Dan Bishop: “I thank the gentleman for yielding. I noted that, at the outset, the bill sponsor, the gentleman from Rhode Island, said…”

“I thank the gentleman for yielding. I noted that, at the outset, the bill sponsor, the gentleman from Rhode Island, said that every community deserves to be treated with dignity and respect. Every community deserves to be treated with dignity and respect. The problem with this misnamed bill is that it does not treat every community with dignity and respect. You have heard from previous speakers that this bill takes pains to say your earnestly held religious beliefs are no defense. What else does it do? Well, the basic way the legislation operates is to insert or substitute for the word ``sex'' as a protected classification the phrase ``sex, including sexual orientation and gender identity.'' If it did nothing more, it would be an echo of the Bostock decision in June. But it does do more. It defines the term ``included,'' so ``sex, including sexual orientation and gender identity.'' If you go to the definition section, ``including'' is defined to mean ``including, but not limited to.'' ``Including but not limited to,'' why is that? What else does the bill intend to do that the bill declines to state? Most significantly, Mr. Speaker, is that the bill removes the play in the joints. Let me explain what I mean. Concerning the public accommodations title, Title II of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which, by the way, didn't cover sex, it defined what a public accommodation was for the purpose of ceasing the discrimination against Black Americans in public accommodations.…”