Posts Tagged ‘homophobia

25
Feb
14

Arizona’s SB1062 Would Have Dangerous Consequences, Faces Backlash or “The Arizona GOP continues to get things very, very wrong.”

The state of Arizona, or at least its legislature, is once again on the anti-queer bandwagon. After last year’s embarrassing fiasco where they attempted to legislate where trans people are allowed to void their bladders, one might have hoped they had learned their lesson. But, the GOP being who it is, they’ve opted to turn their queerphobia up to eleven with their latest jab at the LGBTQ community, SB1062.

SB1062, an amendment to the state’s current statutes on “the free exercise of religion,” codifies a person or company’s right to refuse service to anyone on the basis of their religion without fear of reprisal from government agencies and regardless of any local ordinances to the contrary. It appears to stem from a string of recent incidents around the country where businesses have been sanctioned for refusing service to queer individuals. It’s been approved by both chambers of the Arizona legislature, and it current awaits a signature from GOP Gov. Jan Brewer, who has given little indication of her position on the legislation.

 Previously, this statute granted this right to refuse service based upon religious objection only to any “religious assembly or institution”, but the revised statute would read:

“Person” includes a religious assembly or institution ANY INDIVIDUAL, ASSOCIATION, PARTNERSHIP, CORPORATION, CHURCH, RELIGIOUS ASSEMBLY OR INSTITUTION, ESTATE, TRUST, FOUNDATION OR OTHER LEGAL ENTITY.

This grants the ability of essentially organization, business, or person to access the particular protections of this statute (because really, there aren’t many things that don’t fall into those categories. The particulars of the statute read as such:

41-1493.01. Free exercise of religion protected; definition

4 A. Free exercise of religion is a fundamental right that applies in this state even if laws, rules or other government actions are facially neutral.

7 B. Except as provided in subsection C of this section, state action shall not substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability.

The key portion of that pile of legalese is “even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability.” Rules of general applicability is a term that stems from a landmark Supreme Court case involving the free exercise of religion clause of the First Amendment, known as Employment Division, Department of Human Resources vs Smith. In it, the Court ruled that a person could not claim exception from a law based upon one’s religious beliefs if the law created rules that were of “general applicability”, that is-that they weren’t particularly targeted to religion or specific religious groups. This means that, as a general rule, people cannot claim exemption from things like employment, housing, or healthcare non-discrimination laws simply because of their particular religious beliefs. However, the proposed Arizona law would specifically enshrine the right of people within that state to ignore essentially ANY state law if they can ground it in their particular religious convictions.

So, what are the implications of a law like this? It means a corporation can adopt a particular religious doctrine and use it to deny service to LGBT individuals. It means religious hospitals can refuse to treat LGBT people. It means perfectly legal “No Gays Allowed” signs on businesses owned by anti-queer religious people. It means pharmacies being able to legally refuse to fill HIV meds, birth control, emergency contraception, and hormones for trans people if the pharmacy or it’s owners have specific religious views.  It could be interpreted to mean that police officers wouldn’t be required to assist LGBT individuals if their personal religious beliefs would be violated in doing so. It would absolutely mean that religious doctors or other healthcare professionals could deny life-saving pregnancy termination procedures to women if it violates their religious beliefs. Given that many racial hate groups use religion to justify their racism, it could mean that companies or organizations could use this law to refuse service to racial minorities Taken to extremes, it could even be used as a potential defense in violent hate crimes (after all, the Bible makes clear that homosexuality [along with lots of other things] is punishable by death), or as a justification for legalized spousal rape or beating (since there’s justification for both in the Bible).

Not surprisingly, the bill has received a huge amount of backlash from everything from feminist and LGBT activists concerned about how the law will be used, to business owners who are concerned that it will have wide reaching effects of tourism in Arizona (a large force in their economy). George Takei wrote a length missive calling for a boycott of Arizona if the bill is signed, and that call has been echoed loudly in the LGBT community. The mayors of Arizona’s largest cities, both of their sitting Senators, and a large contingent of their members of Congress have called of Gov. Brewer to veto the bill. Leaders of the state’s largest business groups wrote to Brewer imploring veto, concerned about opening businesses to potential litigation and having the state branded an unfriendly place for visitors. And in just the last few days, even three member of the state legislature who voted in favor of the bill have come forward urging a veto on the measure, calling passage of the measure a “mistake.’

In the wake of this much pressure, it seems somewhat unlikely that Gov. Brewer would be willing to sign the legislation into law. However, the fact that the bill hit the governor’s desk at all is a very disturbing reminder of to just what lengths the GOP is willing to go to attack the LGBT community. Unfortunately, this is also far from an isolated incident. Similar bills attempting to enshrine the legal right to discriminate using a smoke-screen of religious liberty have been introduced in Ohio ,Idaho, Mississippi, and several other states recently, though none have yet progressed as far as the legislation in Arizona.

Despite the progress made in areas like marriage equality, the fight for equal rights and equal protections for LGBT individuals is FAR from over, and it appears that this new round of “religious objection” legislation represents the Republicans’ next volley in the pushback against the progress that has been made in the movement for equality for queer people.

 

 (Author’s note:  This is a significant simplification of the case law here, interpreted and explained by a scientist, not a lawyer.)

Advertisements
01
Aug
13

Gay Sex is Still Illegal in Louisiana, or “Unconstitutional somehow doesn’t mean unenforceable in Baton Rouge.”

Louisiana Sodomy Sting: How Invalidated Sex Laws Still Lead to Arrests | TIME.com.

Apparently, a Supreme Court ruling isn’t even enough to keep law enforcement in Louisiana from harassing the LGBT community. It appears that the Baton Rouge Sheriff’s Deputies t has been conducting illegal strings against the gay community since at least 2011. The stings involved an undercover officer approaching men in a park, and getting them to agree to have sex in a private location. That’s it. Not men looking to have sex in public, with children, or even for money (this is not a judgement on my part, except for the sex with kids part. Just mentioning actual enforceable laws). No, they’re just looking for gay men willing to have entirely consensual, private sex for free, and arresting them for violating Louisiana’s “crimes against nature” laws. The trouble is, the Supreme Court very clearly struck down such laws in 2003 in  Lawrence v. Texas.

The Baton Rouge Sheriff’s office initially claimed that they had no idea that the laws were declared unconstitutional and were unenforceable and the their deputies acted on “good faith.” None of the 11 men who have been arrested in such stings since 2011 have been charged, of course. That hardly seems to matter; these men were still publicly outed, had their names and pictures published, had to endure the stress of arrest and detainment, and were forced to spend money on legal representation and bail. My research turns up no instances of straight people similarly targeted for this kind of treatment, even though the Louisiana anti-sodomy law covers both hetero- and homosexual acts. It seems a little crazy to think that someone would keep authorizing these stings (and their expense) if no conviction had ever resulted in if there were no ulterior motive. This appears to me to be either a very clear case of members of the Sheriff’s department specifically targeting the LGBT community for harassment and humiliation, or incompetence and mismanagement of a law enforcement office to an extent that someone should go to jail. Which side of this coin do you want to be, Baton Rouge? In either case, I would suspect that this sort of thing will end up costing the city severely in either a settlement or a lengthy and ugly civil suit.

Unfortunately, the ignorance (or just plain ignoring) of Lawrence v. Texas isn’t isolated to Baton Rouge. In Virginia, GOP Attorney General and Gubernatorial Candidate Ken Cuccinelli is fighting to keep anti-sodomy laws on the books and enforced. Cuccinelli is dredging up the long-since-debunked pseudoscience garbage connecting and equating queer people with pedophiles to built support for his effort. Not surprisingly, he’s also pretty well known for getting his ass handed to him during an climate-change-denying witchhunt. I guess jurisprudence and constitutional law aren’t requirements to be Attorney General in Virginia.

It’s hard to deny the long-standing culture of homophobia within police departments across the country, even if it often falls just under the radar (Amnesty International did a lovely piece of this a few years back). Cases like this certainly don’t do much to improve the already very tarnished image of law enforcement in the eyes of the LGBT community. With queer hate crimes remaining still all-too common, where are we supposed to turn to when even those charged with protecting us are complicit in our abuse?

I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention that it appears that, at the very least, the East Baton Rouge Sheriff, Ed Gautreaux, is at least putting forth an effort to make amends and effect change after these cases came to light a few days ago. While it certainly won’t undo the damage already inflicted on these men, but at the very least it might reduce the chance that such things will happen again in the future. Unfortunately, with anti-sodomy laws still on the books in many states, I fear we may see some copycatting of this behavior. The best solution, of course, is get these laws repealed officially. However, as controversial as all queer related topics remain politically, I don’t see this happening any time soon. Nonetheless, it remains of vital importance for us a community to know our rights, the laws that might affect us, and to vigorously defend ourselves and each other when these kinds of violations occur.

27
Jul
13

The Pardoning of Alan Turing, or “Sorry, United Kingdom, but you are 60 years too late for this to have much meaning.

Alan Turing to receive pardon – CBS News.

Okay, if you don’t know who Alan Turing is, you should crawl out from under your rock and look him up. He’s one of the largest pioneers of what would later become the field of computer science, as the Turing Test (for computer intelligence) is named after him. The Turing Machine is one of the earliest electronic computing devices. He is largely credited with breaking with the German Enigma code in World War II, which allowed the Allies to decode classified, encrypted German military communication. Many believe the intelligence gained from this shortened the war by a matter of years. Unfortunately for Turing, he was also gay, and any form of homosexual sex was illegal at that point in history. In 1952, after admitting to having a relationship with a young man over the course of an investigation into the burglary of his apartment, Turing was charged, tried, and convicted of “gross indecency,” which was nothing more than homosexual sex. Turing was forced to undergo a treatment known as “chemical castration” to render him impotent and destroy his sex drive, or face a significant prison sentence. He lost his security clearance, and his position with the British government. In 1953, Turing took his own life with cyanide.

Turing wasn’t the only man forced into inhumane medical treatment, or who had his life destroyed by the rampant homophobia of the time. Almost 50,000 men in the UK shared his fate during that period. But the tragic loss of such a brilliant, celebrated young scientist and war hero for having the audacity to be gay and unashamed sheds stark light on just how recently our world treated the LGBT population as little more than vermin to control. Turing saved countless lives through his efforts in cryptology, but even that didn’t grant him a bit of leniency in the face of the widely-held notion that being gay is evil and immoral. The fact that Turing’s conviction stood for 60 years is just a further testament to how deeply entrenched those ideas are. Even just last year, there wasn’t enough positive sentiment for Parliament to pass such a pardon. Finally, it appears that later this summer, Alan Turing, father of modern computing and hero of WWII, will be pardoned for his crime of nothing more than being gay.

While I’m sure that for some of the remains of Turing’s family, the pardon is a meaningful act that may give them some peace about the memory of the this extraordinary man. But in the grand scheme of things, it feels like a hollow gesture to me. It makes great press, but little else. Turing is still lost to us, as are all of the contributions he had yet to make. 50,000 other men were still humiliated and subject to horrific medical treatment, and they haven’t received pardons. If this is Parliament’s way of proving it’s commitment to the LGBT community, then they have a long way to go. I recognize that the UK has comparatively progressive attitude towards LGBT rights, especially compared to the US, but some compensation for those subjected to the same treatment, some concrete action on improved services for the queer community, or recognition for current queer leaders would have a great deal more meaning than a shallow correction of a horrible mistake that was left to fester too long, and tarnished the memory of one of the most important scientists of the 2oth century.

24
Jul
13

Violent Homophobic Rhetoric in Ontario, or “Two brave women in Kingston are calling out some cowards.”

Letters To Kingston Lesbians Contain Bizarre, Troubling Threats (PHOTOS).

Here’s one of those items that I feel like I needed to share just to give more give more light to just how incredibly disturbing this is, and to make sure people realize that these sorts of things still go on and that our work as advocates isn’t even close to done.  A lesbian couple in Kingston, Ontario recently received some very disturbing hate mail, demanding they move out of town, or face violence. The first note is a page-long demand letter, addressed to “Lesbian Bitches,” and it lays out the plan of a supposed “small but dedicated group of Kingston residents” to force all homosexuals out of the city. They claim to have a “head office in the Deep South”, and to have successfully forced out several other people in the area, and it includes some fairly ominous threats including “You are not going to be safe at home, office or anywhere else”. A followup letter came days later (I guess they were expecting these women to just pack up and leave town in a day or two.) This is a much shorter letter addressed to “lesbos” informing them that they have purchased BB guns for their children which are intended to be used to “hunt them down” because “what better targets than you.” It ends with a note that these “fun and games” will turn “deadly serious.”

I’m just sickened by this entire thing. I’d like to think that this is the work of one or a very very small handful of truly deranged homophobes, and that swift action by the Kingston Police and the RCMP will find these idiots before this actually escalates into physical violence. I’m hoping against hope that there aren’t actually any children being indoctrinated into this kind of culture of hate and violence, and it’s all just more ploy for their sick game. But the realist in me has to admit that homophobia, even the violent and aggressive kind, is still alive and well that it’s entirely possible that some underground hate group IS operating in Kingston and legitimately threatening the physical safety of the LGBT community in that area (the letters themselves are threats enough to their psychological safety, even if they’re BS).

I applaud the response of these fantastic women, who have remained defiant in the face of these threats. They’ve peacefully protested this garbage by continuing on with their lives, publicly exposing the threats made (even writing about it on HuffPo), and packing their front porch with supportive friends and neighbors. I was really moved by the last few lines of her post about the situation:

As we make a point of facing these threats publicly, we can’t ignore the corrosive effect this all has on our imagination. It’s odd to be surrounded by all the support in the real and virtual world, and yet still think suspicious, fearful thoughts about passers-by. The deluge can happen in an instant, but climate change — both the physical and the social varieties — has been building for years. It has history behind it. So relocation offers aside, we’ll stay on our front porch with our friends, to take cover and peacefully stand our ground.

It’s sad to realize that such ugly homophobia can still pop up in an area as progressive as Ontario, but it’s reassuring to know that our community remains steadfast in it’s strength to withstand these kinds of attacks. Bravo, ladies.

02
Jul
13

The GOP Can’t Let Go, or “How Republicans feel the need to proclaim their homophobic bigotry as often as possible.”

Tim Huelskamp Introduces Constitutional Amendment Banning Gay Marriage.

The ink is barely dry in the Supreme Court’s declaration that the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional, and already Republicans are clamoring to enshrine anti-LGBT bigotry into the US Constitution. Congressman Heulskamp from Kansas has introduced a constitutional amendment to restrict marriage to one man and one woman throughout the US. Already, 28 Republican legislators have signed on as sponsors.

Now, given the make-up of the US Congress, and the composition of the state legislatures, this amendment has absolutely ZERO chance of passing. But the mere existence and introduction of such an item is a degree of bigotry that makes my stomach turn. Essentially, upon hearing that the Supreme Court had decided that they could no longer legally repress and discriminate against gays, these Republicans basically decided to stomp their feat like obstinate children and scream “BUT WE DON’T WANNA BE NICE!” Their homophobia is so profound that they want legal discrimination written into our Constitution. It’s sad. It’s disgusting. And they should be mocked and ridiculed for their outdated, hateful, bigoted views at every turn.

Now, we still don’t have immigration reform. We still don’t have budget agreements. We haven’t reformed the FISA Court. We have still have a jobs problem. But the GOP wants to waste more time fighting for their right to treat LGBT people like second class citizens.

Shame on you, Mr Huelskamp. And shame on all those supporting this amendment. And if the GOP leadership is foolish enough let this see even a peak of daylight, shame on them too. The voters will remember this.




A blog about nerdy things, feminist thoughts, and queer/trans life. It's full of rants, opinions, and personal stories. I don't claim to speak for absolutely anyone but myself. Read at your own risk.

Follow me on Twitter

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 3,460 other followers

Follow Trans.Nerd.Feminist on WordPress.com