Massachusetts Treasurer and candidate for governor Steve Grossman is putting his money where his mouth is. Touting himself as a progressive political activist, Grossman recently called out the Kansas House of Representatives which recently passed a bill that would allow private businesses, organizations and similar entities to deny service to same-sex couples because of their respective religious beliefs.
The bill (see: below) reads that no consortium shall be required by law to “solemnize any marriage, domestic partnership, civil union or similar arrangement,” which, when interpreted by the U.S. Constitution, is an acceptable opinion as long as decisions aren’t based upon it. People are, after all, afforded the freedom of speech and therefore aren’t required to exalt same-sex marriage.
But Grossman rightfully is unwilling to accept that the law further calls for the refusal of:
Any services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods, or privileges; provide counseling, adoption, foster care and other social services; or provide employment or employment benefits, related to, or related to the celebration of, any marriage, domestic partnership, civil union or similar arrangement.
In showing his distaste of the measure, in line with Massachusetts being the first state to legalize same-sex marriage, Grossman penned a disapproving letter (also below) to Kansas Senate President Susan Wagle writing that the bill is “beyond reprehensible,” urging her to kill it in the chamber.
Grossman further suggested to Wagle that she circulate a copy of the Fourteenth Amendment which reads, in part, that “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”
According to The Wichita Eagle, Wagle is reportedly not a fan of the discriminatory legislation. A conservative in her own right, Wagle recognizes that there are plenty of Kansas lawmakers who favor the traditional definition of marriage but not when it comes to discriminatory practices.
“A strong majority of my members support laws that define traditional marriage, protect religious institutions, and protect individuals from being forced to violate their personal moral values,” Wagle said in a statement to the Eagle.“However, my members also don’t condone discrimination. If we cannot find ample common ground to ease legitimate concerns, I believe a majority of my caucus will not support the bill.”
Grossman, though, calls Kansas’ consideration of the bill a shame upon the Midwestern state.
“The question of whether Kansas chooses to accept history’s arc of justice bending further toward equality remains for you to answer,” Grossman wrote in the letter. “This attempt to segregate citizens on the basis of their sex or gender is an embarrassment to all people, in Kansas and across the United States.”
You can read the rest of Grossman’s letter below. In 2004 Massachusetts became the first state in the country to legalize same-sex marriage after the landmark ruling in Goodridge v. Department of Public Health. Since then, 17 states and the District of Columbia, as well as eight Native American tribal jurisdictions have followed suit.
