April 30, 2015 Floor Statements<p>Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.J. Res. 43.</p><p> This resolution would express Congress' disapproval of the District of Columbia's legislation that would protect employees from discrimination based on their reproductive health decisions.</p><p> Just last month, the States of Indiana and Arkansas attempted to pass so-called ``religious freedom'' bills that are really an attempt to permit discrimination.</p><p> Tonight, we are debating a resolution that would allow employers to fire or refuse to hire workers because of their private reproductive medical decisions, notwithstanding the protection provided to the employees by the District of Columbia.</p><p> Madam Speaker, in 1993, when Congress passed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, better known as RFRA, it did so with the intent to expand protections for religious exercise; but since then, we have seen attempts by Congress and some States to use so-called ``religious liberty'' or ``religious freedom'' measures to undermine otherwise valid protections against discrimination provided in the Civil Rights Act.</p><p> This resolution would allow claims of a ``sincerely held religious belief'' to justify otherwise illegal discrimination. The reasoning in this resolution would also undermine all civil rights laws because anyone could claim a sincerely held religious belief to justify discrimination based on anything--race, religion, or any other protected class.</p><p> The District of Columbia got it right. This law protects Washington, D.C. <span>citizens from invidious discrimination based on reproductive health decisions. We should not overrule this legislation.</span></p> Issues:Civil Rights