MAP: Sexual Orientation & Gender Identity Discrimination in U.S.

This map is what the state of play in sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination in employment looks like in the various states as of March 2011. There are 29 states that have no protections for LGBT people in employment in any way (so your boss can say, "I'm firing you because you're a fag!") and you have no recourse what so ever.

As of July 6th, there are now 15 states which ban discrimination on the basis of gender identity, and there are 21 which ban employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity (all the states which ban gender identity discrimination also ban sexual orientation discrimination). The six states which do not overlap are: New York, Wisconsin, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Maryland and Delaware. (One should note that 3 of these 6 states have already enacted marriage equality!) Wisconsin is  ahead scratcher because they passed sexual orientation non-discrimination way back in 1982, the first state in the country to do so. There was gender identity nondiscrimination legislation pending  in New York and Maryland which died when those legislative sessions ended this Spring.

The Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) would prohibit employment discrimination nationwide on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. Significantly, A version of ENDA (without gender identity protection, thus some people called it "SplENDA") passed the U.S. House under Democratic control in 2007 but failed to be brought up for a vote in the 2009-2001 111th Congress. With Republicans in majority control of the U.S. House it is very doubtful that ENDA will pass that body in the 2011-2013 112th Congress.

Herman Cain Says Homosexuality Is A Sin and A Choice

MadProfessah first blogged about Black republican presidential candidate Herman Cain way back in April, noting then that he was once a mathematics major.

Cain has started making headlines because he is starting to appear in the middle or at the top of polling lists in early Presidential primary states, with more support than media darlings like Jon Huntsman and Tim Pawlenty.

Openly gay Miami Herald blogger Steve Rothaus has the transcript:

"I believe homosexuality is a sin because I'm a Bible-believing Christian, I believe it's a sin," he said. "But I know that some people make that choice. That's their choice." 

Cain was asked: "So you believe it's a choice?" 

"I believe it is a choice," he responded.

I wonder if Mr. Cain believes in the Golden Rule?

Hat/tip to Rod 2.0

Catholic Charities Sue Ill. For Right To Anti-Gay Discrimination

Today in religious hubris news, three chapters of Catholic Charities (based in Peoria, Joliet and Springfield) have decided to sue Illinois in order to gain the right to take state money (as much as $30 million) but discriminate in who they provide adoption and foster care services to. As you may recall, on June 1, Illinois' civil unions law went into effect. In response, some local Catholic Charities have announced they would suspend foster care and adoption services altogether unless they have the right to violate Illinois Human Right Law which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation (and race and marital status).

Simply astonishing. The Advocate has the deets:

In the suit, Catholic Charities for the dioceses of Springfield, Joliet, and Peoria claim that their state-funded adoption services are exempt from the civil unions law under provisions of the legislation as well as existing state religious freedom protections.

"Same sex couples' and unmarried cohabiting couples' application for adoption or foster care referrals could be fully and adequately serviced and accommodated (as they are now) by [the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services] referring them to other providers which do not share [our] conscientious religious objections," attorneys for the dioceses wrote in their complaint.

"On the other hand, the harm to plaintiffs and to the poor, needy and vulnerable third parties whom they serve, should no injunctive relief issue, would be severe and ... even unconscionable," they wrote.

The suit was prompted in part by a March 8 letter from Illinois attorney general Lisa Madigan's office inquiring into Catholic Charities of Springfield's existing policies and whether they violate the law.

"Please be advised that the Illinois Human Rights Act makes it a civil rights violation for any person to 'deny or refuse to another the full and equal enjoyment of facilities, goods, or services of any public place of accommodation' on the basis of unlawful discrimination," which includes sexual orientation and marital status as protected characteristics, the letter read in part.

In a Tuesday statement, a spokeswoman for the attorney general's office said of the suit, "Organizations that receive taxpayer funding to provide public services must comply with the law. Unfortunately, instead of working with the state to ensure compliance with child protection and civil rights laws, the dioceses have opted to go to court."

Filed on behalf of the dioceses by attorneys from the Thomas More Society in Chicago, the lawsuit comes after the announcement late last month that Catholic Charities in Rockford was pulling out of adoption services entirely — a decision described by one source as a possible "trial balloon" from the church to put pressure on the state assembly and attorney general's office. But "there's nothing to indicate that the governor or the assembly is interested in providing an exemption" for religious groups contracted by the state for adoption services, the source said.

Meanwhile, Catholic Charities' claim that Illinois is undermining its religious freedom in state adoption contracts has been criticized by several national LGBT legal and advocacy groups.

"It's outrageous," said Camilla Taylor, national marriage project director for Lambda Legal. "They're asking permission to put their desire to discriminate ahead of the welfare of children in state care. And they're asking to do this at taxpayer expense. It's a tragic result for children."

Even the head of Catholic Charities in Illinois, Anthony Riordan, recognizes that the position stated in the lawsuit is nonsensical, making this statement:

That the Catholic Charities adoption contracts in question are not private but rather funded to the tune of a reported $30 million annually by the state is not ultimately what this is about, he argued. "I think it's certainly a reasonable point: If you receive state funds, you have to follow the directives and the rules of the state," Riordan said. "But our position is that faith-based charities have religious liberties and certain rights of conscience."[emphasis added]

I wonder how far Catholic Charities would like these alleged religious liberties to go? The right to be exempt from age of consent laws? Statutes of limitation on child molestation lawsuits? Why stop at the human rights law and try to get exemptions for every law that they don't agree with?

It should be noted that the notion that religious beliefs should trump the concept of "equal justice under the law" and the underlying principle of public accommodations civil rights laws has been rearing it's ugly head in other contexts, most notably the fight to legalize marriage equality in New York State.

Openly Gay LAPD Officer Wins $1.1M Lawsuit

Sgt. Ronald Crump

An openly gay police officer named Ronald Crump who literally appeared on a poster to recruit people to the Los Angeles Police Department has won a million-dollar judgement against the City of Los Angeles for anti-gay job discrimination and retaliation.

Karen Ocamb of LGBT POV has been covering the story diligently:

Openly gay Sergeant Ronald Crump is suing the city of LA claiming that his boss in Media Relations, Lt. John Romero, created a hostile work environment for gay and lesbian officers. His civil suit outlines a series of incidents over six months in which Crump claims he was harassed and humiliated. For instance, Crump claims that Romero said: “I was a religion major at Liberty University – Jerry Falwell would roll over in his grave if he knew I hired you.” The suit notes that Fawell founded the conservative religious university – but doesn’t mention that Falwell’s Moral Majority helped launch the antigay movement in 1977 with Anita Bryant.

Crump claims that Romero subjected him to “nearly constant harassment on account of his sexual orientation, including introducing Crump to new co-workers as “the new Ruby [Crump’s predecessor] – the only difference is that he doesn’t wear heels.” When Crump told Romero that he didn’t appreciate being referred to as the “new Ruby,” he says Romero told him to “’get over it’ and chuckled as he walked away.”

The lawsuit also details comments Romero allegedly made about other LAPD employees, calling one a “quirky, effeminate guy;” and of another, “She’s a militant, don’t ask/don’t tell activist lesbian,” among other similar comments.

The lawsuit also reports how in January 2009, a lesbian co-worker “remarked that Lt. Romero made the office environment stressful and that she saw Romero treating Plaintiff and others poorly.”  That lesbian left the Media Relations Department one month later, which was closely followed by an inquiry into the concerns about the hostile work environment from then-Assistant Chief Jim McDonnell’s office. Before he left the LAPD, McDonnell had an extraordinarily good relationship with the LGBT community.

And people think this blatant discrimination won't happen in California just because we have strong laws against it? It's up to the justice system to enforce the laws on the books.

Here's a local media report on the Crump verdict:

Los Angeles - A Los Angeles police sergeant who claimed he was the victim of retaliation for being gay was awarded $1.16 million by a jury today. 

A Los Angeles Superior Court jury deliberated for part of Wednesday afternoon and most of today before finding in favor of Sgt. Ronald Crump. 

"This was not a case about Ronald Crump being gay, but about the department's retaliation against him," attorney Gregory Smith said on behalf of Crump. 

Smith said his client's involuntary transfer from the Los Angeles Police Department's Media Relations Section in 2009 after complaining about his treatment from his boss at the time, Lt. John Romero, left the sergeant without a chance for significant promotions and pay increases. 

"He's not going anywhere in this department," Smith said during closing arguments Wednesday. "He is finished forever. They have completely destroyed his career for any advancement or promotion." 

Deputy City Attorney Daniel Aguilera declined to comment on the verdict. However, his colleague, Deputy City Attorney Shaun Dabby Jacobs, told jurors that Crump did not lose rank or pay with his changes of position and earns about $110,000 annually. She also said that months passed after he began the media relations assignment before he complained about alleged mistreatment.

I wonder what City Attorney Carmen Trutanich and LAPD Chief Charlie Beck will say about the Crump case the next time they address a large openly LGBT audience during one of their regular community forums?

Nevada Legislature Passes Transgender Rights Bill(s)

The Nevada Legislature has completed work on Assembly Bill 211, a bill to prohibit employment discrimination based on gender identity or gender expression, passing it by votes of 29-13 in the Assembly and 11-10 in the Senate to reach Republican Governor Brian Sandoval's desk.

Additionally, the Nevada Senate had previously passed bills to prohibit discrimination in public accommodations (Senate Bill 331) and housing (Senate Bill 368) on the basis of gender identity or expression. These bills are still pending in the Assembly.

The Senate killed Senate Bill 180, which would have added gender identity or gender expression to the state's hate crimes law, even though the Federal Hate Crimes Law already has provisions which include sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression.

The National Gay and Lesbian task Force sent out a statement praising the Nevada's legislature's positive legislative actions to protect transgender individuals:

"This is a wonderful victory for the people of Nevada. We commend lawmakers for ensuring that all Nevadans, regardless of gender identity or expression, are protected from discrimination in employment. The startling statistics and personal stories found in our national survey on transgender discrimination show just how critically necessary these protections are. No one should fear being jobless, homeless and going hungry because of discrimination. Without legal protections, transgender people are made particularly vulnerable to bias and abuse. This law will literally save lives. We thank the Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada for its hard work leading to this victory and we're proud to be a partner in this effort. We look forward to the governor's signature on this important measure."

The Hawaii Legislature passed and Democratic Governor Neil Abercrombie signed into law a measure prohibiting employment discrimination on the basis of gender identity of gender expression earlier this year.

TN Senate Approves Bill To Repeal Local LGBT Rights Laws

In Tennessee, the State Senate has passed legislation to prohibit local ordinances which ban discrimination based on sexual orientation. The only city in Tennessee which has a local gay rights ordinance is Nashville, so basically the state legislature is repealing Nashville's ordinance and preventing any other locality from enacting  LGBT civil rights ordinance in the future.

A local news report from NewsChannel5:

A vote Thursday afternoon in the Senate all but cemented the passing of state's Equal Access to Intrastate Commerce Act. Senators voted 21 to 8 on the proposal that would prohibit local governments from creating anti-discrimination laws that are stricter than the state's has passed the Senate.

"It had nothing to do with intrastate; it had nothing to do with jobs. It had to do with some people that folks didn't like. And they twisted it up, dressed it up in bows to make it look different," said State Sen. Thelma Harper of Nashville.

The move by state legislators will repeal Metro Nashville's ordinance barring contractors from doing business with the city if they don't ban discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.

Ostensibly, the legislators are claiming that they want to have uniform statewide rules on non-discrimination. I suppose it's just a coincidence (or oversight) that they have also refused to pass a bill which would include sexual orientation or gender identity as characteristics protected under statewide civil rights laws.

MD Gender Identity Bill Killed By 6 Traitorous Democrats

For the second time in a few weeks, a huge priority of the LGBT community has been killed by the Maryland legislature. Previously it was HB 175, the marriage equality bill, and today it was HB 235, the gender identity non-discrimination bill.

From Equality Maryland:

 MARYLAND SENATORS WALK AWAY FROM JUSTICE - SEND GENDER IDENTITY PROTECTIONS BACK TO COMMITTEE 

Equality Maryland thanks supporters for the significant progress made in 2011 and vows to keep up the fight for full protections

Annapolis, Maryland, April 11, 2011 - Today, led by Sen. DeGrange, the Senate referred House Bill 235, the Gender Identity Anti-Discrimination Act, back to the Judicial Proceedings Committee by a vote of 27-20, effectively ending efforts to pass vital protections in housing, employment, and credit for transgender Marylanders.

Senators Kasemeyer (D-12), Klausmeier (D-8), McFadden (D-45), Middleton (D-28), Robey (D-13) and Zirkin (D-11) were expected to support ending discrimination based on gender identity in housing, employment, and credit, but voted instead to recommit the anti-discrimination bill. 

Equality Maryland's Executive Director, Morgan Meneses-Sheets:
"Six Senators who committed to support HB 235 took a walk on justice and fairness today and turned their backs on the most vulnerable members of our community.  We are appalled that lawmakers continue to play politics with much needed protections for the transgender community.  

We must not forget all the positive strides we accomplish as a community this year overcoming significant hurdles, including getting this legislation out of the Senate Rules Committee.  Supporters of this critical legislation made hundreds of phone calls and sent thousands of emails to their legislators. Countless members of the transgender community shared their very personal stories of discrimination.  We are grateful to them for their courage and to every supporter who made their voice heard on this important bill.

Equality Maryland remains committed to fighting against discrimination and injustice targeting the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community at every turn.  Progress takes time.  Today's result was not fair or right, but we will keep up the fight to make the Free State truly free." 

###

Equality Maryland is Maryland's largest lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) civil rights group, with thousands of members across the entire state. Equality Maryland includes: a 501(c)(4) advocacy organization that lobbies in Annapolis and across the state to create equal protection under the law for LGBT Marylanders and their families; a 501(c)(3) educational foundation that works to eliminate prejudice and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity through outreach, education, research, community organizing, training and coalition building; and Equality Maryland PAC, which exists to influence elections. For more information, visit www.EqualityMaryland.org.