Politics
Religious exemption inspires heated debate at ENDA panel
Wolfson challenges current language in LGBT anti-discrimation bill
Freedom to Marry’s Evan Wolfson (left) and Freedom to Work’s Tico Almeida had heated exchange on ENDA’s religious exemption (Blade file photos by Michael Key).
NEW YORK — The appropriate scope of the religious exemption in the Employment Non-Discrimination Act continues to stir debate as a prominent marriage equality advocate on Thursday made a surprise endorsement of narrowing the broad provision in the bill.
Evan Wolfson, president of Freedom to Marry, said he shares the “grave concerns” expressed by the American Civil Liberties Union over the religious exemption — which he said would “carve coverage by certain kinds of entities for LGBT people” — during a panel as part of Freedom to Work’s premier “Situation Room” in New York City.
“I do have grave concerns about the specific language in the specific bill,” Wolfson said. “That’s one of the points of difference I have with Freedom to Work on this current bill.”
Currently, ENDA has a religious exemption that provides leeway for religious organizations, like churches or religious schools, to discriminate against LGBT employees. That same leeway isn’t found under Title VII, which prohibits religious organizations from discriminating on the basis of race, gender or national origin.
Wolfson and Tico Almeida, president of Freedom to Work and proponent of the religious exemption, were the lone speakers on the second panel of the day. Wolfson’s main purpose on the panel was to talk about the lessons the campaign to pass ENDA can learn from the marriage equality fight.
Almeida initially responded by saying the religious exemption has value in allaying concerns from Republican lawmakers who are undecided on ENDA.
“I would say that in a bunch of Republican meetings we spend a majority of the time talking about the religious exemption and exactly how it will apply, what the case law is,” Almeida said.
Almeida co-wrote the current version of the religious exemption when working as a staffer for Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.). It was passed as an amendment on the U.S. House floor in 2007 to a gay-only version of ENDA by a vote of 402-25.
But Almeida qualified his support for the religious exemption by saying he believes religious organizations shouldn’t be able to receive federal funds if they discriminate against LGBT people. But, Almeida continued, the mechanism to prohibit this discrimination isn’t ENDA; rather, it should be a workplace non-discrimination executive order signed by President Obama.
“I think there’s complete uniformity that we are all pushing for a federal policy that if you take and profit from federal dollars, you must follow American values, you must pledge not to discriminate against LGBT folks — and if you get caught, there should be consequences,” Almeida said.
But Wolfson quickly retorted as the panel developed into a heated debate between him and Almeida that seemed to become almost hostile as the session closed.
“We have a body of laws across the country that include sexual orientation and gender identity as prohibited discriminatory classifications alongside race, sex and others — and they have all followed generally a certain kind of exemption — as had Title VII and the Civil Rights Act, and so on,” Wolfson said. “The problem with this current draft of ENDA is that exemption goes far beyond what that body of experience has taught us is the right balance.”
Wolfson added the argument in favor of ENDA to undecided lawmakers should be to look at existing law throughout the states as opposed to enshrining “new and unnecessary and dangerous exemptions from non-discrimination law.”
“By the way, calling them religious exemptions implies that there’s some religious problem to be solved,” Wolfson said. “There is no religious problem to be solved: what these are are licenses to discriminate.”
Almeida, a Catholic, responded by saying he thinks attitudes should change within the church by action from members of that particular faith.
“I don’t believe civil rights statute in the form of Title VII and ENDA should be used to force the Catholic Church to make a change to its policies,” Almeida said. “I think we will push them, and it may take decades, and it may take more than my lifetime, but we will push them in other ways.”
Almeida added he doesn’t understand the argument the religious exemption in ENDA is a new approach because he said he “literally copied and pasted it from Title VII.”
Besides, Almeida also said groups that oppose ENDA’s religious exemption missed an opportunity to propose an amendment when the Senate Health, Education, Labor & Pensions Committee voted on the bill in July. Also, he challenged them to make public the language they would prefer instead.
“I would love for those organizations to publicly communicate to the LGBT community and to Congress what is their proposal,” Almeida said. “They made a big fuss …, and they didn’t seek an amendment at markup. They didn’t ask any of our progressive champions, and there are very progressive champions on that committee, or if they asked, then they got rejected.”
Wolfson countered by saying Almeida’s proposal to change the Catholic Church from within is “completely irrelevant” to the conversation of putting a “license to discriminate” in a statute.
“Nobody is saying that the Catholic Church should be sued or told what to do as a matter of law when it comes to doctrine or the church, or ministers,” Wolfson said. “That’s misleading language that might confuse people in a way that you didn’t intend.”
Additionally, Wolfson said Almeida was mischaracterizing the religious exemption in ENDA by saying it’s lifted from Title VII. Almeida conceded that point on the panel.
“To say that something has some degree of religion in it, but now that it’s in the marketplace, it can now fire not just the priest, but the janitor, that’s an exemption that doesn’t exist in Title VII or any other parts of law,” Wolfson said.
Concluding his argument, Wolfson said the religious exemption issue must be resolved because it’s giving fuel to the anti-LGBT forces seeking to thwart ENDA passage.
“The religious exemption language thing is mostly a distraction, it’s a non-and-wrong solution to a non-problem, but becomes important if it get put into law,” Wolfson said.
Ian Thompson, legislative representative for the ACLU, told the Blade after the panel he commends Wolfson for endorsing a narrower religious exemption for ENDA, calling the news “a great development.”
“As a leader of the freedom to marry movement, he knows as well as anyone the importance of rejecting overly broad religious exemptions,” Thompson said.
Further, Thompson responded to Almeida’s claims that narrower language on religious institutions hasn’t been proposed by pointing to existing law.
“The alternative to ENDA’s unprecedented religious exemption has been and remains crystal clear,” Thompson said. “Just as our civil rights laws have never permitted blank checks to discriminate based on race, sex, national origin, age, and disability, they must not now do so based on sexual orientation and gender identity.”
Discussion of the religious exemption also came up during the first panel of the day, which consisted of six speakers from a bipartisan group of LGBT organizations. Paul Schindler, editor-in-chief of Gay City News, asked the panel if they were comfortable with the language.
Gregory Angelo, executive director of the National Log Cabin Republicans, started off the discussion by saying he was “comfortable” with the current wording because it’s hard enough selling the bill as it is.
“Without naming names, there are meetings that I have had with Republicans — both in the House and the Senate — where there’s some Republicans who don’t feel those religious protections go far enough,” Angelo said. “We’re pushing back against that. I think the protections as they exist now are strong, they’re solid.”
Melissa Sklarz, a transgender Democratic activist from Stonewall Democrats of New York City, seemed to support the exemption on a temporary basis as a way to win support for the bill, saying it won’t hold up in court and is just “a barrier to try to win allies” on the Republican side.
“It’s a good idea,” Sklarz said. “We watched them fight LGBT equality in ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ and we’ve watched it in marriage. As they keep throwing things at ideas that prevent equality, they will not stand up. If this is going to win allies among the moderate and right-wing so we can get it to the floor, then great.”
Asked by Schindler whether under the current religious exemption he could be fired at a Catholic hospital or a Mormon book store, Almeida replied, “It depends.”
“It depends on the facts,” Almeida said. “Law has very few bright line tests, and neither the Title VII religious exemption, nor the ENDA religious exemption, list types of organizations. So, courts have created factors that are considered.”
Almeida said courts have established that for-profit businesses are eligible for the religious exemption under existing law. But he acknowledged that organizations like the Catholic Church and Catholic Charities will be able to continue to discriminate against LGBT people in hiring and firing decisions.
“By tying the ENDA religious exemption explicitly to the Title VII religious exemption, that gives us the most clarity, and as a byproduct, and for me it’s just a byproduct, it’s going to be the one to help us win,” Almeida said.
Congress
MTG resigns after years of anti-LGBTQ attacks amid Trump feud
Greene’s abrupt departure adds fresh uncertainty to an already fractured Republican Party.
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene announced on Friday that she is resigning from Congress.
In a post on X (formerly Twitter), the Georgia 14th Congressional District representative announced her sudden decision to resign from office.
The nearly 11-minute-long video shows Rep. Greene stating she will step down from her role representing one of Georgia’s most Republican districts on Jan. 5, 2026. She cited multiple reasons for this decision, most notably her very public separation from Trump.
In recent weeks, Greene — long one of the loudest and most supportive MAGA members of Congress — has butted heads with the president on a slew of topics. Most recently, she supported pushing the DOJ to release the Epstein Files, becoming one of only four Republicans to sign a discharge petition, against Trump’s wishes.
She also publicly criticized her own party during the government shutdown. Rep. Greene had oddly been supportive of Democratic initiatives to protect healthcare tax credits and subsidies that were largely cut out of national healthcare policy as a result of Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill,” passed in July.
“What I am upset over is my party has no solution,” Greene said in October.
Trump recently said he would endorse a challenger against the congresswoman if she ran for reelection next year, and last week went as far as to declare, “Marjorie ‘Traitor’ Green is a disgrace to our GREAT REPUBLICAN PARTY!” on his Truth Social platform.
Trump told ABC News on Friday night that Greene’s resignation is “great news for the country,” and added that he has no plans to speak with Greene but wishes her well.
Despite her recent split with the head of the Republican Party, Rep. Greene has consistently taken a staunch stance against legislation supporting the LGBTQ community — notably a hardline “no” on any issue involving transgender people or their right to gender-affirming care.
Rep. Greene has long been at odds with the LGBTQ community. Within her first month in office, she criticized Democrats’ attempts to pass the Equality Act, legislation that would bar anti-LGBTQ employment discrimination. She went as far as to suggest an apocalypse-like scenario if Congress passed such a measure.
“God created us male and female,” she said on the House floor. “In his image, he created us. The Equality Act that we are to vote on this week destroys God’s creation. It also completely annihilates women’s rights and religious freedoms. It can be handled completely differently to stop discrimination without destroying women’s rights, little girls’ rights in sports, and religious freedom, violating everything we hold dear in God’s creation.”
Greene, who serves one of the nation’s most deeply red districts in northwest Georgia, attempted to pass legislation dubbed the “Protect Children’s Innocence Act,” which would have criminalized gender-affirming care for minors and restricted federal funding and education related to gender-affirming care in 2023. The bill was considered dead in January 2025 after being referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Her push came despite multiple professional medical organizations, including the nation’s largest and most influential — the American Medical Association — stating that withholding gender-affirming care would do more harm than any such care would.
She has called drag performers “child predators” and described the Democratic Party as “the party of killing babies, grooming and transitioning children, and pro-pedophile politics.”
Greene has also publicly attacked Delaware Rep. Sarah McBride, the nation’s first and only transgender member of Congress. She has repeatedly misgendered and attacked McBride, saying, “He’s a man. He’s a biological male,” adding, “he’s got plenty of places he can go” when asked about bathrooms and locker rooms McBride should use. Greene has also been vocal about her support for a bathroom-usage bill targeting McBride and transgender Americans as a whole.
She has repeatedly cited false claims that transgender people are more violent than their cisgender counterparts, including falsely stating that the 2022 Robb Elementary School shooter in Texas was transgender.
The former MAGA first lady also called for an end to Pride month celebrations. She criticized the fact that the LGBTQ community gets “an entire” month while veterans get “only one day each year” in an X post, despite November being designated as National Veterans and Military Families Month.
Under Georgia law, Gov. Brian Kemp (R) must hold a special election within 40 days of the seat becoming vacant.
The Washington Blade reached out to both the White House and Greene’s office for comment, but has not heard back.
PFLAG honored U.S. Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) with the “2025 PFLAG National Champion of Justice” award during their annual “Love Takes Justice” event in Washington.
Waters has represented California’s 43rd Congressional District — including much of Los Angeles — since 1991 and has been a vocal advocate for LGBTQ rights since her swearing-in.
Her track record includes opposing the Defense of Marriage Act, which would have made marriage only between a man and a woman; co-sponsoring the Respect for Marriage Act, ultimately requiring all U.S. states to recognize same-sex marriages performed by other states; and is a long time supporter of the Equality Act, which would codify comprehensive protections for LGBTQ Americans.
In addition to her work on marriage equality, she also created the Minority AIDS Initiative to help address the devastating impact of HIV/AIDS on minority communities, particularly communities of color.
The award reception took place Tuesday at the headquarters of the American Federation of Teachers, where Waters was presented with the award by former U.S. Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), the openly gay member of Congress. Frank praised Waters for her unwavering support for the LGBTQ community and her lifelong commitment to advancing equality for all.
“One of the most encouraging developments in the fight for human rights is the failure of those who traffic in any form of bigotry, including bigotry to divide the Black and LGBTQ+ communities,” said Frank, who came out in 1987 while in office. “No one deserves more recognition for strengthening our unity than Maxine Waters.”
During the reception, Waters spoke about her extensive history of LGBTQ advocacy within the halls of Congress, emphasizing that her idea of government centers around uplifting its most vulnerable and threatened communities.
“From the very beginning of my public life I’ve believed that the government must protect those that are vulnerable, including LGBTQ+ people, who have been pushed to the margins, criminalized and told that their lives and their love do not matter,” Waters said. “Discrimination has no place in our laws.”
She continued, adding that the discrimination LGBTQ people have dealt with — and continue to deal with — is unconstitutional and wrong.
“I am proud to stand with LGBTQ+ families against efforts to write discrimination into our constitution, against attempts to deny people jobs, housing, healthcare and basic dignity because of who they are or who they love,” she said.
Waters joins a slew of other LGBTQ advocates who have received this award, beginning with the late-Georgia Congressman John Lewis in 2018. Past honorees include Oakland (Calif.) Mayor Barbara Lee, who was then a member of Congress, U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Frank, Colorado Gov. Jared Polis, who was then a member of Congress, and Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).
PFLAG CEO Brian Bond commented on the continued fight for LGBTQ rights in the U.S. as anti-transgender rhetoric and policies coming from the Trump-Vance White House grow each week.
“LGBTQ+ people and their families — and all of you here — know too well the reality of the political climate, the attitudes of the public, and the sheer lack of respect that LGBTQ+ people are experiencing in the world today. There’s no end to the hostile barrage of harmful laws, city ordinances, and regulations, especially against our trans loved ones,” Bond said. “This particular moment in history calls us to increase and fortify our work, advocating at every level of government.”
He ended with some hope — reminding the LGBTQ community they have been on the receiving end of discrimination and unjust treatment before, but have risen above and changed the laws — saying we can do it again.
“PFLAG members and supporters are uniquely suited for this moment, because we are fighting for and alongside our LGBTQ+ loved ones, we know that our love is louder … and love and liberty are inseparable,” said Bond.
Congress
Global Respect Act reintroduced in US House
Measure would sanction foreign officials responsible for anti-LGBTQ human rights abuses
U.S. Reps. Sarah McBride (D-Del.) and Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) on Thursday reintroduced a bill that would sanction foreign officials who carry out anti-LGBTQ human rights abuses.
A press release notes the Global Respect Act would direct “the U.S. government to identify and sanction foreign persons who are responsible for torture, arbitrary detention, physical attacks, murder, and other flagrant abuses against LGBTQI+ individuals.” The measure would also require “annual human rights reporting from the State Department and strengthens coordination with foreign governments, civil society, and the private sector to prevent anti-LGBTQI+ persecution.”
“Freedom and dignity should never depend on your zip code or who holds power in your country,” said McBride.
The Delaware Democrat who is the first openly transgender person elected to Congress notes consensual same-sex sexual relations remain criminalized in more than 60 countries, while “far too many (countries) look away from the violence that follows.”
“The Global Respect Act reaffirms a simple truth: no one should be targeted for who they are or whom they love,” said McBride. “This bill strengthens America’s voice on human rights.”
“No person should ever face imprisonment, violence, or discrimination on the basis of who they are,” added Fitzpatrick. “The Global Respect Act imposes real and necessary sanctions on those who carry out these abuses and strengthens America’s resolve to uphold basic human rights worldwide.”
The Global Respect Act has 119 co-sponsors. McBride and Fitzpatrick reintroduced it in the U.S. House of Representatives on the annual Transgender Day of Remembrance.
“As we mark Transgender Day of Remembrance, we reaffirm that no one, no matter where they live in the world, should be persecuted or subjected to violence simply because of who they are or whom they love,” said Mark Bromley, co-chair of the Council for Global Equality. “The Global Respect Act seeks to hold the world’s worst perpetrators of violence against LGBTQI+ people accountable by leveraging our sanctions regimes to uphold the human rights of all people.”
Outright International, Amnesty International USA, Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights, ORAM (Organization for Refuge, Asylum and Migration), and the Human Rights Campaign are among the other groups that have endorsed the bill.
U.S. Sens. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) in June introduced the Global Equality Act in the U.S. Senate. Gay California Congressman Robert Garcia and U.S. Sen. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) on Monday introduced the International Human Defense Act that would require the State Department to promote LGBTQ and intersex rights abroad.
The promotion of LGBTQ and intersex rights was a cornerstone of the Biden-Harris administration’s overall foreign policy.
The global LGBTQ and intersex rights movement since the Trump-Vance administration froze nearly all U.S. foreign aid has lost more than an estimated $50 million in funding.
The U.S. Agency for International Development, which funded dozens of advocacy groups around the world, officially shut down on July 1. Secretary of State Marco Rubio earlier this year said the State Department would administer the remaining 17 percent of USAID contracts that had not been cancelled.
PHOTOS: Rush Preview Night
Tips for LGBTQ buyers, sellers during holidays
Holiday movie season off to a ‘Wicked’ good start
Perfection is a lie and vulnerability is the new strength
India’s Jharkhand state works to improve trans people’s access to health care
Bowser announces she will not seek fourth term as mayor
Happy Thanksgiving to all
D.C. theater scene has something for everyone this holiday season
D.C., Va., Md. to commemorate World AIDS Day
