Is It Time to Claim Victory in the Gay Rights Struggle?

Since I came out in mid-life, the changes in the legal rights for LGBT Americans have been stunning.  When I first came out, in Virginia a same sex relationship could land one with a felony convictions, you could be thrown out of the military for being LGBT, same sex couples could not marry and you could be fired at will by bigoted employers - as I was.  In a piece in New York Magazine gay conservative (and former Republican) Andrew Sullivan looks at the changes, starting with this week's stunning U.S. Supreme Court ruling which granted employment non-discrimination protections to LGBT Americans nationwide. I believe that Sullivan's inclination to declare victory is premature for three reasons: (i) contrary to Sullivan's statement, public accommodation protections remain missing in the majority of states - in Virginia we will have them starting July 1st - (ii) there will be years of lawsuits against employers who ignore the new scope of Article VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and (iii) Christofascists will continue to strive to use alleged religious belief as an excuse for ignoring the law. That said, the wins have been immense and many LGBT rights organizations will find the focus of their efforts much more circumscribed - already Equality Virginia seems largely focused on transgender rights.  Here are highlights from Sullivan's column:

The last major obstacle to civil equality for gay men, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgender people was toppled this week — by another Republican-appointed justice, Neil Gorsuch. (It will surely be one of the ironies of this period that gay equality in America has been judicially delivered by white cis straight men nominated by, respectively, Ronald Reagan and Donald J. Trump). Gorsuch’s reasoning was far more constrained than Anthony Kennedy’s in Obergfell — which guaranteed gays and lesbians the right to civil marriage — and was, in many ways, a punt. He used the “sex” discrimination aspect of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to retroactively grandfather in gay men, lesbians, and trans people. 

I don’t buy Gorsuch’s stated logic for an instant, of course. Rather, the ruling is a way to give gay and transgender people practical protection from discrimination in all states, without creating a new, explicit standard. And it doesn’t even pass Gorsuch’s own standard for textualism.

Gorsuch relies on a very simple idea to counter that point: that “sex” in the 1964 Act meant discrimination on the basis of being male or female, and that because gay men are penalized for having relations with men, rather than women, lesbians with women rather than men, and transgender people because they may no longer be the sex they started out as, it’s all a form of sex discrimination. It makes sense from that semantic point of view — but it’s a stretch on the substance. It dodges the core question of civil rights specifically for gay and transgender people, by subsuming us under the rubric of an existing category, sex. And it does so by mere textual reading of a statute, invoking no grander constitutional principles.

Nonetheless, its impact is immediate and transformative. Every single goal the gay-rights movement set out to achieve in my lifetime has now been won. Gays can marry; we can serve our country openly with pride; we are categorically protected from discrimination in employment [except] and public accommodations in every state.

[T]he remaining business: a battle between religious freedom and gay and transgender equality.

With any luck, we’ll reach a deal in Washington, D.C., rather like that achieved in Utah, where, in a very Mormon compromise, key measures against discrimination against gays were balanced with strong protections for religious freedom. . . . . . if Evangelical Christians and conservative Catholics decide to die on the hill of firing gay people, they will experience a brutal defeat, and tarnish what credibility they still have. The Gospels are not about shunning sinners, or pharisaical puritanism. They are about the imperative to see in everyone the image of God.

But this comprehensive victory obviously presents the major institutions of the gay-rights movement with a dilemma: What do they exist for after this?

If current trends are any indication, these groups will simply merge into the broader intersectional left and become as concerned with, say, the rights of immigrants or racial minorities as they are with gay rights. In the political climate on the left at the moment, singling out gays as a separate category is increasingly impermissible.

None of this means that we live in a world where homophobia has ceased to exist, where discrimination is unknown, or where visceral fear of and disgust toward trans people does not endure. In fact, prejudice and discrimination against the unknown or different are part of human nature, and partly because of that, young trans people of color are very much at risk. So we can try to keep shifting the culture — and man, has it shifted — in order to lessen the prevalence of irrational prejudice. And we can ensure equality of opportunity and protections against discrimination in employment . . . . .
As Eleanor Roosevelt is believed to have said: “No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.”

One of the remarkable truths of gay history is how so many, under social and legal pressures exponentially greater than today, were able to withhold that consent. They were objectively victims, but subjectively free. It took real imagination, courage, and vision for these heroes and heroines of our past — and that past stretches for centuries before Stonewall — to live lives of authenticity and integrity. Now that the formal and legal obstacles to gay and transgender equality have been entirely removed, let’s follow their example, and forge a future that requires the consent and approval of no one but ourselves.

I like the last sentiment.  Part of being a self-accepting LGBT individual is gaining a mindset where you need no one else's approval for who you are.

The Supreme Court’s LGBT Ruling Will Extend Far Beyond Employment Law

Justices Gorsuch and Roberts: targets of Christofascist venom.

Yesterday's much welcomed U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County was limited to Article VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and focused on employment discrimination.  However, the spill over effect will likely spread much farther and impact the application of other statutes that bar discrimination based on sex.  One likely victim of the ruling - even though court challenges will likely be required - is the Trump/Pence regimes efforts to roll back Obama era rules that bar discrimination in the health care realm. Applying the reasoning of Bostock, the Department of Health and Human Service's re-write of the rules runs head on into what the Court just ruled is illegal discrimination. Yes, the Christofascists are indeed seething because Bostock now provides a further weapon against their demands that the have a license to discriminate. A piece in Mother Jones looks at the likely spill over effects.  The irony, of course, is that a Trump appointee wrote the ruling,  Here are highlights:

On Monday, the Supreme Court handed LGBTQ Americans one of their biggest civil rights victories yet. In a 6-3 decision, the court ruled that gender identity and sexual orientation were protected under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act’s prohibition on sex discrimination in employment. The decision means LBGTQ folks can no longer lose their jobs simply for being queer. 

“In our time, few pieces of federal legislation rank in significance with the Civil Rights Act of 1964,” writes Justice Neil Gorsuch, a Trump appointee, in the majority opinion. “There, in Title VII, Congress outlawed discrimination in the workplace on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Today, we must decide whether an employer can fire someone simply for being homosexual or transgender. The answer is clear. An employer who fires an individual for being homosexual or transgender fires that person for traits or actions it would not have questioned in members of a different sex. Sex plays a necessary and undisguisable role in the decision, exactly what Title VII forbids.”

The ruling provides some much-needed clarity for lower courts and state officials, who are currently working with a hodgepodge of different (and sometimes conflicting) nondiscrimination policies.  

And though the case was specific to employment discrimination, the implications beyond the workplace are huge. The ruling won’t directly overturn discriminatory policies outside the realm of employment, says Sharon McGowan, Legal Director for Lambda Legal—which argued one of the Title VII cases before the Second Circuit Court—but it does set a precedent that makes it incredibly difficult to exclude gay and transgender people from other laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex. 

Take, for example, the Fair Housing Act. In 1974, the act was amended to prohibit housing discrimination on the basis of sex, but to date, only 24 states interpret that to include LGBTQ people (or have passed state legislation that explicitly includes them). One additional state, Wisconsin, prohibits discrimination against gay people, but not transgender people. Through the years, studies have shown that LGBTQ renters and home owners have been overcharged, less likely to secure rental housing or even evicted because of their sexual orientation and gender identity.

Experts say the Supreme Court ruling could also effect things like Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972—which prohibits sex discrimination in education and has recently been weaponized against transgender student athletes—and health care nondiscrimination policies. 

Just last week, Trump’s Health and Human Services Department released a prepublication version of a rule change that would roll back protections for transgender patients under the Affordable Care Act. The change is meant to undo an Obama-era policy that barred providers and insurance from rejecting care based on gender identity.

“There is still a chance for HHS to see the error of their ways and pull the rule back and fix their mistake, which I hope they will do,” McGowan says. “But assuming that they’re going to continue to forge ahead, they basically have put forth a rule that says ‘we, in the federal government, think that sex discrimination doesn’t mean the things that the Supreme Court has just said sex discrimination means.’

But now, the bad news: Monday’s Supreme Court ruling does nothing for laws that don’t include sex in their nondiscrimination policies—and unfortunately there are more of them than you might think. Federal law prohibits discrimination in public accommodations (e.g. restaurants, retail businesses, parks, libraries) based on race, color, religion and national origin only. The same is true of discrimination prohibitions in certain federally funded programs. 

“I remain more optimistic than I’ve ever been, that we will continue to succeed in rooting out discrimination in all of its forms,” says McGowan. “But I do think that there are going to be issues that that many courts—particularly courts that are hostile to the underlying pinnings of these rulings—may try to find wiggle room maybe where it doesn’t exist. We know that our work is going to continue.”

The struggle for full equality under the law continues.

Supreme Court: Yes to Gays, Clean Water and Sanctuary Cities, No to Trump/Pence

Today was a wonderful day for LGBT Americans as the U.S. Supreme Court in Bostock v. Clayton County ruled that existing civil rights non-discrimination laws regarding sex applied to LGBT citizens, thereby effectively making employment discrimination and other forms of anti-LGBT discrimination illegal nationwide. It was also a good day for California which saw the Court reject the Trump/Pence regime attack on so-called sanctuary cities   It was also a good day for environmental activists as the Court left the Clean Water Act intact.  The big loser was the Trump/Pence regime which was on the opposite side of the issue in all three cases.  The other big losers were white evangelical Christofascists who sought to have their bigotry and hatred placed above the law so that they could discriminate against LGBT citizens at will.  Indeed, some of the usually suspect in the Christofascist world are shrieking as if the world was ending - and also attacking Trump for his Court appointee, Neil Gorsuch, who wrote the majority opinion.   As a gay man, it is hard to describe my feelings.  Had this decision been handed down almost 20 years earlier, I might have been spared a financial nightmare when I was forced from a law firm for being gay.  At the time, I had zero employment non-discrimination protections.  I am SO happy that in the future LGBT individuals may be spared the experience that befell me. A piece at SCOTUS Blog explains the importance and impact of this ruling:

In affirming that Title VII’s broad scope prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, the Supreme Court immediately ended a form of stigmatic injury suffered by millions of citizens who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or whose gender identity differs from their sex assigned at birth. The question whether the phrase “because of … sex” means what it says in the context of employer actions prohibited by Title VII has been definitively answered—it does. That is, because sexual orientation and gender identity cannot be explained as traits that someone has without making reference to the sex of the person, discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity is also because of an individual’s sex. The Supreme Court also once again concluded that it makes no difference under the text of Title VII whether an employer intended also to discriminate based on an additional reason, like motherhood or the identity of one’s spouse, if sex is a basis for the decision.

With that legal uncertainty removed, gone too is the practical uncertainty faced by real individuals weighing questions of whether to make career moves, geographic moves or moves to reveal aspects of their personal lives by openly sharing their authentic selves at work.

The opinion in Bostock v. Clayton County fulfills the best promises of textualism. The Supreme Court’s confirmation that all people have the right to be given the full measure of protection afforded to them by laws having meaning anchored in the written word is a powerful statement about the enduring power of people-led movements.

Maryland, along with 20 other states and the District of Columbia, expressly prohibits employment discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity through statute or regulation. Title VII now definitively joins these statutes in prohibiting all forms of discrimination based on sex, including discrimination based on traits like sexual orientation and gender identity that cannot be separated from an individual’s sex. The Bostock decision affirms that citizens may rely on the achievement of broad legislative protections against discrimination to provide long-lasting victory.

Importantly, the confirmation of Title VII’s sweep immediately cements protections for federal government workers, no matter their state of residency, and for individuals who work in states that have not yet specifically prohibited discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. In those states, LGBT workers facing discrimination may now bring complaints under Title VII to directly improve their own working conditions.

Other benefits will accrue over time. As Maryland and the 20 states and District of Columbia set forth in their amicus brief, discrimination is expensive. Reducing salary disparities, health care instability and increased health care costs due to the mental health effects of stigmatic discrimination will immediately benefit individuals and the states that care for them. There is also a body of evidence demonstrating that private industry benefits from reducing discrimination because of the increased creativity and productivity LGBT people bring to the workplace when they are included and when they are freed from the health effects of stigmatization. LGBT individuals and their families benefit from better working conditions, and so do states, which experience decreased use of their public benefits system and increased tax revenue as a result of increased innovation and productivity.

Indeed, everyone benefits except religious extremists - think Trump's evangelical base - motivated by hatred and a sick need to have others to denigrate so that they can feel a sense superiority.  

But, as noted, LBGT Americans were not the only winners today.  In its opinion in County of Maui v. Hawaiʻi Wildlife Fund the Court (including Justice Kavanaugh) sided with clean water advocates that point source discharges to navigable waters through groundwater are regulated under the Clean Water Act.   The Supreme Court also rejected the Trump administration’s effort to blow a big hole in the Clean Water Act’s protections for rivers, lakes, and oceans. As explained here these were defeats for the Trump/Pence regime:

In other words, the Clean Water Act prohibits unpermitted discharge of pollution “into navigable waters, or when the discharge reaches the same result through roughly similar means.” In doing so, the Court rejected the Trump administration’s polluter-friendly position in the clearest of terms: “We do not see how Congress could have intended to create such a large and obvious loophole in one of the key regulatory innovations of the Clean Water Act.”

Lastly, the Court also ended Trump's war on blue states that include so-call sanctuary cities.  A column in the Los Angeles Times looks at the Court's action (it is noteworthy that both of Trump's appointees ruled against his regime): 

Since his inauguration in 2017, President Trump has waged a mean-spirited, costly and unnecessary war against undocumented immigrants — many of whom have been living in this country for years and have been hard-working, law-abiding members of the their communities. Thankfully, the U.S. Supreme Court reaffirmed Monday that states and cities can’t be forced to support that pernicious effort.

California has been a regular target of Trump’s anger and frustration, particularly after the state passed a so-called sanctuary law in 2017 that limits how state and local law enforcement agencies cooperate with federal immigration agents. Former Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions sued to overturn the state’s restrictions, complaining that California was trying to secede from federal law.

The Supreme Court brought that lawsuit to a halt Monday when it sided with California and rejected the Trump administration’s challenge. Notably, even Trump’s two appointees on the court — Justice Neil M. Gorsuch and Brett M. Kavanaugh — refused to hear the administration’s appeal.

At least for now, my faith in the Court is somewhat restored.  It would seem that with Trump's decline in the polls, even his appointees to the Court have decided to put the law first and Trump's whims and misogyny last. 

Northam Signs LGBT Nondiscrimination Bill into Law

When I first came out, same sex relations could land one with a felony conviction. Thankfully, that situation ended with the Supreme Court ruling in Lawrence v. Texas.  Yet over the intervening years while finally afforded the right to may, LGBT Virginians were fair game for being fired from their jobs of their sexual orientation - something that happened to me - and could be denied housing or even public accommodations. The Virginia elections in 2019 which handed Democrats control of both the General Assembly and the Governor's mansion set the stage for passage of non-discrimination protections - long blocked by Republicans prostituting themselves to Christofascists and hate merchants such as those at The Family Foundation, Virginia's leading hate group to be passed into law.  Yesterday, these protections became a reality as Governor Northam, a good friend, signed the Virginia Values Act into law.  This Act  prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in housing, public or private employment, public spaces and credit transactions.  Moreover, it gives LGBT individuals a right to sue those who violate the Act and in some cases, grants the attorney general to prosecute offenders.   The Washington Blade looks at this legislation which will make Virginia a more welcoming state and remove an obstacle to companies recruiting the best talent.  Here are highlights:

Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam on Saturday signed a bill that adds sexual orientation and gender identity to the state’s nondiscrimination law.

“This legislation sends a strong, clear message — Virginia is a place where all people are welcome to live, work, visit, and raise a family,” said Northam in a statement. “We are building an inclusive commonwealth where there is opportunity for everyone, and everyone is treated fairly. No longer will LGBTQ Virginians have to fear being fired, evicted, or denied service in public places because of who they are.”

The General Assembly approved the Virginia Values Act earlier this year. Republicans, who lost control of the General Assembly last November, previously blocked efforts to ban anti-LGBTQ discrimination in Virginia.

“With the governor’s signing of the Virginia Values Act, we have made discrimination against our gay, lesbian and transgender friends, family, neighbors and co-workers in employment, housing and public accommodation illegal in the commonwealth of Virginia,” said House Speaker Eileen Filler-Corn (D-Fairfax County) in the statement Northam’s office issued. “It is now the law of the land [in Virginia] that every Virginian can work hard, earn a living wage, and live their lives without fear of discrimination based on who they are or who they love. A tremendous victory.”

Advocacy groups also applauded Northam. . . . The Virginia Values Act will take effect on July 1, 2020.

Virginia will join 20 other states, D.C. and Puerto Rico that explicitly ban discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. Virginia is the first Southern state to enact these protections.

As a piece in the Virginia Pilot notes, Christofascist who use the smoke screen of "religious liberty" to inflict harm on others -typically so they can feel superior - vigorously opposed the legislation and can be expected to act as if the sky is falling. 

VA Democrats Make LGBT Nondiscrimination a Top 2020 Priority

Speaking with Governor Ralph Northam last month in Richmond following the Virginia 2019 elections that saw Democrats retake control of both houses of the Virginia General Assembly, he said he wanted Democrats to "be bold" on the issue of LGBT rights.  Democrats now in control of the House of Delegates and Virginia Senate appear to be doing just that and are making the passage of LGBT non-discrimination laws a priority for the 202 legislative session ( no doubt to the horror of the hate merchants at The Family Foundation).  A ban on conversion therapy is also apparently in the works. All of which underscores the reality that elections do matter and that every vote is critical - ask Nancy Guy who beat a Republican by a little more than two dozen votes.  While vacationing last week, I came across a piece that looks at the Democrat agenda on finally enacting LGBT protections long blocked by Republicans.  Here are highlights:

Virginia House of Delegates Speaker-designate Eileen Filler-Corn (D-Fairfax County) on Thursday said passage of a comprehensive LGBT nondiscrimination bill is a top legislative priority in 2020.

“Virginia needs comprehensive protections for our LGBT brothers, sisters, friends, co-workers,” said Filler-Corn during a press conference at the Pocahontas State Office Building near the Virginia Capitol in Richmond. “And in 2020 I’m here to tell you we will deliver them.”

State Dels. Danica Roem (D-Manassas) and Dawn Adams (D-Richmond) are among those who stood alongside Filler-Corn at the press conference the Virginia Values Coalition organized. State Sen. Adam Ebbin (D-Alexandria), outgoing Equality Virginia Executive Director James Parrish, Nationz Foundation founder Zakia McKensey, American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia Executive Director Claire G. Gastañaga, Human Rights Campaign President Alphonso David, National Center for Transgender Equality Executive Director Mara Keisling and Hannah Willard of Freedom for All Americans spoke.

The bill about which Filler-Corn and others at the press conference spoke would ban discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in employment, housing and public accomodation. Filler-Corn noted Virginia is one of 30 states “where members of the LGBTQ community are not explicitly protected from discrimination.”

“We’re long overdue in protecting Virginia’s LGBT community,” she said. “It is unacceptable to me, to others and clearly the voters that in 2019 a Virginian can be fired or evicted or denied service at a restaurant because of who they are and who they love.”

Roem after she defeated Republican challenger Kelly McGinn on Election Day told the Washington Blade “its time for us to pass a Virginia version of the Equality Act.”

This is wonderful news!! May the legislation pass quickly and go to Northam's office for signing.

NAACP Endorses LGBT Equality Act

Hilary Shelton, director of the NAACP’s D.C. bureau.

While in theory they should have been allies for decades given their common enemies, particularly white Christofacsists who by a seeming large majority are also white supremacists, the LGBT and African-American communities have nor always been allies.  One of the main stumbling blocks has been "conservative" black pastors who have allowed themselves year after year to be rallied against LGBT rights by the very same Christofascist who in prior generations advocated for segregation and retention of the Jim Crow laws. Indeed, here in Virginia, The Family Foundation, the state's leading hate group, has played black pastors as fools  for many years.  Now, with the very transparent effort by the Legislative Black Caucus to throw Governor Ralph Northam - the most LGBT governor in Virginia history - under the bus in order to elevate Justin Fairfax to the position of governor,  relations between the some elements of the two communities are very strained (e.g., I will not be voting for my state senator and delegate in November who are members of the Legislative Black Caucus).  A piece in Metro Weekly looks at the NAACP's endorsement of the Equality Act which hopefully may help mend fences.  Here are excerpts:

The Equality Act got a big boost on Friday night after the NAACP, the nation’s oldest African-American civil rights organization, publicly endorsed the LGBTQ rights bill currently making its way through Congress.

“We support what it does — and we support it now,” Hilary Shelton, the director of the NAACP’s D.C. bureau, told NBC News. “It’s important that it gets through.”

Shelton added that the group had previously endorsed the bill in meetings with its two main sponsors, Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) and Rep. David Cicilline (D-R.I.).

The organization’s support for the bill, which would add protections based on sexual orientation and gender identity to the list of characteristics protected under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, is considered a significant victory for LGBTQ rights groups, who had been criticized for failing to obtain the support of prominent African-American organizations before introducing the act earlier this month.

By endorsing the act, the NAACP effectively shuts down one of the arguments — albeit specious — used to justify opposition to the legislation.

“We believe the same protections that we have worked for so hard over the 110 years of the NAACP should be extended to all Americans, particularly members of the LGBTQ community,” Shelton told NBC.

He also noted that the NAACP previously supported other pieces of legislation granting the LGBTQ community expanded protections, including the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, insurance nondiscrimination protections contained in the Affordable Care Act, and the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act.

The organization also expressed support for marriage equality in the run-up to 2012, and prior to the 2013 and 2015 Supreme Court decisions that, respectively, overturned Section 3 of DOMA and legalized same-sex marriages nationwide.

Nation's Larges Naval Shipbuilder Scores High on LGBTQ Polices

As the crow flies, I live perhaps 5 or 6 miles from Newport News Shipbuilding, Virginia's largest employer and the builder of America's nuclear powered aircraft carrier fleet and many of the U.S. Navy's nuclear submarines.   For the last several years the company has been a champion of LGBT rights locally and a presenting sponsor for the HR Pride event each summer.  The Christofascists, of course, must be having conniption fits.  Unlike Virginia Republicans, Newport News Shipbuilding when your policies are welcoming to all and discrimination is banned, you can hire the best and the brightest employees.  Who they love really should play no role whatsoever in employment decisions.  Moreover, such policies make a region and/or state attractive to other progressive, forward looking businesses.  A piece in U.S. News & World Reports looks at the company's LGBT friendly polices.  Here are highlights:

One of the nation's leading gay rights groups is praising the LGBTQ-friendly policies of the nation's largest military shipbuilder.

The Daily Press in Newport News reported Friday that Huntington Ingalls Industries received a 100 rating on a corporate survey from the Human Rights Campaign Foundation.

The survey evaluated policies that include domestic partner benefits and transgender-inclusive medical benefits. The company builds aircraft carriers and submarines. It was one of 609 major businesses that earned a top rating.

The shipbuilder first participated in HRC's survey last year and scored an 85. The company's score was higher this year for a few reasons.

One was the addition of medical benefits for gender transition. The benefits include surgery, mental health services or other measures.

A piece in the Daily Press provides more on the views of the company's leadership and that of its parent company, including opposition to GOP backed license to discriminate laws masquerading as "religious freedom" laws:  

The nation’s largest military shipbuilder began ramping up efforts on diversity and inclusion several years ago at the behest of CEO and President Mike Petters.

He has vowed to change the culture of a corporate giant built on a foundation of shipyards, a traditional, male-dominated workplace. At Newport News, senior shipbuilders started walking the waterfront decades ago — back when attitudes on race, gender and sexual orientation were far different — so things won’t change overnight.

Changing the culture also means speaking out when necessary.

When the state of Mississippi advanced what supporters termed a religious freedom law, LGBTQ advocates rallied to oppose it.

Major business interests in the state opposed the bill, including MGM Resorts International, which operates casinos in the state, and Nissan North America. HII joined the opposition on behalf of its Ingalls Shipbuilding division in Pascagoula, Miss. 

Is Black Homophobia a Myth?

In the Hampton Roads area some of the most reliable minions of the anti-gay efforts of The Family Foundation ("TFF"), arguably Virginia's most powerful hate group which the Southern Poverty Law Center has yet to formally certify as  a hate group, are the leaders of black churches.   Seemingly oblivious to the white supremacist roots of TFF, these religious leaders are lead around like trained circus dogs by Victoria Cobb and her, in my view, evil compatriots who want a white Christian theocracy.  Bearing out this reality is a black friend who remains terrified of coming out to his church going parents who has said to me time and time again (we have a discussion about his need to bite the bullet and come out every few months) that I don't grasp how anti-gay the black community is in this area. Despite such concrete examples of black homophobia, a piece in Think Progress written by a blogger friend attempts to make the case that black homophobia is a myth.  I am not sure where the cited survey was conducted, but the support for same sex marriage and non-discrimination laws among black respondents is lower than the general support levels in Virginia. My take away is that the LGBT community still has a great deal of work to do with the black community. Here are article excerpts (I'd love to know what readers think):

For many years, there has been a myth that African Americans are more likely to be homophobic and thus more likely to oppose advances for LGBT equality. Conservatives have even tried to leverage this supposed wedge to slow the progress of equality. A new survey, however, not only debunks the myth, but suggests that the black community is one of the LGBT community’s strongest allies.

After California passed Proposition 8, a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage, The Advocate magazine asked on its cover, “Gay Is The New Black?” Following the lead set by Dan Savage in his “Black Homophobia” post the day after the 2008 election, the cover story relied on exit polls from the election that seemed to suggest that even though black voters largely supported Barack Obama for president, they also largely supported Prop 8.

This mythical divide between the two communities has persisted in the years since, despite the fact that the Prop 8 numbers were later debunked. Just last year, for example, writer Michael Arceneaux called out Lee Daniels for his claim that his television show Empire would “blow the lid off homophobia” in the black community, when it actually seemed to be reinforcing the myth. “Blacks are not the X-Men of anti-gay bigotry,” he wrote. “We don’t have some superior level of homophobia compared to other groups.”

Opponents of LGBT equality have, in turn, tried to capitalize on the supposed black/gay divide. A 2009 National Organization for Marriage (NOM) strategy memo revealed a blatant attempt to “drive a wedge between gays and blacks” by convincing black people not to see same-sex marriage as a civil right.

PRRI’s massive survey focused on three general questions: support for marriage equality, support for LGBT nondiscrimination protections, and support for “religious refusal” exemptions — allowing businesses to refuse service to LGBT people based on their religious beliefs.

Support for marriage equality was a bit low among Black Protestants, with only 38 percent supporting and 54 percent opposing. But on the other two measures, Black Protestants overwhelmingly supported LGBT equality. They favored nondiscrimination laws 64-31, and on the question of religious refusals, black respondents actually opposed exemptions at higher rates than any other racial group, including white respondents.

As it turns out, marriage equality and nondiscrimination protections are simply two very different questions for black respondents. For example, among black Protestants who oppose same-sex marriage, a 51 percent majority still favor LGBT nondiscrimination protections — albeit not quite as strongly.

Dr. Robert Jones, CEO of PRRI, told Think Progress that even on the question of marriage equality, black Protestants are more ambivalent than white evangelical Protestants, who oppose same-sex marriage at much higher rates. On LGBT nondiscrimination protections and religious refusals, their support flips. “I think that’s about really their own experience with discrimination,” he explained.

“The thing that African Americans and evangelicals have in common is a very strong connection to religion and particularly religion that has a fairly literal view of the Bible. They have high levels of religious attendance and fairly traditional religious beliefs, and I think that leads to some ambivalence on the issue of marriage equality.”

But on nondiscrimination, there’s a real “parting of the ways,” he said, “where an experience as a racial minority is informing and influencing their views on these issues that it just doesn’t among white evangelicals.”

The Supreme Court established marriage equality nationwide, but 28 states still offer no statewide nondiscrimination protections.

Wilson agreed, pointing out that the work that needs to be done is the same across the board. “The state of homophobia within the black community is only a reflection of the broader American culture, which finds itself in a continuous evolution in favor of the demands that define the LGBTQ equality movement.” He hopes that increased visibility of LGBT people will continue to advance acceptance and inclusion.

Saying that blacks are less extreme in their views of gays than white evangelicals doesn't, in my view, magically make the black community an ally of the LGBT community. Until the embrace of ignorance and bigotry that goes hand in hand with more fundamentalist forms of Christianity prevalent in the black community is defeated, black homophobia will not be a myth.  Yes, things ate better, but there still is a long way to go. 

Virginia House Republicans Effectively Kills Pro-Gay Bills

Once again gay friendly bills that would have protected LGBT Virginians have been effectively killed by Republicans in the House of Delegates.  Thus, gays can marry on Saturday and be fired on Monday because of their sexual orientation - a situation that no doubt warms the ice cold heart of Victoria Cobb and her fellow hate merchants at The Family Foundation, one of the foulest organizations in Virginia.  The only good news is that the same committee tabled anti-gay bills as well, apparently seeking to shield House Republicans from having to take a recorded vote that could come back to haunt them in 2017.  The irony is that a vast majority of Virginians support non-discrimination protections for LGBT Virginians - many don't realize they do not exist in Virginia - as do Virginia's leading businesses.  But sadly, the power of the Christofascists in the Virginia GOP has not been broken and hate, bigotry and the embrace of ignorance remain the hallmarks of the party.  Metro Weekly looks at the wrongs done to LGBT Virginians yesterday.  Here are highlights (when is the media going to stop using the euphemism "social conservatives" and call these people out for what they are, the Christian Taliban?):

A Virginia House of Delegates subcommittee voted 5-2, along party lines, to table a number of LGBT-related bills this week, shuffling them off to the Code Commission for further review and analysis.

The move, which was done for eight bills, regardless of whether they espoused a pro-equality or anti-equality viewpoint, allows lawmakers in the Republican-dominated House to avoid taking a firm position on LGBT issues for the rest of the 2016 session. 

Voting to table the bills and send them on to the Code Commission also allows Republican lawmakers to placate social conservatives who demand that all Republicans adhere to anti-gay orthodoxy while also giving them political cover by avoiding an on-the-record vote that could prove unpopular with a general electorate or a majority of their constituents. Polls have consistently shown that super-majorities of Virginians support nondiscrimination protections for LGBT people. 

Among the bills that were sent to the Code Commission and are not likely to be brought up for the remainder of this year’s legislative session were six bills granting protections in public employment, private employment, housing and public accommodations, as well as a measure that would have banned the practice of LGBT conversion therapy on minors.

From the anti-gay side, the subcommittee also referred to the Code Commission two bills submitted by Delegates Bob Marshall (R-Manassas, Manassas Park, Sudley, Bull Run) and Dave LaRock (R-Hamilton, Lovettsville, Berryville) that attempt to define gender in terms of biological sex only. Marshall’s bill seeks to nullify any pro-LGBT federal policies, rules or regulations dealing with discrimination that were either passed or came into effect after Jan. 1, 2012. LaRock’s bill seeks to prohibit the commonwealth or any subdivisions from adopting policies that treat gender identity discrimination as sex discrimination, regardless of any federal ruling on the issue.

These delegates refuse to acknowledge what the majority of Virginia has long believed: protecting LGBT Virginians is not only the right thing to do, but it’s what is best for the overall success of the commonwealth.

“Our hope now is the broad Republican support in the Senate will provide the bipartisan support needed to properly and accurately represent Virginia’s people and the Code Commission will take these issues into serious consideration in the upcoming year,” added Parrish.

The House subcommittee also approved two other bills from Marshall and Del. Mark Cole (R-Fredericksburg, Hartwood, Remington), respectively, putting them up for consideration by the full committee, and, later, potentially the full House.

Marshall’s approved bill seeks to circumvent and overturn several school board policies — such as ones that passed this past year in Fairfax and Arlington counties — that prohibit discrimination against LGBT students, staff, teachers or other employees. Marshall’s bill would explicitly bind the hands of school boards from passing any such policy unless the General Assembly had passed a similar policy. 

Cole’s bill, meanwhile, directly targets transgender restroom use in public facilities in any government building or school in the commonwealth. Under the bill, transgender people would only be allowed to use the restroom consistent with their biological sex. The bill would also make it harder for schools to provide alternatives to restrooms or changing facilities for transgender students. Cole’s bill received much criticism, particularly in its initial form, which was interpreted as potentially requiring teachers and administrators to check students’ genitals before allowing them to use the bathroom.

Virginia, Like Indiana Still Hasn’t Learned Its Lesson

As detailed in my upcoming February column in VEER Magazine, this year's General Assembly session has seen a raft of anti-gay, anti-transgender bills introduced by Republicans.  As is the norm with Republicans, the misogyny is cloaked as protecting "religious freedom."  Thankfully, Gov. McAuliffe has promised to veto the bills should they make it out of the legislature.  Pro-gay bills were introduced by Democrats and two have actually passed the Virginia Senate with 6 Republicans supporting them.  Sadly, the bills will likely be killed in the Republican controlled House of Delegates.  As a piece in The Advocate argues, Indiana hasn't learned from its religious freedom bill debacle last year.  The same argument applies to Virginia Republicans.  Here are article excerpts:

In one, foul sweeping gesture of rejection, the Indiana legislature this week killed our best chance of securing equal protections for LGBT Hoosiers this year. The bill, SB 344, was a measure that, while flawed in its current incarnation — with amendments advocates were working to insert — would have prohibited discrimination at the state level.  Indiana lawmakers’ unwillingness to move this bill through the legislative process reflects a special kind of stubbornness. They have not learned from last year, when the prospect of a law that would open the door to discrimination against LGBT Hoosiers unleashed backlash that the state is still feeling today.

Last year, the fight played out in plain sight of the entire nation. Governor Mike Pence and the Indiana legislature passed a Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) bill, which would allow someone to claim that their religion gives them a right to undermine nondiscrimination laws. Prominent allies like Salesforce, the NCAA, Angie’s List, Gen Con, and others spoke up and said that discrimination against LGBT people was not only wrong but bad for business. Some even said they would stop investment in Indiana. 

The national pressure forced lawmakers’ hands into adding a welcomed (though incomplete) “fix” that said the RFRA couldn’t be used to discriminate against LGBT Hoosiers in housing, employment, and public accommodations.

The climate was tense but a victory of sorts was won. For the first time, the majority of the country, including the business community, was united in saying that discrimination against LGBT people is wrong and we must put a stop to it. Better yet, the country was vocally on our side.

[C]ome the 2016 legislative session, lawmakers were angry they had lost both on the RFRA and marriage equality fronts. Perhaps they thought the country wasn’t watching this time. Whatever the reason, rather than moving forward in the direction of the nation and in line with the majority of their constituents and businesses, they introduced “non-discrimination” bills riddled with carve-outs, . . .

There was renewed hope that perhaps an affirmative non-discrimination bill would at long last prevail. SB 344 passed out of committee hours later. Unfortunately, it didn’t go far.

To the rest of the country, may they heed the lessons learned from Indiana and know that we’re watching and assuming ready position. At the end of the day, all we’re fighting for is a fair playing field, one in which everyone can pursue a life of their choosing free from discrimination.  

 Here in Virginia expect a reprise of Indiana's preference for hate and bigotry rather than equality for all citizens.

Senators Warner and Kaine Join in Introduction of LGBT Non-Discrimination Bill

Despite the marriage equality Victory, LGBT Americans continue to face legalized discrimination in employment and other realms.  Indeed, in Virginia and 28 other states, gays can be fired at will and the only recourse is to launch an expensive federal lawsuit and EEOC complaint.  Now, a bill has been introduced in the United States Senate that would change this situation.  Sadly, even if it clears the Senate, the GOP controlled House of Representatives will likely kill the measure in slavish obedience to their Christofascist puppet masters.  NBC29.com looks at the bill's introduction.  Here are highlights:

News Release from the Offices of Senators Kaine and Warner: 
 ~ The Equality Act would outlaw discrimination in the workplace, financial markets, housing, public accommodations & more ~

U.S. Sens. Mark R. Warner (D-VA) and Tim Kaine (D-VA) today joined 38 of their Senate colleagues and 158 House members to introduce historic, comprehensive federal legislation to ban discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) Americans.

“We’ve made tremendous strides in the journey towards equality, but work still remains,” said Sen. Warner, the first Virginia Governor to ban discrimination in state employment based on sexual orientation. “The Equality Act helps move us closer to true equality of all of our LGBT friends and neighbors. Discrimination has no place in our nation’s laws.”

Despite major advances in equality for LGBT Americans, including nationwide marriage equality, in the majority of states, an LGBT couple could be married in the morning and risk being fired from their jobs or evicted from their apartment in the afternoon. In Virginia, it is currently legal to fire, not hire, deny service or evict someone on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.

The Equality Act of 2015 would prohibit such discrimination nationwide by adding sex, sexual orientation and gender identity to other protected classes, such as race or religion, in existing federal civil rights laws. The bill would ban discrimination in a host of areas, including employment, housing, public accommodations, jury service, access to credit, and federal funding. The bill would also add protections against sex discrimination in parts of anti-discrimination laws where these protections had not been included previously, including in public accommodations and federal funding.

Elections make a difference and LGBT Virginians and their allies need to get out and vote against Republicans in November.

GOP Controlled House of Delegates Rejects All Pro-Gay Bills

While busy condemning Islam and ISIS, Republicans in the Virginia House of Delegates were busy prostituting themselves to Virginia's own religious extremist organization, The Family Foundation ("TFF"), a hate group in all but formal designation which seeks to impose its Christofascists version of Sharia law on all Virginians and to denigrate LGBT Virginians in particular.  Thanks to the extremists at TFF and its Republican political whores in the House of Delegates, LGBT Virginians remain subject to summary firing even by state agencies and departments and are otherwise still third class citizens.  And editorial in the Fredericksburg Free Lance Star condemns to GOP's bigotry.  Here are excerpts:

Four pieces of General Assembly legislation aimed at protecting lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender public employees from workplace discrimination have failed to make it out of the House of Delegates this year. It’s an embarrassing situation that suggests Virginia still has some catching up to do in the modern world.

The initiatives before the General Assembly would have expanded the language of the executive order to include all public employees in Virginia, whether they work for the state or any locality. There is no attempt—yet—to protect private-sector employees as well, though five states, including Maryland, and many large companies, already do.

With the legislation’s demise, Virginia will again fail to join dozens of other states that offer codified state employment discrimination protection to at least gay and lesbian workers. Virginia could have been the 17th state to include gender identity as well as sexual orientation bias protection.

Is there at least any progress on the issue in the General Assembly? It depends on how you look at it. The two Senate bills introduced by Sens. Donald McEachin (D–Richmond) and Adam Ebbin (D–Alexandria) were combined into McEachin’s SB785, which passed in the Senate thanks to two Republican crossover votes and a tie-breaking vote by Democratic Lt. Gov. Ralph Northam.

The bill was then tabled—killed—by a House subcommittee.

Republicans on that subcommittee outnumber Democrats 6–2, so the chances of such measures getting to the full committee, let alone the full House, are slim and none.

There is nothing about being gay, or lesbian, or transgender that disqualifies one from being a person, or an American or a Virginian. Ending discrimination in any form, against any group, is as important as any responsibility that our lawmakers in Richmond have. So far, it’s one they are shirking.

Virginians shouldn’t have to rely on the governor’s order, which could be undone by the state’s next chief executive. The General Assembly needs to pass a law.

Of course, gays aren't the only ones TFF Hates.  Its followers also hate blacks, the poor, Hispanics and anyone else who isn't a lily white far right Christian. 

Lt. Gov. Northam Casts Tie-Breaking Vote for Gay-Rights Bill

Yours truly with Northam at a fundraiser

In another example that elections do truly matter, Lt. Governor Ralph Northam yesterday cast the tie breaking vote in the Virginia Senate on a bill that would provide employment protections to LGBT state employees.  Currently, unless one is a federal employee or works for a federal contractor covered by Barack Obama's executive ENDA order, LGBT Virginians have absolutely ZERO employment protections.  The bill will now go to the GOP dominated House of Delegates where it faces an uncertain fate as the Virginia GOP in fealty to the haters at The Family Foundation ("TFF") continues to wage war against gays, women and the poor.  Here are highlights from the Virginian Pilot on yesterday's vote:

Lt. Gov. Ralph Northam cast a tie-breaking vote Tuesday to pass a bill that prohibits state agencies from discriminating in employment based on sexual orientation.

SB785 by Sen. Donald McEachin, D-Henrico County, tied on a 19-19 vote in the Senate. Two Democrats were absent, but two Republicans joined the remaining 17 Democrats in supporting the bill. They were Sen. Jill Holtzman Vogel, R-Fauquier County, and Sen. John Watkins, R-Midlothian.
The vote was the first tie-breaker of this year's session.

Northam's office issued a statement on his behalf: "Employment discrimination in any form is truly unacceptable, and the Commonwealth should be held to a high standard in this regard."

 It goes without saying that the two Republicans who voted for passage will likely find themselves on TFF's hit list.