Rep. Hanna Warns Against Anti-Religious Liberty Bill

Action Alert from Rep. Bruce Hanna 4-19-07:

HB 2893 — passed the House, headed for the Senate

House Bill 2893 is a union-backed bill (introduced at the request of the Oregon AFL-CIO) that prohibits employers from talking to their employees about pending legislation that will affect their business operations.

HB 2893 will prevent employers and employees from praying or worshipping together — even if it’s their own choice!

HB 2893 would regulate all communications between employers and employees on religious and political matters, and not just those in the workplace.

This bill specifically targets people of faith in every Oregon workplace; whether they are employers or employees.

  • Jerry

    BAD BILL. Stupid people.

  • Lewis

    Read the text of the bill people…it does nothing of the sort. It prohibits employers from FORCING their employees to attend meetings at which the employer endorses a particular set of religious beliefs. If people want to organize and pray at work, they can.

  • Sassy

    Who is “FORCING their employees to attend meetings at which the employer endorses a particular set of religious beliefs.”

    This is the first I’ve heard of this practice.

  • beleiveitornot

    It’s been al over the news that some employers are embracing the practice of forcing their religious practices (Christian) upon their employees claiming it makes their employees more effective. Some of us yearn for the days when a person’s religion was private and personal.

    • Chris

      What are you talking about? All over the news? Cite your source. I read the paper all the time, and I have not read anything of the sort. Let’s see a link from a refutable source.

  • believeitornot

    The faith at work movement or workplace evangelism has been around for a long time. The International Ministry of Christian Company Leaders believe the work place is an opportunity to evangelize. [email protected] and Christian Chamber’s of Commerce promote connecting to employees through their religion. Thankfully there are plenty of laws on the books if an employer attempts to force an employee to participate, change religions or just doesn’t wish to participate.

    • Chris

      So when you say “it’s been all over the news that some employers are embracing the practice of forcing their religious practices (Christian) upon their employees”, what you really mean is that you heard from someone who heard from someone. Don’t spread rumors you can’t substantiate.

    • Captain_Anon

      I didn’t realize we lived in a country where the government tells you where you can and can’t work, and if you dont like to work there, you can’t leave.


    I don’t believe anyone should be pressured into a religous belief by anyone. At the same time I believe this state should be a Right to Work state and no employee should be required to be part of a Union in order to have their job, especially if they don’t believe in their Unions policies or politics.

    Sounds like the Unions who sponsored this bill should practice what they preach and stop their opposition of the Right to Work rules that many other states have in place!

  • believeitornot

    HR 2390 bans mandatory meetings by employers to discuss union organizing drives or political or religious topics. Imagine your boss forcing you to attend a meeting to discuss his/her religion and you have to attend that meeting. Let’s say the boss is Mormon, 7th Day Adventist, or Catholic and you are not. How about being required to attend a meeting where the employer tells you to join the Green Party. How about being told you cannot organize a union or you will leave.

    The twisted interpretation by Rep. Hanna get’s the evangelical’s knickers in a twist. Pandering to the hard right used to be one of the Republican’s favorite weapons. Guess what, it’s not working!


    Hey beleveitornot, how about an employer telling you that in order for you to have a job you must pay dues to a Union whose policies you don’t support? Where is your outrage to that? I want to hear you rationalize the justice in that…………why do you not support the Right to Work? If any state should be, Oregon should be a Right to Work state!


    Oh by the way people, it would appear the believeitornot is actually the same person the once called himself Richard………..go figure, lol!

  • Alex

    Okay, let’s turn the tables a little bit just to gain a fresh perspective.

    Suppose your boss, a Democratic openly homosexual practicing Muslim, forces you (or your children) to sit through a mandatory meeting in which he propagates and pontificates his unique viewpoints, none of which are relevant to your job. Now, you’ve gotta act interest because, remember, your job is on the line.

    HB2893 would prevent that from happening.

    I would challenge the Christians who are concerned over this bill to open their mind to the possibility that they are not necessarily under attack around every legislative corner, and ask themselves, “Is it really *right* to force employees to take part in mandatory meetings in which the employer spouts off his views on politics and religion?”

    Remember, when you force your views on people, it’s *oppression*.


    I don’t disagree with the concept that people should not be forced to attend meeting over religous matters in order to keep their jobs.

    On a diffeent side of the same coin though, this should be a Right to Work state and membership in a Union whose practices and political perspectives a person doesn’t agree with. Not being a very religous person the above Union statement equates to the first statement in my post also. One thing more about the mandatory union membership, the unions get to take portions of peoples checks and spend that money on the things these people don’t believe in too, that’s fair?

    When the liberals who support this bill are willing to put aside their hypocrisy and make an effort at making Oregon a Right to Work state, I may start having more respect and less skeptisism about their motives for bills like this.

  • Somebody’s lying

    Somebody’s been telling fibs!

    Lying makes Baby Jesus cry.


    Oops, after reading my first staement it sounds like I actually support forced religous meetings at the work place, I do not! Please disregard the first sentence in my earlier post, Thanks.

  • R.I. Christian

    One posting stated …”Some of us yearn for the days when a person’s religion was private and personal.”

    Just when was that? 1760? 1776? 1787? 1796? Under our founding Christian fathers like Jay, Madison, Washington, etc?

    Or do you mean like in 1994, or 1996?

    A “person’s religion” has never been private and personal, nor has it been the explosive issue some today wish to make it. The only real reason people are afraid of Christianity today is because it exposes their damnable, sinful, perverse, twisted, lying, lifestyles.

    Get a life (or die forever).