Pat Toomey's (R-PA) 'yes' vote on yesterday's ENDA cloture vote was a bit of a happy surprise for me and perhaps other who closely follow the legislation. Toomey took to his Facebook last night to explain his vote:
"I have long believed that more legal protections are appropriate to prevent employment discrimination based on sexual orientation. That is why I supported a provision in the Allentown charter barring the city government from discriminating against persons on the basis of their sexual orientation some 17 years ago, in 1996. More recently, it’s also why I supported allowing gay, lesbian, and bisexual persons to serve openly in the military.
"So I believe the Employment Non-Discrimination Act contains very important provisions. However, I also believe it should be improved, especially as it pertains to religious organizations. We must strive to reach the appropriate balance between protecting workers and protecting religious freedom. I voted to move forward with debate on ENDA with the hope that the Senate will take up amendments – including one that I plan to offer – to address this important aspect of the proposed law."
"I have long believed that more legal protections are appropriate to prevent employment discrimination based on sexual orientation. That is why I supported a provision in the Allentown charter barring the city government from discriminating against persons on the basis of their sexual orientation some 17 years ago, in 1996. More recently, it’s also why I supported allowing gay, lesbian, and bisexual persons to serve openly in the military.
"So I believe the Employment Non-Discrimination Act contains very important provisions. However, I also believe it should be improved, especially as it pertains to religious organizations. We must strive to reach the appropriate balance between protecting workers and protecting religious freedom. I voted to move forward with debate on ENDA with the hope that the Senate will take up amendments – including one that I plan to offer – to address this important aspect of the proposed law."
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.