2 more Common Ground bills defeated

A bill to prohibit discrimination in housing and employment on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity was defeated on an 8-5 vote by the House Business and Labor Committee Tuesday.

HB267, sponsored by Rep. Christine Johnson, D-Salt Lake, is one of a series of high-profile gay and lesbian rights bills known as the Common Ground Initiative introduced during this year's legislative session.

The meeting to discuss the bill was packed with a standing-room-only crowd, and dozens of people were forced to wait in the hallway. Several witnesses spoke to the committee on each side of the issue.

Anticipating a likely argument against her proposal, Johnson assured committee members at the outset that the bill "does not promote or legitimize gay marriage, marriage equality, civil unions, partnerships, domestic partnerships, nothing like that."

She said it did address a problem that was adversely affecting people's lives every day.

"This kind of discrimination is happening in the state of Utah," Johnson said. "People are losing their jobs because they do little things like bring their partner to the Christmas party."

Utah County resident Bryan Horn, who is gay, told the committee he was fired from his job at a credit union for asking if his partner could get health benefits. He said he has not been able to find employment since, is near bankruptcy and on several medications for anxiety and depression.

Choking back tears, Horn said, "You will never know the pain and the heartache of what I've dealt with."

Johnson told committee members that 20 other states and more than 100 cities and municipalities had already taken similar action, including Salt Lake City.

She cited a January poll in which 62 percent of respondents said they supported making it illegal to fire employees and 56 percent supported making it illegal to deny housing to someone simply because they are gay.

"Utahns don't want to be hateful or hurtful," Johnson said.

Eagle Forum President Gayle Ruzicka told the committee she had seen attempts similar to this one for the past 20 years and that they were all about legally protecting an individual's "sexual choice."

"Why would we put someone's sexual choice into the law?" Ruzicka asked. "This is not the right thing to do and this is not the right time to do such a thing."