John Burris: Doling Out Credit In The RFRA Debate

A debate engulfed our state last week. It’s faded now, as quickly as it came. We argued over an acronym that most of us could not have accurately spelled after hearing it.

Gov. Hutchinson accurately summed up the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) in his nationally televised press conference. He said the bill would not have created an outcry in ordinary times, but “these are not ordinary times.”

Following that press conference, the governor and legislative leaders found common ground. An amended RFRA was passed, and the House of Representatives recalled the original HB 1228 from the governor’s desk.

There was plenty of irony, at least to me. The people involved in the policy, as well as the politics it has created, are all worth noting.

Democrats deserve credit for playing their minority role well. They presented reasonable amendments, and then took “yes” for an answer. Sometimes that’s hard to do.

State Rep. Bob Ballinger, the original sponsor of the RFRA, has never been one for compromise. I say that knowing that he’ll take it as a compliment. I won’t say if that’s how I mean it.

He insisted he only wanted to pass a state RFRA similar to the federal RFRA signed into law by President Clinton. In the end, that’s exactly what he did. So I guess in a way he didn’t compromise at all.

Under intense scrutiny, he handled himself tremendously well. When the governor announced that he would not sign HB 1228, I can only speculate that Bob’s initial reaction was not as graceful as the speech he gave on the House floor a day later. There – when it mattered most – he spoke sincerely and effectively. I believe that he believed what he was saying. I think others did too.

Rep. Hammer and Rep. Shepherd also deserve mention. Both spoke forcefully and directly to the matter at hand. It takes wisdom to know when a good retreat is better than a bad stand. It takes courage to say it.

It takes no courage to give an overly righteous and rhetorical speech on an issue in which others engaged, after the solution has already been agreed upon.

Recalling HB 1228 was the right decision to end the debate, but still pass a bill.

The politics of this policy will take some time to sort out. I suspect that while Arkansas has moved past this latest skirmish in the culture war, we’ll look back and see it as a turning point, but not in the way that those supporting a RFRA would have hoped.

Many, including myself, defended HB 1228. I don’t believe it was the discriminatory gut-punch that many thought it was. Religious freedom has never been legally interpreted to allow a restaurant owner to deny a cup of coffee to a gay man. There’s no sincerely held religious belief to justify that. It’s as silly as a “Church of No Taxes.”

The outcry was unfair, but it spotlighted an issue that most Americans believe is wrong. That is, that in most places, denial of services based on sexual orientation is allowed, as a result of not being designated as a protected class under the Civil Rights law.

It has little to do with a RFRA, but casual observers don’t distinguish. It’s the easiest thing to hear in a political debate. The larger debate of possible discrimination now consumes the small number of times a future law, like gay marriage, could conflict with a religious objection to delivering a service, like baking a wedding cake.

Insisting that the two things are not necessarily connected is the intellectually honest position. But you can be right and still be wrong.

If you’re a social conservative, passing a state RFRA is a step forward. Highlighting the cause to make sexual orientation a protected class is about ten steps back. That debate is now coming, and in a far more intense way than before. It will be hard to oppose.

But the LGBTQ community could eventually overplay their hand as well. Most folks understand the LGB part. The T and the Q get more complicated, especially when you’re talking bathrooms at the soccer field or mall. That’s just the reality, not bigotry.

All of that will be for the future.

The past week in Arkansas was not the embarrassment that high-minded liberals would like to proclaim it to be. We did just fine. An executive worked with another branch and all political parties. A middle ground emerged.

Those who helped find – or just accepted – that ground, deserve praise.