Ohio Governor John Kasich (R) has finally issued an executive order barring discrimination in state-based employment, after allowing his predecessor’s EO to briefly expire. Like former Gov. Ted Strickland’s EO, the measure prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, gender, national origin (ancestry), military status (past, present or future), disability, age or sexual orientation, but does not include protections for gender identity — which Kasich specifically promised to extend during the gubernatorial campaign. (The measure does add a new category for genetic information.):

Kasich had said in response to a Dispatch questionnaire that he would continue Strickland’s 2007 order, and the question specifically mentioned gender identity.

Asked why Kasich decided to omit it, spokesman Scott Milburn replied: “The governor is opposed to discrimination in state employment and has made that clear in this executive order in the way that he feels is most appropriate.”

As Autumn Sandeen of Palm’s House Blend notes, “So apparently it’s now ‘appropriate’ to discriminate against those state employees in Ohio who were who were once protected by the gender identity provision of the previous governor’s antidiscrimination order.” “Maybe it’s just me, but I can’t help but feel that Republican Governor John Kasich threw a bone to social/religious right conservatives — he singled out a very small minority population that were once protected by the state’s antidiscrimination policy, and has now has left them vulnerable. The chances of a large and effective enough protest against the change of policy means he gives his socially conservative base something to be pleased about that won’t be effectively countered by a broad coalition of people on the left. ”

The Ohio House passed a measure prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in, but the legislation never came up for a vote in the Senate. The state does not offer non-discrimination protection for LGBT employees.

CNN is teasing this segment from Piers Morgan’s upcoming interview with Pastor Joel Osteen, in which the usually jovial TV evangelist says he believes that that homosexuality is a “sin” and that God can give gay people the “grace to change”:

OSTEEN: I’ve always believed Pierce, that the scripture shows that it’s a sin, but I’m not one to bash homosexuals or tell them that they’re terrible people and all that. There are other sins in the bible too. …I don’t believe that homosexuality is God’s best for a person’s life. [...]

MORGAN: And when you see civil partnerships sanctioned, you think that’s wrong, presumably?

OSTEEN: Yes, I think it’s wrong, but I’m not going to bash those people. I’m not going to be against those people, they’re good people. I say it’s wrong because that’s what the scripture says. [...]

MORGAN: Say a friend of mine like Elton John watching this at home, who with his partner – a civil partner, David Furnish – have just had a surrogate child which was born on Christmas day. They’re going to be pretty angry what they hear. They’re going to think who are you to call them a sinner.

OSTEEN: Yes.

MORGAN: But why are they sinners in your eyes?

OSTEEN: Well, it’s strictly back to what the scripture says. I mean, I can’t grab one part and say God wants you to be blessed and live an abundant life, and not grab the other part that says, you know what? You know, live that kind of life. So it comes back to the scripture. I’m not the judge. You know, God didn’t tell me to go around judging everybody.

MORGAN: I’m not so sure though, you see. I think you are a kind of judge, I think you can’t abrogate that responsibility — because of your influence. Seven, eight million viewers every Sunday. When you say things like homosexuality is a sin, it’s a big statement to make. You are a judge. And you’re encouraging your congregation to believe that. [...]

V. OSTEEN: We’re not judging the person. [...]

MORGAN: You are judging the person, aren’t you?

OSTEEN: Well, to me, I’m not the one to judge and say who’s bad or who’s good….I don’t know that God is judging sins on different levels, but we pick out that one. If you listen to my message, they’re about lifting people up and so it’s not, I mean I really talk about homosexuality when we get on the interviews.

MORGAN: Yea, but now I’m curious, what would you say to a homosexual watching this? How do they change? What do they have to do to change to be better people?

OSTEEN: Well, I don’t know that I understand it all. I believe that it’s a process. But I believe that God can give us grace to change. We’ve seen people break addictions, and do other other things as well.

Watch it:

Osteen has been criticized by some members of the evangelical community for not stressing “sin” enough. During a 60 Minutes profile in 2007, one Christian reverend said that Osteen “tells only half the story of the Bible, focusing on the good news without talking about sin, suffering and redemption” and went so far as to accuse him of teaching “heresy.”

Wyoming and Iowa are advancing anti-marriage legislation, while Maryland is getting closer to voting on expanding marriage equality to its residents sometime next month — all this and more in our latest installment of State Marriage Watch:

- WYOMING: Moments ago, the Wyoming House passed House Bill 74 — banning the state from recognizing same-sex marriages performed elsewhere — by a vote of 32-27. The measure now moves to the Senate. On Friday, the Wyoming Senate Judiciary Committee approved legislation by a 3-2 vote that would ban same-sex marriage in the state, but amended the legislation to allow for civil unions. The House Judiciary Committee will take up civil unions legislation — H.R. 150 — this week.

- MARYLAND: Last week, Senate Majority Leader Rob Garagiola of Montgomery County introduced the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act (SB116), which would permit same-sex couples to marry but would not require churches to perform the unions. The House version of that bill is scheduled to be introduced this week by House Majority Leader Kumar Barve. Del. Luiz R.S. Simmons is also due to introduce a “slightly different” bill. ‘ Equality Maryland expects a Senate hearing on either Tuesday, Feb. 1 or Thursday, Feb. 3 and anticipates “a three-day fight on the Senate floor during the week of Feb. 7, culminating with a cloture vote, which requires 29 votes. Twenty-four votes are needed to pass the Senate bill; there are 18 co-sponsors.”

- IOWA: An Iowa house subcommittee will hold the first hearings this afternoon on an amendment that would repeal recognition of same-sex marriages and ban civil unions. “The full judiciary committee is scheduled to consider the bill today at 4 p.m. Republicans have a 12-9 advantage on the committee and a 60-40 majority in the full House.” The Iowa Marriage Amendment (IMA) would “put a question on the 2013 ballot that would define marriage in the Iowa constitution as a heterosexual union – and thereby reverse the 2009 Iowa Supreme Court ruling that brought gay marriage to the Midwest.” The measure is “supported by 56 out of 60 Republicans in the House and supporters claim all 60 GOP members will likely vote for the measure, which has little – if any – support among Democrats.”

– NEW HAMPSHIRE: After initially saying that the party will focus on economic issues, New Hampshire’s House Republican leader, Rep. D.J. Bettencourt told The Associated Press he will ask the committee responsible for the repealing the state’s marriage equality law “to retain it until next year.”

For a complete overview of the latest developments in the marriage battleground states of Rhode Island, Maryland, New York, California, New Hampshire, Minnesota, Wyoming, Iowa, and New Mexico, click here.