Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson today called upon Congress to pass the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which would ensure that no one can be fired based on sexual orientation or gender identity. Nine out of 10 voters already believe such a federal law exists, but only a handful of states actually offer the LGBT community protections, and in eight states, only sexual orientation is protected. Unlike Catholic Bishops in New York, Rhode Island, and Illinois, Bishop Robinson sees supporting LGBT equality as a matter of Christian principle:

The scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are filled with admonitions that we will be judged by the way we treat our most vulnerable members. For Christians and Jews, God is described as having a special concern for the poor, the marginalized, and the vulnerable. We are morally bound to take special care to protect those who are so marginalized. I believe that in our time, it is gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people who are the marginalized deserving of civil protections. Surely, in this great nation, we can at least do that much.

Though protections are inconsistent from state to state, progress is being made in the absence of a federal ENDA. The map below was current just four months ago, but since then there have been victories for transgender protections in Hawaii, Nevada, and today Connecticut. (Those states should appear as red now.) Still, the map has a bit too much orange, representing the 29 states that have no employment protections for LGBT people whatsoever:

Yesterday, California lawmakers “sent the governor a bill that would make the state the first requiring public schools to include the contributions of gays and lesbians in social studies curriculum.” Proponents of the Fair, Accurate, Inclusive and Respectful (FAIR) Education Act argue that a state that requires schools to teach about “women, African Americans, Mexican Americans, entrepreneurs, Asian Americans, European Americans, American Indians and labor” and has prescribed “specific lessons about the Irish potato famine and the Holocaust,” should certainly recognize the struggles and accomplishments of gay and lesbian people. The measure bill also would prohibit “discriminatory instruction and discriminatory materials from being adopted by the State Board of Education.”

But opponents fear that teaching LGBT history would confuse children or even turn them gay. Their opposition, sprinkled through today’s news reports, is particularly alarming given California’s existing commitment to diversity education and the success of those programs in increase tolerance towards minority groups. Below are some choice statements from chief opponent Assemblyman Tim Donnely (R) and Randy Thomasson, president of the group SaveCalifornia.com:

– “As a Christian, I am deeply offended.” [Donnely, LA Times]

– “I think it’s one thing to say that we should be tolerant. It is something else altogether to say that my children are going to be taught that this lifestyle is good.” [Donnely, AP]

– “Our founding fathers are turning over in their graves” [Donnely, AP]

– “This sexual brainwashing bill would mandate that children as young as 6 years old be told falsehoods — that homosexuality is biological, when it isn’t, or healthy, when it’s not, [Thomasson, AP]

The measure now heads to Gov. Jerry Brown (D) and would go into effect for the 2013-2014 school year if enacted. It does not mandate any specific plan or grade level for implementing the measure, leaving the matter to local school boards.

There is good reason for Brown to sign the measure. Schools that incorporate LGBT history into the curriculum report lower rates of anti-gay violence and bullying. The Preventing School Harassment Survey in California, for instance, has found that “schools where the majority of youth report having learned about LGBT people in the curriculum, only 11 percent of students report being bullied, but that number more than doubles to 24 percent if the majority of students in a school say they haven’t learned about LGBT people.” Similarly, the 2003 Preventing School Harassment Survey concluded that students who have learned about LGBT people at school were more likely to feel they have a voice at school and make positive contributions.

Meanwhile, opposition to the measure stems from the now thoroughly debunked and unsubstantiated fear that sexual orientation is a communicable condition and that it could be contracted by simply learning about gay people and their accomplishments. And that suggests that critics of the measure may need just as much education about gay and lesbian people as California’s school children.

Julea Ward claims she was discriminated against for refusing to affirm homosexuality.

As a graduate counseling student at Eastern Michigan University, Julea Ward refused to counsel a gay student about his relationships because affirming his “lifestyle” would be a breach of her religious beliefs. As a result, she was unable to complete her requirements and was booted from the university. She sued, claiming she was “discriminated against,” and a federal judge decided against her, ruling the university “had a right and duty to enforce compliance” with professional ethics rules.

Now, as Todd Heywood reports, two Michigan state senators are proposing legislation that would allow counseling students to decline to counsel some clients. Sen. Tupac Hunter (D) explains that it should be fair to discriminate against a client based on sexual orientation, but not on race, because the Bible prohibits homosexual activity but does not support racism. Wayne Besen, executive director of Truth Wins Out, explains how dangerous a precedent such a “conscience” clause could be:

BESEN: All respected mental health organizations say that homosexuality is not a disease that can be treated. Any counseling that rejects coming out as an option is by nature inappropriate, unhealthy and damaging to the client. Furthermore, the counseling should be about the client, not the self-serving needs of the therapist.

This bill underlines how ex-gay therapy is at the root of anti-gay bias. To not affirm a sexual orientation is to condemn it; to not encourage it is to discourage it. The moral objection to homosexuality requires that sexual orientation be something that is chosen, but all mental health research demonstrates that it is not, and professional ethics reflect this reality. By suggesting counseling students should be free to disregard gay clients, these senators are endorsing anti-gay mythology and discrimination in the name of Christianity.

In today’s Washington Post, Jason Horowitz profiles Michele and Marcus Bachmann, noting the couple’s extreme anti-gay views and links to “pray away the gay” therapy. Michele Bachmann — who came to prominence for sponsoring a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage in Minnesota — has called gay marriage “probably the biggest issue that will impact our state and our nation in the last, at least, 30 years” and described her lesbian step-sister as leading “a very sad life” that’s “part of Satan.”

Marcus Bachmann can be even more blunt. He compared homosexuals to “barbarians” who “need to be disciplined,” and in 2005 delivered a presentation during which he “introduced three people as ‘former homosexuals’ as proof that sexual orientation is a choice.” Bachmann’s Christian counseling clinics have also been rumored to perform “reparative therapy,” a charge he denies while reiterating the notion that gay and lesbian individuals choose to be attracted to people of the same sex. “[I]f someone comes in a homosexual and they want to stay homosexual, I don’t have a problem with that,” he said.

But Michele Bachmann has gone even further in endorsing the discredited ex-gay movement. In 2004, as ex-gay proponents “Love Won Out” prepared to hold their annual conference in Minneapolis, Minnesota for those “struggling with unwanted homosexuality,” Bachmann not only lent a quote for the group’s press release but also “opened the conference with a greeting and blessing.” From the release:

“We are so pleased that Minneapolis has invited us back to share again that change is possible for those who are no longer satisfied with their homosexuality,” said Mike Haley, host of the Love Won Out conference, a former homosexual and the author of the book 101 Frequently Asked Questions About Homosexuality. “In fact, we have been officially welcomed by Minnesota Sen. Michele Bachmann, the author of the state marriage-protection amendment.”

Though her amendment was blocked in the Legislature, Bachmann remains committed to protecting marriage and looks forward to hearing about the causes of same-sex attraction.

“I know that Love Won Out will present the truth about homosexuality,” Bachmann said, “and present it in a compassionate and loving manner. Those of us working to safeguard marriage from redefinition by radical judges must inform our efforts with an understanding of the deep emotional wounds that many in the homosexual community carry. I look forward to welcoming Minnesotans and residents of surrounding states to hear the message of healing that is possible.”

The “truth” of Love Won Out and other ex-gay organizations has been discredited by professional medical organizations, who see reparative counseling as harmful to gay people. Both the American Psychological Association and American Psychiatric Association — among other groups — have ruled that efforts to change sexual orientation have no scientific credibility and can cause psychological harm to patients. As a recent revelations about Dr. George Rekers’ efforts to change the sexual orientation of a 7-year-old boy reveal, sometimes that therapy can lead to deadly consequences.