Missouri lawmakers concerned about dog discrimination, but anti-LGBTQ bias is still OK?

For the 22nd year in a row, the Missouri legislature did nothing to change the fact that it’s still legal to fire someone for being gay in this state. Or to refuse to rent to them or serve them a meal.

For the 22nd year in a row, Republican lawmakers can go home at this session’s end and brag without fear of contradiction that they resisted all pressure to stop discriminating.

These same folks seem to think of themselves as strongly pro-business, but we will contradict them on that point, because none of the Amazons of the world are ever going to choose to locate their headquarters in a state where LGBTQ employees would not feel safe or be safe under the law.

Democratic state Rep. Greg Razer of Kansas City and Republican state Rep. Tom Hannegan of St. Charles County, two of the four openly gay members of the Missouri General Assembly, noted on the House floor Thursday that their bills prohibiting anti-LGBTQ discrimination didn’t even get assigned to a committee this year.

A bill outlawing discrimination against Israel passed, though, and their colleagues were not too busy to debate legislation that would keep local governments from discriminating against certain breeds of dogs.

“It’s important for our colleagues to look us in the eye and tell us why it was worth spending an hour to talk about discrimination against dogs,” Razer said, “but it’s not worth any time to talk about discrimination against you.”

The most poignant comment on this discrepancy was this one from his colleague: “Whenever we have these conversations,” Hannegan insisted, “I always see a little headway.”

That’s hope in the unseen, and faith in folks who you’d think would respond to the economic argument, especially at a time like this, if not to the appeal for basic fairness.