Fact Checker: Does religious freedom bill shield businesses from same-sex ... - The Gazette: Eastern Iowa Breaking News and Headlines

I can't say that enough. We give statements grades coming from A New to be able to F depending on accuracy and also context.


Conway mentioned the writer of the bill, Labrador, is actually contemplating changing the actual wording "to clarify that organizations wouldn't end up being included."

Blum spokesman Keegan Conway said the particular congressman is an acronym by his statements.

Fact Checker scores this an F. "The distinct intent with the legislation is to protect religious organizations such as churches from discrimination ... Your language involving the bill is what counts.

The bill as created would allow folks in any occupation, such as a photographer, wedding planner or perhaps baker, in order to refuse services pertaining to same-sex marriages, he said.


The Fact Checker team checks statements created by Iowa political candidates/office holders by national candidates/office holders concerning Iowa. Raul Labrador, R-Idaho, in June 17, along with referred towards the Committee about Oversight and also Government Reform.

Source involving claim: U.S. That's exactly what the bill will be about, just churches ... He is an acronym through his statement the legislation is not intended for you to impact businesses."

In essence, the balance prevents the federal government from penalizing any "person" with regard to acting accurate for their religious beliefs that will marriage will be among 1 man and something woman. Comments: (319) 339-3177; brian.morelli@thegazette.com

Blum's spokesman explained require along with intent, but it doesn't trump what are usually the bill clearly states: protection with regard to corporations and also "for profit" entities, which usually include businesses.

"The congressman would never assistance something that enables organizations to become able to discriminate against anyone," Conway said.

Tim Hagle, a university of Iowa political science professor, stood a comparable interpretation. Justices will appear to the language of the bill before wanting to decipher intent, he said.

"Once again, just churches. Blum was referring for the Initial Amendment defense Act, which in turn is actually a bill he co-sponsored together with 145 additional lawmakers as the Supreme Court had been legalizing same-sex marriage over the country.

Conway cited quotes through Solicitor General Donald Verrilli Jr., which in turn Conway said articulate how acting in opposition to same-sex marriage could place churches at a heightened risk regarding losing tax-exempt status, and also how a bill's intent would end up being to protect "churches, charities or perhaps private schools."

If anyone spot any declare you think requirements fact checking, email us at factchecker@sourcemedia.net.

The official bill language states it "prohibits the actual government from getting discriminatory action against the person around the time frame which such person believes as well as acts relating using a religious belief or even moral conviction that: (1) marriage is actually or perhaps needs to end up being able to be acknowledged as the union of just one man and something woman, as well as (2) sexual relations are usually appropriately reserved for you to this type of marriage."

The legislation ended up being introduced by http://occupyfdp.com simply Rep. Claims should be independently verifiable.

The bill defines "person" as "including corporations as well as other entities irrespective of for-profit or even non-profit status," based on a new introduction to your bill.


"That one person's statement doesn't seem to be supported with what is actually here, despite the really fact that which might end up being what they are attempting to acquire at," Hagle said.. Rod Blum, a first-term Republican congressman coming from Dubuque, as quoted within the Waterloo-Cedar Falls Courier.

If into your own market is redrafted, Blum could wind up getting correct, nevertheless as of this point, he could be not. Rep.

Iowa State university political science professor Steffen Schmidt put it bluntly. The Particular Supreme Court ruled June 26, but the outcome had been anticipated. I consider your average individual across America would agree in which churches shouldn't have to violate their particular principles." Religious freedom legislation is actually aimed at preventing "not a business, a new church" via losing its tax-exempt status for refusing to end up being able to officiate weddings together with same-sex couples.

l This particular Fact Checker has been researched as well as reported by Brian Morelli

Write a comment

Comments: 2