Editorial Of The Day

In an editorial published yesterday, the New York Times slammed the "terribly broad" religious exemption in ENDA.

The exemption would extend beyond churches and other houses of worship to any religiously affiliated institution, like hospitals and universities, and would allow those institutions to discriminate against people in jobs with no religious function, like billing clerks, cafeteria workers and medical personnel. The exemption — which was inserted to appease some opponents who say the act threatens religious freedom — is a departure from the approach of earlier civil rights laws. And though the law would protect millions of workers from bias, the exemption would give a stamp of legitimacy to the very sort of discrimination the act is meant to end. Any attempt to further enlarge the exemption should be rejected.

The editorial goes on to denounce Boehner for refusing to allow ENDA to be heard.

A spokesman for Mr. Boehner said the speaker believes that ensuring workplace fairness for gay, lesbian, transgender and bisexual Americans would “increase frivolous litigation and cost American jobs.” Those concerns are not borne out by the experience in states that have had such protections for years. And that kind of excuse, of course, was used decades ago to try to block legislation to outlaw discrimination on the basis of race, gender, age, national origin and disabilities.