Lifepac Homepage

Life Issues Family Ethics Political Action Committee

of Southwest Washington

The featured "face off" question between candidates was , "Should gay marriage be legal?" . State Representative Jim Moeller wrote the pro side, "Gay Marriage Here to Stay".

Among other things, Moeller wrote:
"The underlying error in the gentleman's idea is that the purpose of
marriage is to produce children. Wrong. Marriage is for adults"

"Marriage has been evolving since its creation. Today, the marital pact
scarcely resembles marital arrangements of biblical times."

He closed with,
"A married gay couple will be accepted in our great country-just the same as
Britney Spears and whomever she's married to at the time."

"Councilman takes stand on gay rights; Jim Moeller wants the city to offer benefits for domestic partners,"

The Columbian, August 31, 1997 (FVRL ProQuest)

Excerpt: "Religious employers required to hire those with sexual practices in
opposition to faith.
In August of 2001, Moeller accused Christian business owners, who do not
hire homosexuals, of bigoted employment practices because they 'selectively
apply the Old Testament holiness code to their business employment
dealings.'"

In the Columbian article Councilman Moeller Under Siege For Comments On Christians, Bigotry (August 28, 2001, FVRL ProQuest), Moeller makes a distinction between Christian business owners being bigots and their employment practices being bigoted. Moeller says, "What I believe is their employment practices are bigoted. But I do not believe they are bigots, and there is a tremendous difference there." According to the article, the difference to Moeller is a "bigoted employment practice can be based on ignorance while being a bigot reflects a personal belief."

Faith based institutions would have been required to hire those who don't hold to the tenets of the faith

HB 1809 proposed in 2003 and 2004, would have expanded Washington's
discrimination clause to include sexual orientation, and include all
workplaces. Under HB 1809, churches, synagogues, religious prechools, and
private schools that do not believe that homosexual or other sexual
practices are consistent with their faith could be forced by the State to
hire those who disagree with their beliefs. In addition, faith-based
employers could be subject to lawsuits if an individual with sexual
orientation differing from the tenets of their faith were terminated. In the
past, exemptions were made for religious institutions.
House Vote 59 for 39 against 2003 and 2004. It did not pass the Senate.
State Representative Jim Moeller (49th) was a sponsor of the bill and voted
for it (HB 1809 Roll Call Votes).
Representatives Deb Wallace(17th) and Bill Fromhold(49th) also voted for it.

State imposed limits on personal speech by appointed board, Human Rights Commission

Moeller was chairman of The Community Coordinating Committee for a Human
Rights Commission, which proposed the creation of a local human rights
commission. His committee supported creating a bureaucracy that advocated
punishing certain kinds of speech that an appointed board deemed offensive.
The following was used as an example of speech that should not be allowed.
It was a quote made by someone who was asked about their view of churches
who welcome practicing gays and lesbians as members.

"It's a false church. They've compromised their beliefs, they've
compromised the bible, and they've compromised the word of god. They've
pretty much caved into worldly pressures. They have no backbone. True
believers are smart enough to stay away from those churches."

The proposal, explicitly used this quote as an example of discrimination
that should be punished. The mission statement of the commission was in part
to create a culturally competent community. Who defines culturally
competent? The appointed Human Rights Commission.

Original proposal for the Local Human Rights Commission, Nov. 20, 2000:
“Human rights ordinances adopted by the County and City will ensure that
consequences are present should an offender fail to comply with the
administrative decisions of the HRC or its hearing examiner(s). Remedies
will include civil penalties and/or criminal penalties in cases that do not
attain resolution through mediation.”
Ordinance M-3557 to establish the commission was adopted by the Vancouver
City Council (6-1) in July 2001, despite strong citizen opposition. Clark
County Commissioners then unanimously approved forming a County/City Human
Rights Commission of nine non-elected appointees, dubbed the “thought
cops”. The commission was to provide mediation, education and referrals for
approximately $200,000 taxpayer dollars every two years. These services were
a duplication of similar services offered by the state.
Their duties would've included proposing additional anti-discrimination
laws, subject to only one public hearing and city council vote. Citizens
were concerned about private speech regulated by a non-elected body. In
addition, early drafts included penalties for non-compliant speech as
determined by the “thought cops”. Framers of the commission were all
enthusiastic supporters.

Over 5,000 Vancouver residents responded and signed the first successful
referendum petition ever, to put the Moeller promoted commission to a vote. There is no power
of referendum in the county. Vancouver citizens voted soundly against the
“thought cops” commission in November 2001, and it was rescinded by both the
city and county.

If this information has helped you with your vote, please Donate now to help LifePac with its candidate research work.