Two bills, which already passed through the state House, would make it illegal for state employers to offer benefits to the same-sex partners of their employees. A third bill, which still is in the House, would empower landlords to reject potential tenants because of their sexual orientation or status as a student.

These bills have no consideration of the progress made by the LBGT community in the past. In East Lansing, the new package would make current city anti-discriminatory policies illegal. The laws would force MSU, which currently offers benefits to the same-sex partners of its employees, to no longer do so. Students would be forced to find housing further away from campus not because of anything they have done, but because of who they are.

If “illegal anti-discriminatory policy” sounds repugnant and objectionable, that’s because it is. State Rep. Dave Agema, R-Grandville, told The State News that because same-sex marriage is not yet legal in Michigan, the bill package is about enforcing the laws already in place.

“You’ve got a group of people in civil services and colleges who think they’re above the law,” Agema said. “I have the law on my side.”

Agema might have the law on his side, but if the laws are outdated and discriminatory, they should be changed to reflect that.

This bill package also doesn’t help the problem of the state’s economy. Qualified individuals having to be fearful for their employment because of what they do in their personal life doesn’t create the most welcoming work environment. It also doesn’t attract those intelligent people to work in the state in the first place.

The state needs bright minds working together to get out of this economic hole. Eliminating an entire segment of people from the workforce because of their sexual orientation is shortsighted at best and bigoted at worst. The race, gender or sexual orientation of employees or are of no concern if they can work effectively.

Even if the bill package doesn’t pass or is found unconstitutional, it still is disheartening to encounter government intolerance in the 21st century.

Not all levels of government, though, are prejudiced. The East Lansing City Council is considering a resolution that opposes the bill package. The resolution will have no legal effect, but it still is commendable for city officials to take a forward-thinking stance.

The bills might be disguised as enforcing the law, but they are morally reprehensible and offer no consideration of the future of the state.