House Proceeding 11-07-07 on Nov 7th, 2007 :: 1:04:09 to 1:11:21
Total video length: 1 hours 27 minutes Stream Tools: Stream Overview | Edit Time

Note: MetaVid video transcripts may contain inaccuracies, help us build a more perfect archive

Views:76 Duration: 0:07:12 Discussion

Previous speech:

Next speech:

1:04:01 to 1:04:11( Edit History Discussion )

Mark E. Souder: values of fairness, equality and inclusion and will continue to fight for a proper enda bill that includes all the people who need its help. thank you and i yield back the balance of my

1:04:09 to 1:11:21( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Mark E. Souder

1:04:11 to 1:04:23( Edit History Discussion )

Mark E. Souder: time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington. >> thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i am pleased to yield five minutes to a classmate of mine, the gentlelady from indiana,

1:04:23 to 1:04:36( Edit History Discussion )

Mark E. Souder: mr. slaughter. >> i thank my gished -- distinguished friend from washington . rather than comment on the bill here i'm going to focus on the rule. i'll talk later on the bill myself. we went

1:04:36 to 1:04:49( Edit History Discussion )

Mark E. Souder: through this debate in committee and i find it reprehensible that the process we've been following increasingly in this house to sh off debate, that ironically in a bill that supposedly is

1:04:49 to 1:05:01( Edit History Discussion )

Mark E. Souder: expanding rights, we have another narrowly-drawn rule that deprived me of offering several amendments i offered in committee, has a gerrymandered rule for another amendment that is unique in

1:05:01 to 1:05:28( Edit History Discussion )

Mark E. Souder: history, has several others put in the rules committee that are very unclear. and let me go through a number of these different amendments. i offered an amendment in committee that was unanimously

1:05:28 to 1:05:40( Edit History Discussion )

Mark E. Souder: opposed by the democrats in committee to eliminate the word perceived you going to define perceived? as anybody who has any friends who have worked with and been appointed to people who

1:05:40 to 1:05:51( Edit History Discussion )

Mark E. Souder: have a homosexual lifestyle, they're all types. this is an open-ended. there's no list here of what's perceived to be homosexual. how is an employer suppose to figure out whether it's perceived? does

1:05:51 to 1:06:02( Edit History Discussion )

Mark E. Souder: that mean if he's a christian and make statement someone can file suit because they perceived they were discriminated? this is a legal nightmare. and a precedent that is absolutely terrible

1:06:02 to 1:06:15( Edit History Discussion )

Mark E. Souder: and we can't even vote. we can't even have a vote to strike the word perceived and have a full debate on the word perceived. what kind of an open process is that in the house? i also had an

1:06:15 to 1:06:30( Edit History Discussion )

Mark E. Souder: amendment that would provide some protection for christians who have strong views in the workplace and will insert into the record at this point a number of cases. an at&t employee was fired

1:06:30 to 1:06:43( Edit History Discussion )

Mark E. Souder: because they wouldn't sign a statement that contradicted his religious beliefs on accepting homosexual behavior. a man was fired for at red cross for not participating in gay and lesbian

1:06:43 to 1:06:56( Edit History Discussion )

Mark E. Souder: pride month. others have been fired for other reasons. the question is, not whether you can harass someone in the workplace. that's already illegal. if you mock somebody that's illegal. if you commit

1:06:56 to 1:07:05( Edit History Discussion )

Mark E. Souder: a hate crime, that's already illegal. the question is, can you as a christian express your views and not be persecuted? that, yes, in a sense it's at least a plurality of americans profess

1:07:05 to 1:07:14( Edit History Discussion )

Mark E. Souder: christianity. a smaller percent, conservative christianity, but we are moving so far as to restrict the rights in the workplace of christians even ability to hold or saying in about their

1:07:14 to 1:07:24( Edit History Discussion )

Mark E. Souder: views. people can't even have bible studies in some places. it's been ruled because that would be offensive to homosexuals in the workplace based on this law in some cities and have been

1:07:24 to 1:07:36( Edit History Discussion )

Mark E. Souder: upheld in the court. now, moving past both amendments that were unanimously defeated in committee and then we weren't allowed to debate as a whole house, we have an amendment that was added

1:07:36 to 1:07:47( Edit History Discussion )

Mark E. Souder: in response to another amendment from pete hoekstra in committee that would have attempted -- exempted cpthristian college. it was defeated and then suddenly in the rules committee we have

1:07:47 to 1:07:59( Edit History Discussion )

Mark E. Souder: it added with the religious exception. the problem with the religious exception and here i'd like to put into the record a number of cases that show the problem with this. it local university

1:07:59 to 1:08:12( Edit History Discussion )

Mark E. Souder: was deprived their religious exception because even though it was founded by jess which thes, it requires the founder to be it and they were denied because they didn't meet one of those criteria.

1:08:12 to 1:08:24( Edit History Discussion )

Mark E. Souder: a quaker school was denied a religious exception because it was -- had to have multiple proof that everybody there was quaker and was following every rule. a private religious school was

1:08:24 to 1:08:39( Edit History Discussion )

Mark E. Souder: denied for similar-type things. a business that wanted to run as a religious world view was clearly denied the religious exception. an or if a nadge was denied the ability because they had gone

1:08:39 to 1:08:52( Edit History Discussion )

Mark E. Souder: secular and wanted to become methodist church again and they were denied because they followed -- denied because they were no longer purelyur methodist. this is in addition to the 2,500 christian

1:08:52 to 1:09:03( Edit History Discussion )

Mark E. Souder: book stores in america, only 14% are run by a church. 86% are either for profit or not religious organizations. under this bill, they will be forced to hire homosexuals regardless of the personal

1:09:03 to 1:09:13( Edit History Discussion )

Mark E. Souder: views of christian booktores. this is going to be isto happen in various independent organizations that are quasi- part of the church. sometimes the church will operate a for profitent think

1:09:13 to 1:09:29( Edit History Discussion )

Mark E. Souder: a runs as a for profit entity that would not be a religioust purpose but the proceeds go to the church. therefore they will implement their church beliefs in it. fs none that h tave is exempted underte

1:09:29 to 1:09:39( Edit History Discussion )

Mark E. Souder: this. we didn't get a chance to debate this amendment. it just came in in the rule. i'd ask two additional minuintes. mr. hastings: i give the gentleman two additional minutes. mr. souder: then

1:09:39 to 1:09:48( Edit History Discussion )

Mark E. Souder: on marriage, somehow in response to debate in committee that they're saying that this won't affect the defensive marriage act. this is another ought amdment because that's directly contrary ir to

1:09:48 to 1:10:02( Edit History Discussion )

Mark E. Souder: the fundamental part of the bill. my amendment tries to address part of this but quite frankly it's a legal quagmire. then we come to amendments that dm are allowed.e we've had some debate

1:10:02 to 1:10:12( Edit History Discussion )

Mark E. Souder: onon this gender equity for transgender and transvestites. now the challenge here is not whether you favor or against it. i heard my friend from new york say he was going to voter to if -- for

1:10:12 to 1:10:30( Edit History Discussion )

Mark E. Souder: it. he can't vote for it. we're not allowed to vote for it. we have been banned -- banned from having the debate. what happened to the day ypeou have a debate, you win or lose, to come in unprecedented,

1:10:30 to 1:10:41( Edit History Discussion )

Mark E. Souder: i've never heard a rule coming in prohibiting in the rule a vote. this is a in your face tactic as part of this bill to not let us debate the religious underpinnings and religious stuff,

1:10:41 to 1:11:21( Edit History Discussion )

Mark E. Souder: not debat perceive, not debate protections for people who are individual, not have a vote on transgender and it's five minutes on each side to even debate it -- it. this is an abominal rule.