A Senate bill with a very problematic nondiscrimination clause (S. 262, Runaway and Homeless Youth and Trafficking Prevention Act, chief sponsor Sen. Leahy) is stalled for now. The bill is to reauthorize the federal program to help runaway and homeless youth, many of whom are LGBT. But the clause presumes that private organizations that are not LGBT-affirming and that maintain voluntary religious activities cannot be trusted to serve all youth with respect, it undermines the religious staffing freedom, and it would apply far beyond this one program to every grant program operated by the large HHS Administration for Children and Families.

Sponsors of the youth bill and the clause hoped to attach the bill to Sen. Cornyn’s (R-TX) sex trafficking bill in the Senate Judiciary Committee on Feb. 26, 2015, but encountered opposition due to the nondiscrimination clause and concerns about abortion funding. Plan B was to have the bill amended into Sen. Cornyn’s bill in action on the Senate floor—however, no Senate votes on the Cornyn bill have been possible because of a very heated fight between Democrats and Republicans about the ban on abortion funding in the trafficking bill. It is not clear when this fight might be resolved. Nor is it clear what the Senate might then do about the effort to amend into the Cornyn bill the other bill with its harmful nondiscrimination clause.

There is reason to be concerned: the same language was put into the Violence Against Women Act when it was reauthorized in 2013, and concerns raised then about the negative consequences of the clause for participation by faith-based organizations were swept away as Republicans joined Democrats in voting for VAWA lest they be tarred again as being anti-woman. Activist organizations that want broad nondiscrimination clauses put into federal grant laws, and that so far have not been concerned that their language will harm faith-based participation, are not going to be deterred by temporary roadblocks.

In the meantime, supporters of the runaway and homeless youth program, and the nondiscrimination clause, are seeking support from Republican members of the Republican-majority House of Representatives. Their argument? Oppose this clause and you show your lack of concern for LGBT youth. Representatives ought to argue back: faith-based organizations pioneered many essential services and are often excellent, even the best, providers of services. Why are you attempting to exclude them from these grant programs?

Where there is discrimination against LGBT youth, or any other people who ought to receive services, Congress does need to act. But the nondiscrimination clause in S. 262 is not the way to go.