Whitehouse

A Path to Unity, Mr. President: The Fairness for All Act

Many Americans rightfully crave unity right now. The Fairness for All Act, not the Equality Act, is a better path to get there on one of the most sensitive and challenging questions of our time.

President Biden’s calls for unity have become the opening theme of his presidency. No doubt, the country is thirsty for unity, as misinformation, violence, and fear have riven the nation. Set with the task of restoring normality to our republic, President Biden has laid out an extensive policy plan and is reportedly creating space for cooperation with conservatives on his objectives. One of the many fronts on which President Biden seeks to act is the culture war being waged between the LGBT+ and religious communities. 

On the campaign trail, President Biden promised to “make enactment of the Equality Act a top legislative priority during [his] first 100 days.” Since then, President Biden has backed down from this promise, fearing there are not enough votes in the evenly divided Senate. This should be a sign for President Biden: protecting LGBT+ rights while removing protections for religious liberty, as the Equality Act does, is not a move that will unify—within Congress or without. 

The Equality Act would admirably grant sexual orientation and gender identity protected class status under federal law, ensuring that LGBT+ individuals do not face unjustified barriers in employment, housing, and public accommodations. But it includes no accommodations for the faith community and rescinds a portion of decades-old legislation that protects religious minorities. This is a one-sided proposal for a two-sided problem.

Far better would be for President Biden to endorse the Fairness for All Act. As the result of years of discussion, bridge building, and legal finesse, Fairness for All bars all the same sorts of LGBT+ discrimination as the Equality Act while also diffusing the most pressing clashes with religious liberty in various venues: employment, housing, public accommodations, education, medical services, tax exemption, public financing, and foster care and adoption placement services (see here for a deep dive into the mechanics of each solve and here for some helpful infographics). In short, Fairness for All would be a pluralism-expanding effort, increasing the rights of LGBT+ Americans and the rights of their neighbors of faith. 

Endorsing the Fairness for All Act would not only permit President Biden to maintain his title as the nation’s “most pro-equality president in history” passing the most comprehensive LGBT+ rights bill ever, but it would also make good on his promise to be a “president for all Americans.” And with pieces for both the LGBT+ and religious communities, Fairness for All could break the 50/50 wall in the Senate. 

Most importantly, Fairness for All would dispel fear. The fear that a lesbian couple will be turned down for an apartment; the fear that a Christian will be run out of their profession; the fear that a transgender woman will be refused service at the grocery store; the fear that religious universities will cease to exist; the fear that we cannot live openly as we are. It will show Americans that we are not the same, that we are diverse, and that this is good.

Without the fear and anger that motivate the most contentious factions of this culture war, neighborly kindness returns. We have already seen this occur. In Utah—Fairness for All’s testing ground—the results are astounding. In 2015, Utah passed protections for the LGBT+ community in employment and housing, while also adding a handful of religious liberty protections to its state code. Since then, with tensions diffused, the citizenry’s support for LGBT+ nondiscrimination laws has shot up, making Utah the second-most supportive state in the country, ahead of states like California, Washington, and New York. And Utah’s laws have created real-life change. One transgender woman wrote last year that Utah’s laws saved her life, granting her “blessings more beautiful than [she] could ever have imagined.”

Certainly, there will be opposition to the Fairness for All Act, as there was to Utah’s laws. When introduced in the House in 2019, the Fairness for All Act faced criticism from the extremes in both liberal and conservative camps. But if the nation has learned from recent events, it is that extremists cannot be our guiding forces. Strong policy groups on both sides of this culture war are fed by fear, anger, and high-profile clashes. Just reading the headlines of these organizations’ press releases is enough to see they don’t seek compromise, collaboration, or healing. Rather, they use the language of war to fuel lawsuit after lawsuit—a demonstrably terrible way to seek unity of any kind. 

President Biden can show that rights need not be wrestled out of others’ hands. This is not a zero-sum game. Passing the Fairness for All Act would sidestep hate, expand rights to all Americans, and fast-track equity through legislative means. It would preempt years of legal battles needed to determine whether basic nondiscrimination protections should be extended in housing and public accommodations, even after the Supreme Court extended such to the workplace last summer. And by signaling the Fairness for All Act as the way forward, President Biden can dispel the myth that America is not big enough for all of us.

About the author

Tanner Bean

Tanner Bean is an attorney at Fabian VanCott. He previously had a clerkship at the Idaho Court of Appeals. His experience focuses on the intersecting areas of religious and LGBT+ discrimination. He has a JD from J. Reuben Clark Law School.
On Key

You Might Also Like

Sex Abuse on CES Campuses

How are church-sponsored schools doing on sexual assault? Jacob Mayberry joins me to look at the data, ask what the limitations of the data are, and what lessons we can learn.

Barry Keoghan shines in weak star vehicle

“Bring Them Down” is a careful small-town drama about Irish sheep farmers. The film stars Christopher Abbott as Michael after his acclaimed performance as the villain in “Poor Things,” and titular role in “Wolf Man.”  Barry Keoghan plays opposite as Jack, the son of neighboring farmers. Keoghan also made his mark in a Yorgos Lanthimos film, “Killing of a Sacred Deer.” He is as up-and-coming as an actor can be, set to star in the highly anticipated Beatles biopic.  The film is mostly a showpiece for the two talented leads to luxuriate in the acting moments that the revenge plot affords them. Abbott builds a character suspended in tension between his guilt over his mother’s passing, his deference to his strong-willed father, his honor, and his self-sufficiency. Keoghan has a slightly more complicated job, as he needs to find the motivation to start the feud inside a character that is juvenile and slight. As a showcase, the film is a success. Not many people will see it, but it will certainly help burnish the reputations of Abbot and Keoghan as formidable actors. And the plot is good enough to serve that purpose. Caroline, Michael’s ex-girlfriend, and Jack’s mother, has decided to leave Jack’s father because of their financial problem. A bridge is out, and Michael’s father is reluctant to let Jack’s family cross his property. So Jack hatches a plan to steal two prized rams from Michael’s family. When Jack’s dad catches him, he makes him kill the ram and get rid of it. The woman they sell it to offers them good money for sheep legs, offering what Jack sees as a solution to his family’s problems. But rather than tell the story in a forthright way, the edit tells the story twice, first from Michael’s point of view, and then from Jack’s. So during the first half of the film things move so fast and with so little context, you struggle to know what’s going on. Then when it restarts, the audience doesn’t know the device yet, and doesn’t figure it out for about twenty minutes when plot points begin to repeat themselves.  Once we figure it out, the idea isn’t terrible. When we were strictly in Michael’s perspective the feud seems meaningless and is cast in strictly moralistic terms. When we revisit it through Jack’s perspective, we can begin to appreciate the complicated factors that led to Jack’s decision.  But the edit doesn’t tell the story clearly enough. So the main emotion I felt while watching the film was confusion. I’m certain that the film would improve on a rewatch, but the ultimate story that a feud develops because Jack steals Michael’s sheep to keep his parents together doesn’t have enough heft to draw me back. It’s a pastoral film, and it does a good job of capturing the place. Colm Meaney, who plays Michael’s father, Ray, does a particularly notable job speaking Irish at length. First-time director Chris Andrews has some interesting ideas. He is clearly capable of letting talented actors do what they do best, a skill that will serve him well in his directing career. The film is also shot in a subdued way that highlights the natural light and natural beauty of the setting, but without ever drawing attention to itself.  The use of fire in the film’s back half is particularly notable.  “Bring Them Down” is R-rated for its violence and language. The domestic violence where Jack’s mother beats Jack’s father is particularly harrowing. But I found the film’s moral message to be largely in the right place. Jack’s theft leads to nothing but suffering. And revenge is shown as almost entirely futile. The film even offers a glimpse at honest redemption. Still, I wouldn’t watch this with my kids, at least until they were adults.  Two and a half out of five stars. “Bring Them Down” releases in theaters nationwide February 7, 2025.

Gary Wilson Portrait | There’s One More Atheist in Heaven | Public Square Magazine | Gary Wilson Author | Gary Wilson Death | Gary Wilson Cause of Death

There’s One More Atheist in Heaven

Gary Wilson provided research clarity to the ill effects of pornography on the brain, for this he was harassed and hounded in life. His death gives us an opportunity to praise his work.

Subscribe To Our Weekly Newsletter

Stay up to date on the intersection of faith in the public square.

You have Successfully Subscribed!