Update: Kansas religious act addresses gay concerns

TOPEKA, Kan. (AP) — Gay rights activists say they are satisfied with a new version of the Kansas Preservation of Religious Freedom Act that has been introduced in the House this session.

The bill was first introduced in last year's session. Rep. Lance Kinzer, an Olathe Republican, tells the Lawrence Journal-World (http://bit.ly/UY3sw5 ) that the goal is to shield people who are concerned that government is infringing on religious liberties.

But some gay rights advocates said last year's act would have allowed people to cite their religious beliefs to justify discrimination against gay people.

Tom Witt, executive director of the Kansas Equality Coalition, says the new version of the bill adequately addresses those concerns, but was cautious in his remarks to the Gayly.

"We have asked the ACLU and our board counsel for their input on HB2203, and they agree - while still a dangerous bill, it is no longer targeted at local non-discrimination policies and ordinances," said Witt.

Here is the 2011/2012 version that died in the State Senate last year:

http://www.kslegislature.org/li_2012/b2011_12/measures/documents/hb2260_01_0000.pdf

"You'll see that in the original bill, Page 1, lines 21 through 31 defines "compelling government interest" as only what's in the current Kansas Act Against Discrimination (KSA 44-1001). That was how they were trying to make local non-discrimination ordinances and policies unenforceable," he added.

"That's the section that is missing from the new bill:

http://www.kslegislature.org/li/b2013_14/measures/documents/hb2203_00_0000.pdf

"Frankly, I was very surprised by this," Witt continues. "There is, of course, the possibility that the bill can be amended at any point in the process, but then it would be even more obvious that they are targeting the LGBT community.

Besides language, there's something procedurally different going on. The 2011/2012 version was a committee bill - one where the authors could keep their fingerprints from being obvious. This year, the bill is sponsored by 39 Republicans and 2 Democrats (Jan Pauls and Jerry Henry). That means they've seen and considered this language prior to putting their names on it, and are publicly saying "this is the version I support."

Witt said he will spend the session keeping a very close eye on this bill, adding, "It's a long process, and just about anything can happen. I will be sure to send out action alerts should this bill go from being benign to being hostile to our interests."