Home

The Montana Human Rights Network and its allies have fought for equal protection under the law for gays and lesbians for over a decade. This struggle has played out at the Montana Legislature, where Christian Right activists frequently demonize gays and lesbians, referring to them as sinners, pedophiles, etc. The 2003 legislative session hasn't been any different.

Christian Right activists have frequently invoked God and claimed to be working on His behalf this legislative session. At a hearing on a bill to add sexual orientation to Montana's hate crimes statute, Gilda Clancy, lobbyist for the Montana Eagle Forum, claimed to be testifying against the bill on behalf of "God, country, and family values." Clancy was joined by other Christian Right activists at this and other hearings on adding gender, disability and sexual orientation to Montana's hate crimes law. Apparently Clancy isn't alone in being granted the privilege to speak for God. Hamilton's Dan McCrossin testified that "God would want you to not pass this bill." Harris Himes, pastor of Hamilton's Big Sky Christian Center, said legislators should have "a bias to stand for God," which, according to Himes' particular religious insight, apparently means a bias against gays and lesbians.

Christian Right activists have opposed bills relating to the Malicious Intimidation or Harassment Act, Montana's hate crimes law. Legislators introduced bills to extend the protections of this law in both houses of Montana's legislature. Representative Brad Newman (D-Butte) sponsored House Bill 52 which sought to include gender, disability, and sexual orientation into the current law. Senator Ken Toole (D-Helena) sponsored Senate Bill 177 which would have added sexual orientation.

The opponents to both hate crimes bills comprise a laundry list of Montana's Christian Right groups ÷ Montana Family Coalition, Citizens Network, Montana Eagle Forum, Concerned Women for America, along with individual activists espousing the same anti-gay propaganda. Rep. Newman's bill was the first bill relating to the Malicious Intimidation or Harassment Act that was heard before a committee.

Big Sky Christian Center's Harris Himes stated the protections in Newman's bill would be a "sword against Christians who take the Bible seriously." Jenny Dodge of Citizens Network claimed that being gay is a "developmental problem." Julie Millam of the Montana Family Coalition (formerly the Christian Coalition of Montana) claimed gays and lesbians engage in an "illegitimate, unhealthy lifestyle." Gregg Trude, who said he was representing himself but is also head of Montana Right to Life, urged committee members to be "morally correct" and defeat the bill.

The proponents, on the other hand, stressed the need for the law to equally protect all Montanans. Rep. Newman said his bill was about the "beautiful patchwork" that is Montana, because "our people are as diverse as our landscape." He said his bill brought "uniformity" to the current law and stressed that economic problems are Montana's real enemy, not gays and lesbians. "Homophobia is akin to racism and religious bigotry," he stated.

The Montana Human Rights Network was joined by PRIDE, the Montana Association of Churches, the Women's Lobby, the Montana Advocacy Program, social workers, former legislators, parents and a high school student in supporting the bill. The Network stated that hate crimes are a threat to democracy because they scare people out of the political process. Carol Snetsinger told the committee about hate mail she received after filing a lawsuit against the Montana University System. She said the mail stated "Die Dykes" and claimed to contain anthrax. Snetsinger, a Christian, said it was troubling that Montana has laws protecting her and other Christians against intimidating messages like "Die Christians," but that it would not take equally seriously the exact same kind of message and intimidation based on the gender of the person she loves. A high school student told how he has been assaulted and had his jaw broken because he was perceived to be gay. PRIDE pointed out that Newman's bill would not stop Christian Right activists from speaking out against the gay lifestyle.

The House Judiciary Committee sided with the opponents and tabled the bill in committee. Rep. Newman tried to get his bill blasted out of committee to be debated on the floor of the House of Representatives. He needed 60 votes in the House, but the measure failed 49-51.

The arguments for and against Sen. Toole's bill in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee were similar to the ones heard in the House. Toole said his bill followed the tradition of the Civil Rights Movement that believed it was important to specifically name and address problems. The Network pointed out that supporting the bill would make it clear that Montana doesn't support the use of violence as a political weapon. PRIDE echoed that argument by saying that this bill didn't impact freedom of speech but was a "speed bump between speech and action." A mother told the committee about death threats and harassment her son had received based on his perceived sexual orientation. The Network and PRIDE were joined in their support of Toole's bill by the Progressive Labor Caucus, The Women's Lobby, and the Montana Democratic Party.

The opponents of Toole's bill voiced many of the same objections they had to Newman's bill. The Family Coalition's Julie Millam said being gay was "a terrible lifestyle to live" and was disgusting behavior. Jeanette Zentgraf, representing Concerned Women for America, said the bill supported an "abnormal" behavior and would lead to gays and lesbians recruiting in public schools. Opponents also said this bill was an attempt to "normalize" and "legitimize" the gay lifestyle.

Toole's bill was killed by the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Rep. Christopher Harris (D-Bozeman) is sponsoring House Bill 430. HB 430 would remove the list of categories contained in Montana's Malicious Intimidation or Harassment Act. By determining if the perpetrator of a crime acted on bias towards a characteristic listed, prosecutors can decide if a crime is a hate crime. HB 430 would remove the list from the statute and place it in the framing language of the bill. Harris said his intent was to expand the statute to apply to everyone, saying "Let's take out status of victims and deal with the crime." He felt the bill would make enforcing hate crimes law easier.

At the bill's hearing before the House Judiciary Committee, HB 430 was opposed by both the Network and the Christian Right but for very different reasons. The Christian Right opposed the bill because the framing language stated that people had been targeted for hate crimes based on their sexual orientation. They said this was an attempt to slip the term into the part of the bill that courts would use when applying the law. Harris Himes said the framing language was where ™the poison in this bill liesš and was upset because Rep. Harris wasn't interested in removing it. The Montana Family Coalition's Julie Millam called the bill another attempt to "legitimize homosexuality."

On the other hand, the Network testified that the best parts of the bill were included in the framing language. It encouraged Rep. Harris and the committee to consider putting that language into the statute itself. Without the list of categories in the statute, the law is not a hate crimes law. The point of hate crimes legislation is to make clear Montana's determination to ensure that all citizens enjoy equal rights and are able to fully participate in democracy free from fear. Hate crimes are especially pernicious because their intent is not simply to attack an individual, but to use that attack for political ends ÷ i.e. to intimidate members of a minority group from fully participating in our democratic processes. White supremacists, for example, threaten and attack people of color and Jews in an effort to scare all people of color and Jews out of the political process ÷ and that is an attack on democracy itself, not just the individuals involved. It is essential to include in hate crimes statutes a list of targeted minority groups precisely because those groups have suffered political intimidation in the past. The law is designed to respond to a problem, and to do so effectively the law must give guidance as to the nature of the problem we wish to confront. That problem unavoidably concerns the history of specific minority groups who have been targeted for political intimidation; to remove reference to them is to remove the reason for the law's existence.

As we go to press, the House Judiciary Committee had removed all the framing language from the bill and passed it out of committee and onto the House of Representatives. The House of Representatives voted to send HB 430 back to the committee.

In 1997, the Montana Supreme Court ruled that the state's deviate sex law, which barred same-sex contact between consenting adults, violated the state Constitution. The court ruled the law violated the right to privacy as well as equal protection under the law. Now unenforceable, the law remains on the books.

Rep. Tom Facey (D-Missoula) sponsored House Bill 294, a bill that would have removed same-sex contact from the same line as bestiality in the Montana Code. The bill was essentially a housekeeping measure. Supporters of the bill, including the Network and PRIDE, said keeping the unconstitutional language on the books leads to confusion and promotes the idea that the State of Montana endorses institutionalized homophobia. Keeping this law on the books makes it look like the state views gays and lesbians as second-class citizens.

Harris Himes told the committee that the law must remain on the books and said the legislators should be praised for upholding Christian beliefs. "Let's stand for God," Himes said. "He has said homosexuality is a sin and a crime." Himes also told the committee it should be "sensitive to what God" wants and that homes where probable cause suggested there was same-sex contact going on should be raided in the same way drug houses are raided.

Opponents of the bill frequently made being gay synonymous to being a pedophile. Tei Nash of the Coalition for Community Responsibility said, "Gay men think they are doing children a favor by sodomizing them." The Family Coalition's Julie Millam said keeping the unconstitutional law on the books was for the "good of our society," while Jenny Dodge of Citizens Network said the Montana Supreme Court ruling would eventually be overturned. Hamilton's Dan McCrossin invoked the Ten Commandments in his opposition.

The House Judiciary decided to keep Montana's view of gays and lesbians as second-class citizens codified by tabling Facey's bill.

Rep. Tom Facey (D-Missoula) has also introduced House Bill 607, which would remove the state's prohibition on same-sex marriage. This would allow gays and lesbian to marry and enjoy the same rights that all other Montanans enjoy with the legal commitment of marriage ÷ insurance, the ability to make death-bed decisions regarding their partners, inheritance rights, etc. As we go to press, the bill is scheduled for a hearing before the House State Administration Committee. If it passes, Montana would become the second state to recognize gay marriages.

Christian Right activists testified against a bill that would crack down on bullying in schools.

Rep. Tom Facey (D-Missoula) sponsored House Bill 449, which required local school districts to adopt comprehensive policies regarding bullying and intimidation. The bill is an effort to make schools safer, so the overall environment is more conducive to teaching and learning. The bill's uniform definition banned bullying based on many characteristics. It left the important decisions regarding implementation and enforcement of the policy up to local school districts. School superintendents, teachers, parents, social workers and advocates against sexual and domestic violence testified in favor of the bill.

The same Christian Right activists who have opposed bills relating to equal protection under the law this session latched onto the term "sexual orientation" and brought their homophobia to the hearing before the House Education Committee. The Montana Family Coalition's Julie Millam called the bill a "kid's version of the hate crimes bill" and said it protected "dangerous behavior." She said HB 449 would keep Christian students from speaking out against gays and lesbians. Jenny Dodge of Citizens Network said "there is no integrity in this bill." Harris Himes said that being gay is still a crime under the Constitution and should be treated as such.

The press realized how ludicrous the opponents were. The Bozeman Daily Chronicle said the Christian Right had reached a "new low in their hostility" and that not passing the bill would "preserve the rights of some to berate and threaten our gay citizens." The paper called the arguments "intolerant hogwash."

The House Education Committee tabled the bill. Most of the committee members opposing the bill referred to concerns they had over local control issues. However, Rep. Verdell Jackson (R-Kalispell) said he was worried this bill would drive "droves" of Christian students out of public schools.