thomascwaters.com

Senators get 705,000-plus letters opposing ‘hate crimes’

Anyone who reads my blog regularly knows that I’m a major cheerleader for grassroots constituent advocacy. Making contact with your elected official is the single most important thing a person can do other than vote. but the linked article below demonstrates a bit about just what we are up against with our opposition. The article is specifically about national hate crimes legislation, but the opposition to any GLBTQ-related legislation is based on the same bigotry against homosexuality. They are doing everything in their power to stop any progress on any front whatsoever.

What I find so henious about this is the level of dishonesty involved:

“This could create a chilling effect on religious speech, connecting innocent expression of religious belief to acts of violence against individuals afforded special protections,” he wrote. “The criminalization of religious speech, such as speech against the practice of homosexuality, has already been seen in other countries with similar hate crimes legislation in place.”

Radio talk icon Rush Limbaugh has warned his audience about the advancing threat of “hate crimes” laws.

“Some people are going to be put in jail for things that they say,” he said. “Hate crime legislation. That’s where they determine what’s in your mind when you commit a crime. That’s when they decide what you were thinking … If you were thinking unapproved thoughts, that would make the crime you committed even worse.”

This is all, of course crazy if you look at the bill, and what it actually says. But the opposition will stop at nothing to maintain hatred and bigotry.

Numbers like 705, 000 letters sounds overwhelming. That may not be true either, but no matter how many letters were actually received, it isn’t a small number. It cold be easy to feel discouraged and wonder why bother. But in reality, now is the time we have to step it up even more. But I think we must make wise and strategic decision on where we put our time and energy. There is no area of civil rights legislation that is unimportant. We could go round and round trying to decide should we go for hate crimes, or nondiscrimination, or ending DADT, or [fill in the name of your favorite GLBTQ-related issue]. but the truth is we can’t do it all, all at once. So, can we look at it from the standpoint of where can we make real progress, and get the most bang for our buck?

I’m a big believer in working first, at the local and regional level, and then at the state level, for I think it is easier for the average person to have an impact in these areas. I am not a fan of the recent suggestions for a March on Washington for October. What are we going to do? Get 400,000-600,000 thousand people there and put on a show, and to what end?  Our opponents can get more letters to Washington that we can get bodies there! but I’m also willing to have my mind changed on Washington. I just don’t see a strategy, or any explanation of what the March will do. but I’m open to it.

There has never been a time where it was more important for every GLBTQ person to get involved in some way, shape, or form. Even the littlest of action is needed. but most importantly, we need thousands and thousands of gay, bi, lesbian, trans, queer and straight supporting people to get out there, and make a difference. Come out! Talk about the issues and how they impact you and the people you love. Advocate for legislation in your city, region, or state. Even at the National level. Know what is going on! Confront hatred and lies with facts and real information.

We will not achieve full equality over night, but failure to get involved and take action now may prolong the struggle indefinitely. When you look at what we are up against, we can only succeed if we are all in this one together.

Senators get 705,000-plus letters opposing ‘hate crimes’.

The article is a good read, but I admit, I posted this because of the headline. Totally! And the picture.

We’re Deer. We’re Queer. Get Used to It. | MNN – Mother Nature Network.

This Forbes.com story provides a number of statistics from polls over time that demonstrate attitudes towards GLBTQ issues. It is a good read.  The title is about Gay Marriage, but the polls deal with many aspects of gay acceptance. for instance, Should Gays have equal rights in terms of job opportunities? 55% said yes, in 1977, and 89% in 2008! Numbers like that demonstrate why protections like PA HB 300 are timely and aligned with public opinion.

Gay Marriage And Public Opinion – Forbes.com.

Unintended Consequences

Last Thursday, I posted about meeting with PA State Rep Joe Petrarca, and he had four main concerns he expressed about PA HB 300. Today, I’d like to talk about his second concern- that bills sometimes have unintended consequences and should be thought through carefully. This is an important concern and one worth thinking about. It is one where the opponents to this type of leghislation have really had a field day spreading misinformation, and yet it is likely the argument against the legislation that should be taken most seriously. But then, I’d hope any legislation would be subjected to a process by which unintended consequences might be examined.

Rep Petrarca used an example in our meeting of a bill that was designed to get money out to where it was needed. The state gave money to intermediary organizations with the expectation that it would be passed further down, and this didn’t happen. The intermediaries kept the money. Good point. What is in PA HB 300 that would keep unexpected consequences from happening? I think there are two main points to make about this concern.

A simple change to existing PA law

Unlike the representative’s example, this is a very straight-forward bill (no pun intended). It adds language to the existing human relations commission nondiscrimination policies. In his example, there were two needed steps: 1) pass money down, and 2) expect money to be passed down further. Unless the language of the bill was designed to make the second part explicit, a problem could occur. PA HB 300 is quite different. The language is very clear. It adds Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity and Expression. Both of these terms have pretty specific meanings. so there is truly very little ambiguity in the language of the bill. The language chosen is very intentional, and each term speaks to a different form of discrimination.

Sexual Orientation has very clear meaning. Individuals are either heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, or asexual., That’s pretty clear. Gender Identity and Expression are also fairly clear terms, although truly less understood by most people. I think this is because “sexual orientation” has been a topic of conversation and cultural exploration for many years, but Gender Identity and Expression hasn’t had the same exposure. From music (I kissed a Girl) to TV (everything from the Real world to day-time soaps) to movies (MILK!), there is a long history of educating people about sexual orientation. A set of points about Gender Identity and Expression is posted to my blog.

Because this is a change to existing legislation, it is easy to look at the ways the existing protected classes have been interpreted, and where, if any, has the intention of the legislation been abused.

This legislation exists many places

In whole or in part, these protections exist in over 20 states and over 300 municipalities across the country . Of the Fortune 500 companies,  472 including the 27 that name Pennsylvania as home provide these protections already. For example, sexual orientation has been a protected class in Pittsburgh for almost 25 years and Gender Identity and Expression protected for 10 years! If this legislation is the catastrophe-waiting-to-happen that opponents say it is, there would be well documented cases to be found here or elsewhere. But none exist. None. I could find no documented valid case in any of my searching. Opponents to this bill cite 2 examples which I have discussed in an earlier blog post, but when each is investigated, in neither case were the results different from what would be expected. In both cases, a violation of religious expression is cited, but in neither case is that really what happened.

If this legislation was to cause unintended consequences, it would have happened by now somewhere across the 20 states, 472 major companies, or 300 regional or local municipalities where this language is in use.

A good bill for Pennsylvania

While the focus of this post is unintended consequences- as if these would all be negative, it is useful to see how this language can protect many Pennsylvanians who may not even realize what it has to offer them. Consider how Gender Expression protects all Pennsylvanians. There may be a woman, who doesn’t fit the stereotypical example of feminine, but who is passed over for a promotion. She is heterosexual and married, yet her gender expression is judged unfairly. Or a heterosexual man who is assumed to be gay because he dresses well or talks with his hands.

The use of clear language, lack of any known problems from a long history of this type of legislation existing, and the ability to protect all Pennsylvanians, makes this a good piece of legislation for us today.

Via Twitter, I just found this blog, the Pansy Project. Worth taking a look!

The Pansy Project Blog.

My partner Brad and I were just having a discussion about this over dinner last evening. he might characterize me as being “the glass half empty” but my point was we are at a very critical juncture in the battle, and the opposition isn’t going down without an extreme fight. The link below is a good read. Here are my thoughts about it.

It is both extremely exciting to read this and very bothering at the same time. It may be that we have turned a corner. It may be that momentum is moving in the right direction. But, I think it is horribly wrong to announce that the culture war is over. It isn’t over until it is over, and we have a long way to go until that point.

This is one problem with the Marriage Equality issue. On the one hand, it provides an easy issue to wrap your head around. It is easy to determine what marks a win or a loss. But is it the best or only barometer of where we are overall? I don’t think so. We have more states in our country that lack basic anti-discrimination legislation protecting GLBTQ people than that provide these protections. The right to marry in 4 states doesn’t do much for the people in over 30 states who can still be fired, refused housing or public accommodations due to their sexual orientation or gender identity. Far too many states lack adequate hate crimes legislation. There is still DOMA to contend with as well as DADT on a federal level, and still no national hate crimes legislation.

Past these basic civil rights, the GLBTQ communities have a lot of healing to do. A rise in HIV infections are the result of the lost battle for clear, honest and effective prevention education over the last decade. During the earliest days of the epidemic, we spoke of eroticizing safer sex. But those messages were stripped from AIDS prevention due to federal funding measures. Generally speaking, today’s young people simply gamble with their lives. And drug use like crystal is ravaging parts of our communities. Being the embattled, during this long and dangerous culture war has indeed taken its toll. With basic civil rights and a stronger sense of general support from all americans, the healing can begin.

But when? Two generations away when evangelicalism is gone?

I’m not a sports fan, but I have endured enough games to know that the period after it looks as if the battle is won, is the exact time when the game is really on. The GLBTQ communities have much reason to feel emboldened and there is a light at the end of the tunnel, but we still have much fighting to do before there is real victory. So, I’d say, no- it isn’t official yet. The Culture War isn’t over, but it may be coming towards an end. We’re doing a great job gaining ground. Don’t give up the fight till we raise the rainbow flag at the top of the hill.

What do you think? Leave comments and let’s get the discussion going.

It’s Official: We Won the Culture War :: EDGE Boston.

Interesting blog post in the type of my own blog. This “Gathering Storm” commercial is really drawing attention and setting the stage for the discourse, ugly as it may be.

What’d I Say?: X-Post: The Gay Marriage Fantasies of the Right.

There is no time to sit back even if we want to celebrate Iowa and Vermont. The ability to marry is great, but if men GLBTQ people can still be fired, refused housing and public accommodations simply for being who they are, we are still way behind in terms of equality.

North Dakota lawmakers deem sexual orientation ‘a lifestyle choice’ – from Pink News – all the latest gay news from the gay community – Pink News.

I have paid some attention to this story since it broke last week, but haven’t found it yet worth writing about until today.  If you haven’t been following it, Dana White, president of the UFC used the word, “faggot” in a pergorative way while verbally trashing a reporter, and it has raised a stir. He then apologized, but the story hasn’t really died, yet.

Here is some text from his apology:

“I chose some words that offended and hurt some people,” he said. “Anybody who knows me knows that I would never, ever maliciously attack somebody who wasn’t attacking me, and as far as the gay and lesbian community, my comments were not directed towards them.”

“I have no problem with the gay and lesbian community; I’m actually a supporter of many of their issues. The last thing that I would ever want anybody to think about me or think is cool is to go out and attack somebody because of their sexual orientation. That was not my intention, that’s not the way I said it, and I apologize for anybody that I offended or hurt.”

The remark for which he is apologizing was to label an anonymous source for Loretta Hunt a fucking faggot and a pussy and a liar. In addition to calling her retarded, a moron, and dumb.

So here is what I want to say about this. Our culture, even “good guys” who support gays and lesbians need to step back and think about the images and words used in the name of testosterone to put down other people. There is a real disconnect between thinking it is OK to belittle someone by calling them a fucking faggot, and not recognizing how this can encourage others to dismiss, belittle and mistreat real faggots.

White says, after talking about use of the word “n*gger”:

If that’s the direction society wants to go with “f*ggot” and its equivalents, wonderful.  I’ll sign any petition or rally behind any tangible effort, even though I tend to agree with the other side of the argument i.e. the only way to make a word go away is to rob it of its significance by pretending it doesn’t have any until it doesn’t.

And there lies the rub. How is it that the word Faggot is robbed of it’s significance as a mob of guys bloodies and beats a young man to a pulp because he is gay, as they scream “faggot at him? How is it that the word is liberated as a group of men kidnap and rape a young lesbian?

It isn’t that there is a direct relationship. Every time someone utters the word “faggot” violence happens. But the degree to which words like Faggot are used pergoratively and as vicious attack weapons, accompanied or not by physical attack demonstrates an underlying lack of respect for all people.

Often this gets labeled as homophobia or bigotry. I’m not sure it is either. Dana White is neither a bigot or homophobic in my eyes. He is however a straight white male acting unaware of how his actions, words and underlying intentions display a lack of true respect for the people he claims to be a supporter. It is the inherent underlying bigotry that operates below the surface- and one of the reason it is so successful at continuing to keep GLBTQ people as second class citizens and the recipients of sexual orientation- related violence.

Sticks And Stones Break Your Bones—Words Are More Dangerous in the UFC | Bleacher Report.

Amending the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act: HB 300

PA HB 300 has been rasing discussion all over the state. Infortunately those who wish to treat GLBTQ people as second class citizens are doing their best with scare tactices, exagerations and false claims  to thwart progress on this bill. I want to post a set of talking pointsa about the boill to set the record “straight.”

Current Pennsylvania law provides basic legal protection against discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, ancestry, age, national origin, handicap or disability, education and the use of a guide dog, but not sexual orientation, or gender identity or expression.

Amending the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act (PHRA) to prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity or expression would provide basic protection to ensure fairness for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Pennsylvanians.

Many states have already amended their state civil rights laws to protect against this kind of discrimination.

Twenty states: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia have laws protecting gay, lesbian,  and bisexual people from discrimination.  Thirteen states also prohibit discrimination against transgender people through legislation or case law.  Almost 300 municipalities in the United States, including 14 in Pennsylvania, have civil rights protections based upon sexual orientation, gender identity, or both.

Many major businesses in Pennsylvania have employment policies prohibiting such discrimination.

More than 100 employers, including some of the largest corporations, in Pennsylvania have non-discrimination policies including sexual orientation and/or gender identity.  462 Fortune 500 companies, including all 27 Fortune 500 companies headquartered in Pennsylvania, prohibit discrimination based upon sexual orientation. These companies recognize that attracting and retaining the best workers is critical, and that employers with a reputation for respecting diversity are at a competitive advantage with
these protections.

This change will make Pennsylvania  competitive with our neighbors.

Our neighboring states of Maryland, New Jersey, and New York already have laws prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

Pennsylvania has already taken steps in this direction.

In 1975, Pennsylvania Governor Milton Shapp issued the first state executive order banning discrimination in state employment on the basis of sexual orientation.  This executive order has been reissued by each of Governor Shapp’s successors and now also includes gender identity or expression.  The following Pennsylvania municipalities prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity or both: Allentown; Easton; Erie County; Harrisburg; Lancaster; Lansdowne; New Hope; Philadelphia; Pittsburgh; Scranton; State College; Swarthmore; West Chester and York.

Yet, too many of our citizens are not covered by their employer’s policies or their municipality’s laws.

Discrimination based on actual or perceived sexual orientation and gender identity or expression, effectively denies qualified individuals equality and opportunity.  The lack of
uniform policy across the state leads to confusion for employers and employees and protects only those Pennsylvanians who work in one of the municipalities that prohibits these types of discrimination. Based upon 2000 US Census Data, 79% of Pennsylvanians are not covered by a non-discrimination ordinance.

The Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission (PHRC) supports amending the PHRA to include protections on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity or expression.

The PHRC enforces the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act.  The Act prohibits discrimination in employment, housing, and public accommodations.  The PHRC opposes discriminatory acts against all individuals, including those who belong to classes not currently protected under the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act.

Pennsylvania Headquartered Fortune 500 Companies with Non-Discrimination Policies including sexual orientation.

Air Products & Chem.
Alcoa
AmerisourceBergen
Aramark
Cigna
Comcast
Crown Holdings
Erie Insurance Group
H.J. Heinz
Hershey Foods
Ikon Office Solutions
Jones Apparel Group
Lincoln National
Mellon Financial Corp.
PNC Financial Services
PPG Industries
PPL
Rite Aid
Rohm & Haas
Sunoco
Toll Brothers
UGI
Unisys
United States Steel
Universal Health Svcs.
Wesco International
York International

Provided by the Value All Families Coalition
For more information, contact
Jake Kaskey at
jkaskey@equalitypa.org or
(215) 731-1447 ext. 14.