CLICK HERE to read the original article on Baptist News Global.

By BOB ALLEN

A diverse group of 272 Georgia clergy have signed an open letter opposing so-called “religious liberty” bills before the state legislature, saying the U.S. Constitution already safeguards their religious liberty.

Twenty-nine Baptists, 32 Episcopalians, 31 Jewish rabbis, 42 Methodists and 53 Presbyterians urged lawmakers to reject a “Religious Freedom Restoration Act” being pushed by some elected officials, describing it as “a vague and broad religious exemptions bill that could result in discrimination and have many unintended consequences.”

“As faith leaders from diverse traditions, we believe freedom of religion is one of our most fundamental rights as Americans, but religious freedom does not give any of us the right to harm or exclude others,” said the group identified as Clergy United Against Discrimination.

The faith leaders cited four reasons they oppose the bill:

“First, it would put an individual’s religious beliefs ahead of the common good. Second, it could unleash a wave of costly lawsuits that will add burdens to both the courts and taxpayers alike. Third, our freedom of religion is already guaranteed and protected by the U.S. Constitution and Georgia’s State Constitution. Fourth, a state RFRA could legalize discrimination by allowing businesses to refuse to serve customers based on religious objections.”

“We believe that businesses that are open to the public should be open to everyone on the same terms,” the letter stated. “We strongly oppose giving for-profit corporations religious rights that could allow them to pick and choose which laws to follow and discriminate against employees based on any characteristic — from their religious practices to their sexual orientation. This principle harkens back to the civil rights movement and our nation’s core values of equality and justice.”

Baptist signers include Rev. Timothy McDonald, pastor of First Iconium Baptist Church in Atlanta; James Lamkin, senior pastor of Northside Drive Baptist Church in Atlanta; Frank Broome, executive coordinator of the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship of Georgia; and David Gushee, distinguished university professor of Christian ethics at Mercer University.

Other names include Courtney Allen, senior pastor of Grace Baptist Church in Richmond, Va.; Greg Deloach, CEO/president at Developmental Disabilities Ministries and former pastor of First Baptist Church in Augusta, Ga.; and Walker Knight, a member of Oakhurst Baptist Church in Decatur, Ga., and founding editor of Baptists Today.

Oakhurst co-pastors Lanny Peters and Melanie Vaughn-West added their signatures. So did Pastor Mimi Walker of Druid Hills Baptist Church in Atlanta; Pastor Tony Lankford and associate pastor Trey Lyon of Park Avenue Baptist Church in Atlanta; and Michael Tutterow, lead pastor of Heritage Baptist Church in Cartersville, Ga.

ATLANTA — High-powered business leaders are weighing in on Georgia’s fight over religious freedom as the so-called First Amendment Defense Act awaits action in the House.

“I do believe it presents challenges with how people perceive the openness of our state,” said H.J. Russell CEO Michael Russell.

The bill allows faith based organizations to refuse service to gay couples and not risk penalties from the government. Russell, whose company is one of the largest minority owned real estate firms in the U.S., says while he’s not getting into the politics of the bill, he’s worried about perceptions.

“It has as much to do with perceptions as it has to do with reality. I think we’ve seen from other states, particularly the state of Indiana, the impact it had on that state,” he said.

Indiana’s fight over religious freedom played out on a national stage. Thousands protested, businesses and major sporting events threatened boycotts until the governor there changed the law.

“It’s about equal protection under the law for people of faith,” State Sen. Josh McKoon (R-Columbus) said. McKoon is a staunch supporter of FADA and other religious freedom bills.

He says this is not about discrimination — rather equal protection.

“We are doing something here that is very even-handed, that is not going to lead to any discrimination of the law whatsoever, it’s simply going to keep government out of the lives of people of faith,” McKoon said.

Seven time NBA All Star Grant Hill, who is now co-owner and vice president of the Atlanta Hawks, says the bill could affect Atlanta’s chances of landing the big sporting events, like the Super Bowl and the Final Four.

“It is so important to keep alive the values of good sportsmanship, fairness and inclusion that were ingrained in me as an athlete. It is critical, now more than ever, that our state supports diversity and inclusion in the workplace,” Hill said in a statement.

Although the bill has passed the Senate, Gov. Nathan Deal said this week that it’s not the final version and the battle is far from over.

“I’m hopeful that our leaders will continue to look at the bill and come up with way to make sure it doesn’t have negative consequences,” Russell said.

When Alyssa Aldape was fourteen her family moved from San Antonio, Texas to India to do missionary work with the Banjara people. That was when Rev. Aldape saw discrimination in a new light.

“Discrimination occurs when a group claims to be superior and treats another group unfairly and with prejudice. But it’s complicated,” she said. “Discrimination isn’t always as clean cut as being denied housing or forced to leave a restaurant. Too often, discrimination is cloaked in seemingly good intentions, a wolf in sheep’s clothing.”

The Banjara are a nomadic tribe in India and there is a social stigma against them in modern Indian society. Alyssa recalls seeing her parents—practicing Baptists from the other side of the world—motivated to work with this marginalized group: “There are times, when as ministers we have be voices for people who don’t have a voice.”

When she turned eighteen, Rev. Aldape moved back to the United States to attend college in Birmingham, Alabama, where she lived for six years.

“In 2010, Alabama passed a law—HB 56. It was the strictest anti-illegal immigration law in the US at the time, but of course it was characterized as strengthening the economy and protecting Alabama’s vulnerable residents—a wolf in sheep’s clothing. This law made it OK for local law enforcement and other government organizations to racially profile. Police could stop anyone they believed was undocumented and demand to see papers. They stopped me twice for a ‘routine license check’ and required I show further proof of identification like a passport.”

Rev. Aldape felt angry and helpless in these moments: “It was more than hurtful, being racially profiled and then overtly called out because I’m brown. It was dehumanizing. But at the same time, it made me recognize I need to do something about this. I keep this as a reminder that there are ways that I can be a voice for people who have been discriminated against.”

Now, as a minister at Missions and Community Ministry at First Baptist Church of Dalton, Georgia, Rev. Aldape considers advocacy an integral part of her ministry. The church hosts food banks and aids local immigrant families and the large homeless population of Dalton. Rev. Aldape is using her platform to speak out against LGBT discrimination.

For her, the journey to “being open and affirming” of gay and transgender people wasn’t a given—it began her freshman year of college when one of her good friends came out.

“This friend was a person that I looked up to for spiritual advice,” Aldape said. “She loved Jesus just as much as I did, probably more. As a good southern Baptist, I grew up thinking people like her were bad people. But when one of your childhood friends says ‘I’m gay’ and they’re one of the strongest Christians you’ve ever met, you start to think: maybe we’ve got this wrong.”

Rev. Aldape said she kept returning to one idea: God is love.

God is not biased. God is all-loving. And I believe that God calls us to love all people. It took me years to reconcile, but now I stand squarely in support of my LGBT friends and fellow ministers. My faith has enabled me to give this support lovingly.

That’s why Rev. Aldape is speaking out against so-called “religious freedom” bills like Georgia’s First Amendment Defense Act. She said these bills are not helpful to religious liberty, they give the Church a bad name. “They are discrimination trying to pass itself off as religious freedom. We cannot let that stand.”

And she backed her stance up with scripture: “If you’re going to take scripture literally and believe that all of us are created in the image of God, then we must treat people as equals who were also created in God’s image. I don’t think that means excluding people and refusing them service on the basis of religion. We are called to treat everyone with love as we would want God to love us. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. The golden rule is simple, but it is tried and true.”

Rev. Aldape is also concerned that RFRA-style bills would blur the lines between Church and state, potentially endangering the very religious freedoms these bills claim to protect. “Baptists have historically supported the separation of church and state,” she said. “And I believe that the Constitution protects that pretty well considering it’s written into the First Amendment. As of now, the government and state can’t come in and tell the Church what to do. Why fix something that isn’t broken?”

Above all, she opposes the discriminatory First Amendment Defense Act and all other religious exemptions legislation in Georgia because it would leave tens of thousands of Georgians—including some of her friends and colleagues—more vulnerable to discrimination than they already are.

Currently, in Georgia there are no explicit laws banning discrimination against LGBT people. People face discriminatory treatment every day just because of who they are or whom they love—and too often, religion is the excuse. Rev. Aldape said Georgia doesn’t need more religious protections—they need a non-discrimination law:

Rather than another religious exemption bill, we could be working on a bill that protects the rights of groups who do not have the same protections written into law as people of faith do.

One person who would benefit from non-discrimination protections is Rev. Aldape’s friend from seminary, who got married to her long-time partner in 2014. They got married in the northeast over their spring break and returned to Georgia after the holiday. When they went to the county clerk’s office to get their marriage license and have their names changed, the clerk refused to do their paperwork for them, saying it was “against their religious beliefs.”

Aldape points out: “Kim Davis wasn’t the first. She was just the loudest.”

Even though the Supreme Court had not yet legalized same-sex marriage, a 2013 ruling mandated that if a same-sex couple got married in a state where it was legal, then that marriage would be recognizable in any of the 50 states. As such, Aldape’s friends were legally married—even in the state of Georgia. But because there are no laws barring discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity, the county clerk was within her right to discriminate and refuse public services to them.

In recounting this story, Rev. Aldape said all of the same feelings of anger and helplessness that she had experienced when she had been the target of racial discrimination came rushing back. But it’s stories like these that double her resolve.

“The movement for LGBT non-discrimination is important to me because it affects the people I love. These are the same kind of de-humanizing moments that I remember facing years ago on the side of the road in Alabama. As a minister, as a Christian, and as a human being, I feel it’s my duty to speak up.”

Rev. Alyssa Aldape has been in Georgia for four years, first in seminary at McAfee School of Theology and now as a minister in Dalton. And she has a message for lawmakers:

“To Georgia leaders (who I hope are more well-versed in the Constitution than I am)—there are already laws in place to protect our religious freedoms. I urge you to reject the harmful First Amendment Defense Act and rethink all religious exemptions laws as they would set this state back 50 years. We have pressing problems in our state that deserve more attention than this. All Georgia residents deserve to be treated equally and this bill—without question—will be a toxic cloud over the state of Georgia. I encourage Georgia leaders to find it in their hearts to do the right thing and speak up for ALL Georgia residents, and not just some.”

By Don Byrd

The Georgia House is now considering HB 757, the “Pastor Protection Act,” which the Senate passed after amending it with controversial legislation. Any person or religious organization that refuses to do business with someone due to religious objections to their marital status would be protected under the banner of religious liberty against charges of discrimination.

The bill has sparked a firestorm of criticism, including a letter (via AJC’s blog) sent to House Speaker David Ralston, and Governor Nathan Deal by Joe Whitley, former U.S. Department of Justice Official under Presidents Reagan and George H.W. Bush, lambasting the newly amended proposal.

The Pastor Protection part of the bill, he rightly notes, is unnecessary. The new provision, he argues, “creates a wide range of new rights for individuals and organizations to discriminate against others.”

He concludes:

After surveying this piece of legislation, I note that in the name of tolerance, this legislation likely will cause more in the way of intolerance for those whose private marital and family relationships may be disfavored by a particular faith. Georgia does not need to enact a law such as this to maintain the freedom of religion or protect deeply held religious beliefs, which the Constitution and Bill of Rights already protect. Moreover, no person should have religious beliefs imposed on them without their consent. While I am sympathetic to the fact that a number of my fellow citizens have been led to believe that their personal beliefs are unprotected absent such legislation, as I have shown, this is simply not the case. Instead, passage of the Act likely would lead to real harm to many people, as well as to our State and its reputation.

By Greg Bluestein

The tech company executive who helped force changes to Indiana’s controversial “religious liberty” law has Georgia’s measure in his crosshairs.

Salesforce chief executive Marc Benioff told CNBC he was “very worried” about the proposal approved Friday by the Georgia Senate that would allow opponents of same-sex marriage to cite religious beliefs in denying services to gay couples.

The red flag was raised when Benioff was asked about Apple chief executive Tim Cook’s fight with the FBI over encryption software. Here’s what he said:

“I think that what Tim Cook should be doing is getting down right now to the state of Georgia and going down and talking to those leaders and talking about House Bill 757 because we’re very worried about what’s happening to our employees down there with more discrimination, like what we fought back in Indiana last year just reared its head in HB 757. And that’s what I think Tim Cook should be focused on right now.”

Benioff scrapped his company’s events in Indiana after the governor signed a law in April 2015 that could protect businesses that refuse to serve gay couples amid a growing business backlash to the legislation. Indiana legislators and Pence soon agreed to soften the measure.

In Georgia, business leaders and gay rights groups have warned that the legislation could damage the state’s reputation and spark boycotts. One Decatur tech startup has already decided to leave for Nevada. Supporters, though, say it won’t interfere with the state’s business climate.

“We are simply ensuring that no Georgian suffers at the hand of our government for their view on marriage,” said Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle, a supporter of the measure.

Salesforce, a cloud-computing company, has a major presence in Atlanta. It owns Pardot, the Atlanta-based business email startup, and recently set up a regional hub in Buckhead with hundreds of employees.

CLICK HERE to watch the original feature on 11Alive.

By 11Alive Staff and Donna Lowry, WXIA

ATLANTA — The fight over religious freedom legislation is heating up. Some clergy members and the hospitality community are speaking out against legislation being proposed at the Georgia Capitol.

There are several religious freedom bills floating around in the Capitol this legislative session.

The Hyatt has joined other major hotels, the Atlanta Convention and Visitors Bureau, the film industry and even global brands, such as Coca Cola in opposing legislation – HB 757 — which passed in the Georgia senate last week in reaction to the Supreme Court legalizing same-sex marriage.

As written, HB 757 states, “…relating to marriage generally, so as to provide that religious officials shall not be required to perform marriage ceremonies in violation of their legal right to free exercise of religion.”

“The reason we need this bill in Georgia there are millions – listen to me – millions more Georgians who hold that marriage is between a man and a woman than that marriage is to be between same sex couples,” said Sen. Greg Kirk, (R-District 13).

A diverse group of religious leaders, who say they represent nearly 300 members of the clergy, came out strongly against the bill in the Senate and other similar legislation.

In a statement posted onwww.clergyunitedagainstdiscrimination.org, clergy said:

“We oppose this proposed legislation. First, it would put an individual’s religious beliefs ahead of the common good. Second, it could unleash a wave of costly lawsuits that will add burdens to both the courts and taxpayers alike. Third, our freedom of religion is already guaranteed and protected by the U.S. Constitution and Georgia’s State Constitution.

Fourth, a state RFRA could legalize discrimination by allowing businesses to refuse to serve customers based on religious objections. We believe that businesses that are open to the public should be open to everyone on the same terms. We strongly oppose giving for-profit corporations religious rights that could allow them to pick and choose which laws to follow and discriminate against employees based on any characteristic—from their religious practices to their sexual orientation. This principle harkens back to the civil rights movement and our nation’s core values of equality and justice.”

The statement was signed by 272 clergy members.

In a press conference on Wednesday, Sen. Nan Orrock said the bills threaten Georgia’s economy.

“I call them religious discrimination bills,” Orrock said. “We are threatening our economy when we pass his kind of legislation. We need to put the breaks on it.”

Rabbi Joshua Heller called the bills “an attempt to use religion to divide Georgians.”

The tourism industry predicts if the law passes they’d take a billion dollar hit.

“The college football national championship, the Final Four, the Super Bowl — events such as that are a telling us they’re really going to think twice about coming to Atlanta,” said Hayatt Regency Atlanta General Manager Peter McMahon.

Backers of the RFRA measures say they don’t discriminate.

“We have no desire to discriminate against anyone. The concern I have is that people of faith in Georgia are being discriminated against. And that needs to stop,” said Dr. Robert White of the Southern Baptist Convention during a rally inside the Capitol on Feb. 2.

The state House is now looking at the version the legislation that passed in the Senate, and observers expect the language in the bill might change.

By Katy Steinmetz

Advocacy groups are filling their cannons with economic and emotional appeals.

Two Republican governors are facing mounting pressure—from voters, businesses, professional organizations and even celebrities—to veto bills that critics consider anti-LGBT.

In Georgia, Gov. Nathan Deal is faced with the choice of signing or vetoing a bill that supporters say is about protecting religious freedom and critics say is really aimed at giving individuals and organizations license to treat LGBT residents differently, based on moral beliefs about sex and gender.

The heart of House Bill 757 contains a version of a “First Amendment Defense Act,” variations of which have been proposed by lawmakers from Washington to West Virginia, as well as on the federal level. In this version, lawmakers have laid out legal protections for any “person or faith-based organization” who acts in accordance with their belief that “marriage should only be between a man and a woman or that sexual relations are properly reserved to such a union.” Many who oppose it believe that such language not only puts gay people but also unmarried couples or single parents at risk of being discriminated against.

Just as organizations cancelled plans to host conventions and events in Indiana when the state passed a similar law last year, a Decatur-based telecom company became the first to jump ship after the Senate passed the bill on Feb. 19. “It’s time to relocate” the company said in a tweet, announcing plans to move their shop to Nevada.

The Metro Atlanta Chamber, the Georgia capital’s chamber of commerce, meanwhile sent a letter to every senator stating that they had signed a pledge written by Georgia Prospers, a coalition of more than 100 businesses that supports “open and inclusive for all” policies. Other members of the coalition range from Georgia-headquartered businesses like The Coca-Cola Company and Delta Airlines to sports franchises like the Atlanta Falcons. A business owner who works in the state’s burgeoning entertainment industry, catalyzed by big state investments, told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution that such a law “would really do irreparable harm to our brand as a state.”

Ten organizations that predictably oppose the bill, such as the Human Rights Campaign, a national LGBT rights advocacy group, sent a letter to Gov. Deal and other leaders warning of “dire economic impact” that the bill could have—doubling down on the dollars-and-cents argument has become one of their most effective tactics in fighting such measures. According to one estimate, though Indiana Gov. Mike Pence approved revisions the state’s religious freedom bill to make it clear that businesses couldn’t use it to turn away gay customers, passing the law still cost the state about $60 million in economic impact.

Those same groups are among those organizations opposing a “bathroom bill” in South Dakota that Gov. Dennis Daugaard must sign or veto before it automatically becomes law on March 1. But while the economic tactic is getting showcased down South, groups like the American Civil Liberties Union are using more emotional appeals in the Mount Rushmore state.

An ACLU petition to oppose the bill—which would require students at public schools to use the bathrooms and locker rooms that correspond to their “chromosomes and anatomy” at birth—had more than 36,000 signatures by Tuesday. It leads with a picture of a transgender boy from the state and an assertion that the measure would “legalize the harassment and bullying of transgender students.” Those were among more than 80,000 signatures that advocacy groups delivered to Gov. Daugaard on Tuesday, asking him to veto the bill, as transgender residents arrived at the capitol to participate in a “day of visibility.”

Transgender celebrities Caitlyn Jenner and Laverne Cox have also asked the governor to veto the bill, leveraging support among their thousands of social media followers. “We should be creating safer, nurturing environments for our children not more hostile ones,” Cox wrote in a post. That sentiment was echoed by the American Academy of Pediatrics, American School Counselor Association and several other groups who wrote an open letter about such bills to all the nation’s governors: “All of our nation’s children deserve equal protections and treatment in their classrooms.”

Other groups are opposing South Dakota’s House Bill 1008 on practical, medial grounds. The Pediatric Endocrine Society, an organization for doctors who often treat transgender youth, wrote a letter to Gov. Daugaard stating that chromosomes and anatomy are not absolute determinants of a person’s gender or sex and that “the weight of the scientific data indicates that gender identity—just like sexual orientation—is not a choice.”

While some groups, such as the Alliance for Defending Freedom and Concerned Women for America in South Dakota and the Georgia Baptist Mission Board have spoken out in support of the bills, the opposition is working feverishly to undermine their positions.

The governors have yet to indicate whether they would veto the bills. But both have indicated that they hear the opposition’s cries. Daugaard agreed to meet with two transgender South Dakotans on Tuesday, after having said in a press conference that he had never met an openly transgender person. Though the meeting was not open to media, he said afterward that the half hour discussion “helped me see things through their eyes a little better.” And Deal said at a press conference on Monday that the language of the religious freedom bill is “not finalized yet,” though he did not offer specifics as to what changes may be coming.

CLICK HERE to read the original article on WSB Radio.

By Sandra Parrish

A newly expanded religious liberty bill continues to stir controversy under the Gold Dome, this time from members of the faith community.

Close to a dozen members of clergy held signs reading “No Discrimination in Georgia” as they denounced the bill which is now a combination of the First Amendment Defense Act or FADA and the Pastor Protection Act or PPA.

“It’s an attempt to use religion to divide Georgians, whether people of faith or otherwise; and divided as Georgians, we lose,” says Rabbi Joshua Heller of Congregation B’nai Torah.

Rev. Timothy McDonald of First Iconium Baptist Church says black clergy members will certainly not support it.

“This bill discriminates and it sanctions discrimination; and therefore, we are opposed to it,” he says.

Last week the Senate added FADA, a measure that would allow faith-based organizations and individuals to refuse services based of their beliefs regarding marriage without threat of government penalty, onto PPA which passed the House unanimously. It protects pastors and churches from being compelled to perform same sex weddings.

The measure has been sent back to the House which would have to approve the changes. But with an outcry from the film industry this week threatening to pull out of Georgia because of it, Gov. Deal has said he’s working with leadership to come up with a compromise.

Heller says he could support the measure if FADA was stripped from the bill.

“The hope of the faith community is that there really is an opportunity to walk this back significantly,” he says.

But Virginia Galloway with the Faith and Freedom Coalition is hopeful the two measures will remain together.

“It’s a very balanced bill; it’s a common sense bill; it’s a live and let live bill,” she tells WSB’s Sandra Parrish.

Galloway says FADA doesn’t discriminate because it applies to any marriage, not just same-sex couples. She also says pastors want members of their congregations to be granted the same rights and protections as they would have under PPA.

“They feel like it’s only right to protect every Georgia citizen, not just themselves,” she says.

CLICK HERE to read the full article on AJC.

By Kyle Wingfield

Here are a few things I believe about the so-called First Amendment Defense Act, now roiling lawmakers under the Gold Dome:

I believe the GOP state senators who say they don’t intend the bill, known as FADA, to permit discrimination by citizens and businesses. I believe them when they say they just want to prevent discrimination against those citizens and businesses by government.

I believe FADA, as currently written, has been mischaracterized as being about religious liberty. Every defense it gives those who believe in the traditional definition of marriage also applies to those who believe in same-sex marriage. If you’re going to believe the worst about people, and think FADA would permit discrimination against gay couples, you must also believe it would prevent government from denying contracts, grants, etc. to gay couples. It cuts both ways.

But I also believe the bill’s actual language doesn’t strike the careful balance its advocates sought.

I hear FADA’s advocates say it protects people and “faith-based organizations” from participating in a marriage of which they disapprove. I’ve asked them to show me where the bill says that. Because the text I see is far broader than that.

On a couple of occasions, I’ve asked its advocates if the bill would undermine any non-discrimination laws regarding employment or housing. I have mostly received blank stares, as if they hadn’t considered it.

On the other hand, I sense its opponents don’t want to come right out and say they’d be willing to countenance the closing of a Catholic adoption agency, for instance, if its operators could be coerced by government to place children with families that don’t meet that church’s spiritual guidelines. They’d rather insist it’ll never come to that.

Which, as it happens, is the same response FADA’s supporters give when asked about businesses using the bill to justify discrimination.

So after witnessing a lot discussion and hand-wringing and accusations in and around the Capitol regarding this bill, I believe I’m still where I was a few weeks ago — when I wrote in this space that the middle of a fast-paced, election-year legislative session is no time to try to divine all the consequences, intended or unintended, of a novel bill like this.

There is a good argument for having legislators, not judges, sort out where one proverbial nose ends and another begins when it comes to LGBT rights and religious liberty. FADA’s authors tried to square that circle by offering a general, marriage-related protection for all. But in its generality, it would draw the line in a way we can’t predict, because this is untraveled ground.

It would be better to move forward with time-tested measures whose effects are more knowable, such as the federal public accommodations law and Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Then, take the coming months to study what, if anything, more should be done.

Because here’s one last thing I believe about this entire matter: If an imprudent bill becomes law, and then a mighty backlash damages the state and causes the Legislature to backtrack, there won’t be a second chance to ensure the kind of protections FADA’s supporters want.

By Tracye Hutchins

ATLANTA (CBS46) – Could the passage of the Religious Freedom Bill damage Atlanta’s reputation as the Hollywood of the South? Businesses are already moving out of the state and there’s concern of an entertainment industry boycott if the bill becomes law.

CBS46 talked with the president of an Atlanta-based entertainment firm who says passing the law will have a negative impact on the film industry is Georgia.

Movies are a big business in Georgia, attracting headliners like Tom Cruise in his upcoming film ‘Mena’.

Some fear productions could be in jeopardy because of the proposed Religious Freedom Bill. The bill gives religious leaders the right to refuse to perform same-sex marriages and gives tax-funded groups or people the right to deny services to gays and lesbians.

CBS46 talked with Brian Tolleson, the president of an Atlanta-based entertainment firm called Bark Bark. He says if the bill is approved, he and others would find it hard to do business in the state.

“It’s Georgia going out on a limb and making unprecedented steps toward segregation,” says Tolleson.

Supporters of the bill say it’s not about discrimination, but equal protection.

“This is a common-sense, modest protection for people of faith and it is something we should act on,” says state senator Joshua McKoon. “The people have demanded it.”

If Tolleson is correct, the hit to Georgia’s film industry would be substantial. Just look at the numbers.

$6 billion was generated in the last fiscal year alone.

“We have clients that are lesbian and gay and they’re not wanting to come to our state if there can be signs in restaurants that say they’re not welcome,” says Tolleson.

Tolleson says he’s not rallying the troops to boycott business just yet. He’s waiting to hear what Governor Nathan Deal will do with the bill. The state senate passed their version of the bill last week and it is currently making its way through the house.

By Jay Bookman – The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Last week, the Georgia state Senate voted 38-14 in favor of a bill that turns religion into a shield to excuse anti-gay bigotry, and that allows the use of state tax dollars to carry out such anti-gay bigotry.

And as usual, advocates deny its true intent. “Nothing in the bill will allow a public employee to neglect their responsibilities in service to the public,” state Sen. Greg Kirk wrote in the AJC Sunday. “Nothing in the bill permits discrimination.”

That claim is blatantly false, and on several counts. For example, it is false in its claim that the bill does not permit discrimination — permitting discrimination is its clear and obvious mission. Among other things, HB 757 would gut local laws in Atlanta and elsewhere that protect gay Georgians against discrimination. A landlord who wants to deny housing to a gay couple, an employer who wants to fire a gay worker, or an employer who wants to deny health insurance and other benefits to a legally gay couple would be free to do so under state law, as long as he or she cited religious belief as the reason.

The bill also creates a faith-based excuse to discriminate against gay people as a class, regardless of whether they are or wish to be legally married. It allows religious-based discrimination by those who believe “that marriage should only be between a man and a woman or that sexual relations are properly reserved to such a union (emphasis mine).” In other words, simply being gay is cause enough to be targeted for legalized bigotry.

The bill does include a provision barring government employees from acting upon their own anti-gay bias, as did Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis in Kentucky. But it nonetheless opens the door wide for discrimination from another tax-funded source.

The state of Georgia and local governments contract regularly with faith-based organizations to provide public services. That’s fine; those groups often do important work. But in such cases, the faith-based organizations are acting as agents of the state, performing state functions using state dollars. Under HB 757, those agencies will be free to deny those taxpayer-funded services, such as adoption, to gay Georgians.

Two more points:

1.) The bill is likely to have serious economic repercussions, as the example of Indiana has demonstrated. Companies do not want to relocate to or do business in states that establish themselves as havens for anti-gay bigotry. The film industry, which plans to open several major studios in the state, is particularly vulnerable. The fact that this legislation is hitting the headlines just as the SEC presidential primary looms, with the political attention of the nation switching to Georgia and the South, only compounds the danger.

2.) HB 757 would almost certainly be overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court. In Romer v. Evans, a 6-3 ruling from 20 years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned a Colorado law that created a special exemption allowing gay Americans to be targeted for discrimination. The court ruled that such laws are unconstitutional because they do not give all citizens equal protection.

Gov. Nathan Deal and House Speaker David Ralston have expressed misgivings about the bill, and ought to let it die the quiet death it deserves.

CLICK HERE to read the original article on the Georgia Voice.

A number of local and national LGBT groups have signed onto a letter to Gov. Nathan Deal and leadership in the state legislature calling on them not to pass an anti-gay hybrid “religious freedom” bill that has generated a massive backlash from the LGBT and business community.

The letter, sent to Deal, Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle, Senate President pro tem David Shafer and House Speaker David Ralston on Tuesday, was signed by Georgia Equality, Georgia Unites Against Discrimination, Human Rights Campaign, Lambda Legal, Equality Federation, American Unity Fund, Freedom For All Americans, National Center for Lesbian Rights, National Center for Transgender Equality and National LGBTQ Task Force.

House Bill 757 is currently called the “Pastor Protection Act” but it took on a completely different look after the anti-gay language of state Sen. Greg Kirk’s (R-Americus) First Amendment Defense Act was inserted into it, opening up the door to discrimination against a number of groups.

As drafted, the bill invites individuals, faith-based organizations and even for-profit entities to deny services to anyone who they feel conflicts with their view of marriage. The scope of this extraordinary bill means legally married same-sex couples and their families, single mothers and their children, victims of domestic violence, and so many other hardworking Georgians could be denied critical – sometimes life-saving – services.

The groups also note that Kirk conceded on the Senate floor during last Friday’s debate that the Ku Klux Klan would be covered under the bill since they could be a considered a faith-based group. The bulk of the letter however is devoted to the business community’s reaction to the bill and warnings about what could happen if it passes.

As leaders in Georgia, you can advance this discriminatory bill – and in the process, you will damage your state’s economy and tarnish your brand to an extent that will undoubtedly bring Georgia’s recent business growth to a screeching halt. You will send a clear message to the rest of the nation that not all people are welcomed or treated equally in Georgia. Or, you could do the right thing. You could reject this divisive and discriminatory bill, showing real leadership and taking a bold step that aligns with the values of Georgia voters and business owners. We hope you make the right decision at this important juncture.”

It’s just the latest in a long line of negative reactions to the bill. Brian Tolleson, the openly gay CEO of Atlanta entertainment firm BARK BARK who had a hand in the creation of the LGBT Institute at the National Center for Civil and Human Rights, wrote an editorial in the Saporta Report. He noted that he honors anyone’s right to disagree with him, “But I don’t know how I will explain to my niece and nephews why I’m being denied service in our favorite restaurant, or turned away from a local store or how I tell one of our New York clients why a certain Atlanta hotel doesn’t welcome them. That’s the difference here.”

Plus there’s Georgia Prospers, the coalition of over 300 companies who have signed on against the legislation.

“We are standing up for the principles of inclusion and fair treatment for every Georgia citizen and every visitor to Georgia,” Joe Folz, vice president of Porsche Cars North America said Monday. “Legislation that promotes – or even appears to allow – discrimination against certain classes of people hurts Georgia’s hard-earned reputation.”

And queer Savannah writer Alexander Cheves penned an editorial in The Advocate Tuesday morning talking about the discriminatory nature of the bill and how he moved away from, then recently returned to Georgia.

But I can always leave again. I would like to kindly remind Georgia lawmakers that the LGBT citizens of this state who will be legally discriminated against with the passage of this bill are business owners and industry leaders. If Indiana is any precedent, Georgia industry will suffer and businesses will leave. We have stuck it out here and given this state the opportunity to progress alongside the rest of the United States, and now you are punishing us for it. You are showing your true colors to the country, Georgia, and they are ugly.

Meanwhile, state Rep. Wendell Willard (R-Sandy Springs) appeared on GPB’s “Lawmakers” Monday night and laid out what happens from here with HB 757 now that the amended version is back in the House. There’s a number of options, but Willard said he assumes the House will disagree with the Senate’s changes, which would send the bill back to the Senate, likely leading to the creation of a conference committee made up of three Senators and three House members who will then take up the bill.

The AJC’s Jim Galloway, also appearing on the program, said he assumed the House would delay any consideration of HB 757 until after March 1’s presidential primary to “let it calm down a bit.”

“Good guess,” said Willard, chairman of the influential House Judiciary Committee.

And when asked about state Sen. Josh McKoon’s (R-Columbus) SB 129 (memba that one?), Willard said that if they take it up at all it won’t be until after Crossover Day on Feb. 29.

“It was amended in committee, it is now a closed issue as far as that amendment, it can’t be taken off,” he said. “So at this point, if the bill does go forward, it goes forward with the anti-discrimination amendment.”