This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2015, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.

Government employees could refuse to marry gay couples — but would lose their privilege of marrying anyone — under a new bill released Thursday by the co-sponsor of a groundbreaking anti-discrimination bill.

SB297 essentially would adopt a Utah State Court policy governing judges.

"The courts [are] basically saying you can decide if you want to marry or not, but if you decide you're not going to marry and you're going to try to pick and choose, you can't do that," said Sen. Stuart Adams, R-Layton. "So this bill basically just codifies that. You can decide you're going to marry and if you're not, you're not."

Under the bill, for example, Gov. Gary Herbert, who has said he would not marry a gay couple if he were asked, would no longer be able to preside over any weddings in Utah.

Every county clerk would be required under the bill to have at least one person available to marry gay couples or else contract with someone to do it.

"So, if you run around the county and say, 'Gee, I feel discriminated against. Nobody wants to marry us and they're all opting out,' you know there's somebody in the county clerk's office who will marry you," Adams said.

The bill also would put into law that religions cannot be compelled to marry gay couples — something the courts have already upheld — and that churches and religious institutions could not be compelled to provide services like meeting houses for same-sex marriages.

No government employee who refuses to conduct a same-sex marriage could be disciplined or terminated because of the decision, the bill states.

The bill also says the state could not deny anyone a professional or business license because of their religious views, including their views on same-sex marriage.

Equality Utah released a statement Thursday night in response to SB297, saying it cannot support the bill's current language.

"We are worried that broad individual exemptions may be granted to an unlimited amount of people," the gay-advocacy group said. "We will not support any legislation that may adversely impact the fundamental rights of LGBT Utahns."

The group noted that its members had been consulted on Adams' SB296 — the compromise announced Wednesday that would extend protections against housing and employment discrimination to gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Utahns — but not on his marriage bill.

Sen. Steve Urquhart, R-St. George, who negotiated the discrimination bill with Adams, said the marriage issue didn't come up during talks on discrimination, but called Adams' bill an excellent compromise.

"I am a true believer in LGBT rights. I don't want even a perception I'm hesitating or taking a half-step back, and I'm fully in support of Stuart's bill," Urquhart said. "The way I see Stuart's bill working in the marriage arena is someone will show up to a clerk's office … and the clerk's office will smile and say, 'Great, let's get you married.' "

Urquhart said the protections for the use of churches "to me is just basic First Amendment stuff." Telling churches they have to perform marriages they don't want to would be "blatantly unconstitutional."