blatant political attempt to change state regulations in this area, knowing that the final decision maker will be Governor-elect Bob McDonnell. Unfortunately, in the General Assembly, when the principles of families and business compete, the family is often the loser.

Finally, in what will likely amount to a waste of everyone’s time, there is legislation seeking to repeal the Marriage Amendment passed by the voters in 2006. This bill will be introduced despite the fact that more 30 states now have marriage amendments and three statewide candidates that supported the Virginia Marriage Amendment won landslide elections in November.

We will be ever vigilant watching for other legislation that undermines our values and impacts our families. We will be at the capitol every day during session advocating on your behalf and against harmful legislation, and chronically it all here.

Not exactly a news flash, but the commonwealth’s leading homosexual lobby, Equality Virginia, yesterday announced its endorsement of Democrat gubernatorial candidate Creigh Deeds. Here’s the link to its Web site’s media page, where its only media is its own news release endorsing Deeds. The release also is below. We can’t say we can feel the momentum swinging to Senator Deeds over this, so don’t expect its endorsement to be a game changer. To the contrary, proudly accepting it pretty much blows off what little cover Senator Deeds of a “moderate” image.   

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

OCTOBER 15, 2009

Equality Virginia PAC Endorses Deeds for Governor

RICHMOND – Equality Virginia PAC announced today its support for Creigh Deeds for Governor. “There is no question that for the GLBT community and Virginians who believe in equality for all, there is only one sensible choice for Governor, and that choice is Creigh Deeds,” stated Jon Blair, Equality Virginia PAC’s CEO. “While no candidate is perfect, including Senator Deeds, Virginians must support the one candidate who truly understands that discrimination hurts our economy and our families.”

Blair drew the following contrasts in explaining EV PAC’s decision to support Deeds:

• Deeds co-patroned legislation to ensure that all public employees will be protected from discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, and pledges that he will sign an executive order to that effect; as Attorney General, McDonnell ruled that such an executive order would be illegal, stated he would not sign one as governor, and has refused to support a change in the law to ban discrimination. To attract the best public and private employees, Virginia must be welcoming of diversity and avoid discriminatory practices. Anything else hurts employers and employees, stifles economic growth, and limits Virginia’s competitiveness.

• Deeds ultimately opposed the Marshall-Newman marriage amendment; his opponent, Bob McDonnell wholeheartedly endorsed it.

• Deeds says he will support opening up state health benefits to otherwise qualified adults living in the same household as GLBT employees; McDonnell says that’s for the legislature to decide.

“The number one job of the next governor will be to restore confidence in our economy and keep Virginia the best managed state in the country. I plan to make sure that every citizen of the commonwealth can contribute to the economy and to government to the fullest extent possible without fear of discrimination. I’ve had a lifetime of working against discrimination in the workplace and I’ll continue that work when I’m Governor,” Deeds responded in his acceptance of Equality Virginia’s endorsement.

Yesterday we provided video and commentary of the three Democrat gubernatorial candidates’ views on same-sex marriage and on issues dear to the homosexual lobby. Now, we hear from the front-runner for the Democrat nomination for lieutenant governor, Jody Wagner, who sounds as if she’s in complete lock-step with the Equality Virginia agenda. Among other things, she told the homosexual-oriented Michael-In-Norfolk blog (read the whole report here) that she:

. . . supports adding “sexual orientation” to the Virginia Fair Housing Law covering all rental and sales transactions. Moreover, she reminded me that she served on the Virginia Housing Development Authority when the VHDA Board of Commissioners voted unanimously to remove the so-called “family rule” that required those borrowing money from the agency to purchase a home to be related by blood, marriage or adoption. The Family Foundation and extreme Christianist groups went beserk over the vote, but the policy change was upheld.

Oh, cool. A gratuitous slap at us! Looks like we’ve made it, after all. By the way, “Christianist“? Who’s using the pejoratives, who’s stereotyping, who’s staking the claim to righteousness? Not only did this blog take a slap at us Sunday, it attacked Family Foundation President Victoria Cobb.

Tuesday is “crossover” day in the General Assembly, the day when work on bills from their respective chambers must be complete. The past two weeks have been long and intense, as you have been able to tell by reading this blog and by the number of e-mail alerts you’ve received. (If you don’t receive our e-mail alerts, you should. They are informative, fun, fast and have received critical acclaim. People tell us that when they read them, they feel as if they were in the committee room. Click here to sign up.)  

Several bills in The Family Foundation’s bill profile were acted on recently. Here’s an update:

SB 1270: Abortion Center Licensing Requirement (Support)

This legislation, introduced by Senator Jill Vogel (R-27, Winchester), would have required abortion centers to become licensed, have life-saving equipment in their facilities and submit to one yearly inspection. It was drafted to make abortion centers safer for the women who visit them. In fact, the original bill had numerous regulations, many of which pro-abortion activists claim are onerous and designed put these centers out of business. Anticipating this argument, Senator Vogel stripped down the bill to the three simple requirements listed above.

The fact is that there are several types of medical facilities that are much less invassive, such as podiatry centers; and altogether different types of facilities, such as puppy mills, that have much tougher regulations. Furthermore, all medical disciplines and specialities have oversight by peer review boards, with the notable exception of abortionists.

Finally, the pro-abortion side traditionally argues that the Board of Medicine regulates Virginia’s abortion clinics. Fine. Senator Vogel presented SJ 276, which the Senate passed unanimously last year, that slams the Board of Medicine, citing a 1999 JLARC report, that discovered “the Board of Medicine  took too long to resolve cases, did not adequately protect the public from substandard practice by doctors, and did not handle medical malpractice cases adequately,” among other charges. When confronted with its hypocrisy and the truth, the pro-abortion side did the only thing it could do — ignore it.

So, this bill, which seemed like a logical and bipartisan issue, failed in the Senate Education and Health Committee by a party line vote of 10-5. So much for “safe, legal and rare.” Instead, in Virginia, abortion centers remain an exempted class, untouchable and protected by their overlords in the Senate. Read more about this issue here and see video of the Ed and Health hearing here.

SB 801: “Choose Life” License Plates (Support)

This legislation, from Senator Ken Cuccinelli (R-37, Fairfax), not only would have created “Choose Life” license plates, but would have sent part of the proceeds from the plates to pregnancy resource centers around Virginia. The bill was debated in the Senate Transportation Committee. Of course, the opposition denounced the plates, claiming they are political in nature and out of the purview for recognition.

Even more infuriating, a family practitioner unashamedly attacked crisis pregnancy centers in her testimony. The bill died in committee by a vote of 6-6 with Senators Harry Blevins (R-14, Chesapeake) and John Watkins (R-10, Midlothian) abstaining. Senator Blevins was in the room up until just before the vote and then walked out — leaving a “proxy” vote of “abstain” behind.

HB 2579: Informed Consent, Ultrasound Requirement (Support)

Delegate Kathy Bryon’s (R-22, Lynchburg) bill would require abortionists to take an ultrasound and allow the woman to view it if she desires before having an abortion. The Family Foundation supports this bill not only because it would give women medically accurate information to aid their decision making, but also with hopes that more women would choose life after clearly seeing that life inside them. The House Courts of Justice Committee reported this bill 15-6. It now goes to the House floor.   

HB 2634: Providing Information on Fetal Pain

Another informed consent bill, patroned by Delegate Ben Cline (R-24, Amherst), would require that a woman be told that her unborn child could feel pain during the abortion process and provide her with information on anesthesia for the child. Again, the House Courts of Justice Committee passed this bill 17-5, and the House will vote on it this week. See some of the sub-committee debate here.  

HB 1624, HB 1625, HB 1726, HB 2385, SB 945, SB 1247:  Legislation on “Sexual Orientation” (Oppose)

With homosexual rights advocates feeling emboldened by recent election victories, every effort has been made this legislative season to make sure that the term “sexual orientation” finds its way into Virginia code. It has been attempted in every form from group life insurance and housing discrimination, to making sure that it becomes a protected class under Virginia’s human rights laws. Any incremental step they believe they can take, they will. Thankfully, we can report that all efforts to expand the homosexual agenda have failed thus far, with the exception of SB 945 (life insurance). 

These battles are far from over and other skirmishes over other issues undoubtedly will materialize. If ever it was all to play for, this year’s second half is it.

Now that newspapers are celebrating the in-progress homosexual “marriages” in California with front page articles, radio stations with top of the hour gushes about “newlyweds” and television news with live remotes from various city halls and courthouses throughout the Golden State, there’s not much more to say, but to let the circuses speak for themselves. Funny how four people can overturn the will of an entire state. Except that this issue is no laughing matter. Pro-marriage advocates two weeks ago, however, gained almost double the necessary petition signatures required to get a constitutional amendment banning homosexual marriage on the California ballot this November. That will be the for all the marbles. (About 694,00 were required and more than 1.1 million signed. Read more here.)

The Wall Street Journal, ever looking for a financial impact, quotes something called the Williams Institute,“a think tank on sexual-orientation law at the University of California at Los Angeles’s law school,” as predicting homosexual weddings “will generate $684 million over three years for California’s economy” but that “the social impact — and the impact on the nation — is expected to go far beyond the economy.” Thank goodness for understatements.

Which brings us to Virginia for two reasons. The California Supreme Court decision one-upped (as difficult as that is to imagine) the infamous Massachusetts Supreme Court decision, which started this nonsense, by granting marriage licenses to non-Californians. Massachusetts clerks do not. (By the way, in California, licenses now read “Party A” and “Party B” in lieu of “bride” and “groom.” How sentimental. How much is this going to cost Hallmark to reprint its wedding cards?) Still, how many of these couples will return to their home states and begin legal challenges to have their “marriages” recognized in those states? Plenty, according to the Alliance For Marriage. Not only that, New York Governor David Patterson has issued an executive order for his state to recognize “same-sex marriages” performed in California, Massachusetts and Canada (read the news release here). Virginia’s homosexual lobby, through its words and legislative actions, has made no secret of its desire to whittle away, water down and eventually overturn the Commonwealth’s Marriage Amendment. Will law suits be far behind?

The other reason Virginia comes to mind is that during the 2006 campaign, one of the many points of misinformation by the homosexual lobby was that, if passed, the Marriage Amendment would have the “unintended consequence” of prohibiting any couple (brothers, sisters, business partnerships) from entering into contracts and doing business together. Of course that hasn’t happened and will not happen. Best proof yet? A neighborhood newsletter (we leave no stone unturned in our investigative journalism; click here): One of the leading fundraisers against the Marriage Amendment, Mac Pence of Richmond, and his partner, have bought a historic mansion on Monument Avenue and are converting it to a bed and breakfast. We doubt they even considered that they couldn’t start this business together, proving the homosexual lobby’s disingenuousness from the beginning. In fact, we’re still waiting for that first lawsuit to be filed over any one of the several imaginary grievances that were so hysterically predicted.

Of course, this is but one small example of the falsity of their 2006 arguments. The only difference now is that with the California ruling they will create more misinformative arguments and make them louder, stronger and more frequent. Some will be emboldened to seek the courts. Why not, especially if four people can change the will of millions of voters? Which makes the bizzare scenes coming from California more than a just cause for concern.