Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, is urging his 12 Republican colleagues who voted to advance the Democrats' Respect for Marriage Act to add an amendment he sponsored that would protect the freedoms of those opposed to same-sex marriage.
Lee wrote in a letter backed by 20 other Republican senators that the bill opens the door for litigation against individuals and institutions that oppose same-sex marriage.
"Instead of subjecting churches, religious nonprofits, and persons of conscience to undue scrutiny or punishment by the federal government because of their views on marriage, we should make explicitly clear that this legislation does not constitute a national policy endorsing a particular view of marriage that threatens the tax-exempt status of faith-based nonprofits," Lee wrote. "No American should face legal harassment or retaliation from the federal government for holding sincerely held religious beliefs or moral convictions."
Lee wrote that his amendment "would ensure that federal bureaucrats do not take discriminatory actions against individuals, organizations, nonprofits, and other entities based on their sincerely held religious beliefs or moral convictions about marriage by prohibiting the denial or revocation of tax-exempt status, licenses, contracts, benefits, etc.
"It would affirm that individuals still have the right to act according to their faith and deepest convictions even outside of their church or home."
The Respect for Marriage Act passed a Senate test vote 62-37 on Wednesday, ensuring it had enough votes to clear a filibuster. It would require states to recognize any and all marriages — regardless of "sex, race, ethnicity, or national origin" — contracted in other states.
Many Republicans said the bill is not needed because of the Supreme Court's 2015 ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges, which compelled states to recognize and perform same-sex marriages.
Democrats were spurred into action after the Supreme Court ruled in June that there is no constitutional right to abortion. In his concurring majority opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the court should reconsider all "substantive due process precedents," including Obergefell "because any substantive due process decision is 'demonstrably erroneous,' … we have a duty to 'correct the error' established in those precedents."
© 2023 Newsmax. All rights reserved.