HB620

I oppose this bill because I think it allows people to use their religion to discriminate against other people. It can allow them to deny employees insurance coverage for birth control and HIV prevention medication, allow employment discrimination by for-profit businesses and by taxpayer-funded organizations that take federal money to provide social services,

RFRA has been pointed to as justification for shabby forms of discrimination.

Religion must be kept separate from the state. The state provides for freedom to practice religion to all groups. The state must lift up equality for all. You cannot punish or deny services to a group because you disagree with their way of life or religion. As an employer or administrator you may personally disagree with someone's life choices or ways of being, but you cannot punish them because you think/feel/worship differently. Our constitution (and agreed upon "best practices") do not allow for that.

This bill provides an excuse for allowing discrimination based on religion. It appears to do the opposite, but it would make legal the religious discrimination by businesses and other entities. Please oppose this law -- we do not need this type of discrimination in New Hampshire.

We already have freedom to practice or not practice religion, and we have separation of church and state. But we don't have freedom to impose our religious beliefs on others control their actions. Therefore this bill is unnecessary and it would be a mistake to pass it,

This bill seems too much like far right conspiracy to me. People already have the freedom of religion determined by the constitution. We don't need more bills to say the same thing. And I fear how people might use this to justify cruelty to others in our communities.

I am a long standing member of Americans United for Separation of Church & State and RFRA is a red flag. In 1990 when RFRA was first proposed, the coalition backing it wanted to protect individual religious expression. They sought to help the Native Americans struggling to engage in traditional practices. They wanted to assist Jews and Muslims seeking the right to wear religious attire at work. They wanted to ensure that people who are incarcerated had access to the meals their faiths mandated. In recent years, RFRA has been used to deny employees insurance coverage for birth control and HIV prevention medication, allow employment discrimination by for-profit businesses and by taxpayer-funded organizations that take federal money to provide social services, and let taxpayer-funded foster care agencies turn away potential parents because they are the “wrong” religion or LGBTQ. Put simply, RFRA has been pointed to as justification for shabby forms of discrimination.

I strongly oppose any attempt to give religious organizations any more "protection rights" than they already have. The only religious persecution in this country is against people who are not Christian. Our country was founded on religious freedom - freedom to worship whatever deity you believe in, or not to believe in any deity at all. Religious organizations, especially televangelists who bring in millions of dollars every year, already have the right to make all that money and not pay taxes like the rest of us do. That is more than enough rights.

Dear Representatives, I urge you to OPPOSE this bill. We already have freedom of religion protected in the United States constitution. This bill is unnecessary and fear mongering. Representatives in their leadership roles should not be introducing legislation that makes their constituents believe their religion is under attack. It isn't, this is already protected, and we do not need unique laws around this. Thank you for your time.

The freedom of religion rights granted in the US Constitution are sufficient. Freedom of religion is not under attack in NH and if it was the First Amendment provides the necessary protections and remedies.

Religious beliefs are not under attack in this country or state. This bill is unnecessary and unnecessarily, tho deliberately I suspect, muddies the judicial waters.

No. You already have religious freedoms provided to you. This is a sneak attack to get YOUR religion a free pass. Nope. Shut it down.

Position recorded without written comment.

Position recorded without written comment.

Position recorded without written comment.

Position recorded without written comment.

Position recorded without written comment.

Position recorded without written comment.

Position recorded without written comment.