DES MOINES — A bill in the Iowa House of Representatives would allow religious institutions and charities to deny services to gay couples if they believe it would validate the same-sex couple and go against their personal religious beliefs.

House Study Bill 50, also known as the Religious Conscience Protection Act, sponsored by Rep. Richard Anderson, R-Clarinda; and Rep. Kurt Swaim, D-Davis, would also allow employers to deny jobs, and land lords or hotels to deny housing to same-sex couples.

Under the legislation, they would not face a civil claim or lawsuit challenging them for discrimination. It would also protect individuals who refuse to provide goods to a gay couple.

One Iowa, the state’s largest gay rights organization, immediately pounced on the legislation as unwarranted.

“The Marriage Discrimination Act, quite simply, is another hurtful attack on the institution of marriage,” said Carolyn Jenison, executive director of One Iowa. “The Varnum decision clearly provides for religious protections, and religious marriage remains distinct and protected under Iowa law. Regardless of what you think of marriage equality, Iowans should see this bill for what it is: clear discrimination against all Iowans.”

Ben Stone, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Iowa, expressed similar views in a statement released by One Iowa, the ACLU of Iowa and the Interfaith Alliance of Iowa Action Fund.

The statement also claimed that under current language, the bill would allow denial of services and goods to interracial couples and couples of different faith backgrounds.

Anderson said last week during debate of the marriage amendment that marriage is about procreation, a comment which placed him on national cable news outlets.

“Homosexual couples cannot produce children,” Anderson said. “Heterosexual couples can. That’s what marriage is.”

Most Republicans did not speak during debate, while many Democrats expressed deep opposition to a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriages, civil unions and domestic partnerships.

Anderson characterized HSB50 as a battle between freedom of speech and religion under the First Amendment, and the 14th Amendment, which requires equal protection of all citizens under the law.

“The ACLU recognizes this bill for what it is: an effort to legitimize discrimination under the guise of religious liberty,” Stone said.

At a public forum concerning the marriage amendment last week, opponents of same-sex marriage cited examples in Massachusetts of religious institutions being penalized through taxes for denial of services to gay couples.