Utah Legislature Kills Gay Rights Bill For 5th Year In A Row

Bad news from Utah. For the fifth year in a row a bill which would prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity in housing and employment anywhere in the state of Utah has been killed by the Mormon (and Republican) dominated Legislature. SB 51, authored by Democratic State Senator Ben McAdams, would have

prohibited discriminationincludes sexual orientation and gender identity as a prohibited basis for discrimination in employment; prohibits political speech or activity as a basis for discrimination in employment; modifies exemptions to the Utah Fair Housing Act; includes sexual orientation and gender identity as a prohibited basis for discriminatory housing practices;

Interestingly, in the last few years the Mormon Church has dropped its opposition to statewide LGBT protections in employment and housing and several municipalities in the state have passed local ordinances which do just that.

Just to demonstrate the extreme level of ignorance about civil rights in Utah check out this quote published by the Salt Lake Tribune:

Gayle Ruzicka, president of the Utah Eagle Forum, spoke against the bill, saying that exemptions for religious organizations should be expanded to include religious people. Although existing anti-discrimination laws exempt owners of four or fewer units, Ruzicka questioned how she would be affected if she owned a 100-unit apartment complex.

"What if I was renting to singles and wanted I certain standard. I couldn’t say, ‘You’re living a homosexual lifestyle. You cant live here,’" Ruzicka said. "I think I should have the right to do so." 

McAdams said allowing bias because of a person’s religious beliefs would undermine state and federal laws that prohibit discrimination. 

"If I want to rent only to people of a certain ethnicity [because of my religious beliefs], I can’t do that. That’s discrimination," McAdams said.

It is because of religious extremists like Ruzicka that we need federal prohibitions on discrimination in housing that include sexual orientation and gender identity. McAdams makes the immediate connection that if you can allow discrimination based on religious beliefs it will soon lead to what is clearly unacceptable discrimination based on other categories.

Progressive and LGBT activists are not taking this repressive action by the Utah legislature denying equal rights to the LGBT community quietly.

POLL: Huge Majority Supports LGBT Workplace Equality

A new poll commissioned by Human Rights Campaign confirms that the vast majority of Americans believes that employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity should be illegal.

The poll found a vast majority (77 percent) of voters support protecting LGBT people from discrimination in employment.  The support for employment protections defies conventional political wisdom, reaching across party and ideological lines.  Seventy percent of self-identified Republicans and 67 percent of conservatives support anti-discrimination laws.  Support is strong even among groups who tend to be less supportive of LGBT issues, such as seniors (69 percent among voters over age 65), those with a high school degree or less (68 percent), observant Christians (77 percent), born-again Christians (74 percent), and residents of the Deep South (72 percent). 

In a finding showing a need for more public outreach and education for employment non-discrimination laws, most voters believe anti-discrimination laws already exist.  Eighty-seven percent of voters believe it is illegal under federal law to fire someone for being gay and 78 percent believe it is illegal under state law.  Even in states without anti-discrimination laws, 75 percent of voters think it is illegal under state law to fire someone for being gay or lesbian. 

Of course there is pending federal legislation called the Employment Non-Discrimination Act which would actually make the law comport with what most people believe the law is already: illegal to fire workers because they are LGBT.

But it is absolutely unlikely to pass Congress while the Republicans control the majority of the U.S. House.

Map of Status of Gay Rights in Africa

Joe.My.God links to this interesting map about the state of the law towards homosexuality throughout Africa, provided by ILGA.

Interestingly, friend of MadProfessah.com, Rod McCollum is currently in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia for an international AIDS conference and is posting some amazing first person reports of his trip on his blog, Rod 2.0. Check it out!

WATCH: Heart-rending video by bullied teenager

If you can watch this video all the way without being emotionally impacted you are a heartless troll. It helps that the soundtrack is one of my favorite songs of all-time, Sia Furler's Breath Me (most famously known as the music played for the last four minutes of the final episode the HBO television series Six Feet Under).

It was made by a kid about to go into eighth grade who had been bullied since second grade. 


The video has received over 3,000,000 views on YouTube and multiple twitter shout outs from LGBT-supportive celebrities.

MA: Transgender Rights Bill Passes Legislature

The Massachusetts House passed the Transgender Civil Rights Bill 95-58 and the Senate passed it on a voice vote this week.

The Rainbow Times reports:

The measure, adopted by the House last night, passed the Senate by a voice vote this morning.  Governor Deval Patrick has indicated he will sign the bill into law. It would go into effect July 1, 2012. 

The transgender civil-rights bill would add protections based on “gender identity” to the statutes banning discrimination in employment, housing, education, and credit. It would also add gender identity to current hate-crimes laws. 

The measure, however, does not include protections for public accommodations, such as hotels and restaurants, restrooms, locker rooms, public buildings and transit, including subway and bus lines. 

That omission bothers a lead sponsor of the bill, Representative Carl M. Sciortino, Jr. (D-Medford). But he said, the bill is a step forward  “It makes sure that people who have faced violence and discrimination have legal remedy.”

Massachusetts will become the 16th state to include protections for transgender people from discrimination into law. Curious that this is happening more than 7 years after the state embraced marriage equality. Better late than never.

It's also a big deal that public accommodations are not included in the bill, but hopefully that will happen in the near future.

POLL: Americans Supports Trans Equality

There is excellent news about a new poll which bolsters the case for strong transgender civil rights protections.

The Public Religion Research Institute concluded:

Overwhelming majorities of Americans agree that transgender people should have the same general rights and legal protections as others.*

·              Approximately 9-in-10 (89%) Americans agree that transgender people deserve the same rights and protections as other Americans.

·                     Overwhelming majorities of all major religious groups agree that transgender people should have the same rights and protections as other Americans, including approximately 8-in-10 (83%) white evangelical Protestants, and roughly 9-in-10 Catholics (93%), white mainline Protestants (90%), and the unaffiliated (95%).

·                     Overwhelming majorities of Republicans (86%), Independents (94%), and Democrats (92%) also agree.

·              More than 8-in-10 (81%) Americans agree that legal protections for gay and lesbian people should also include transgender people.

Approximately three-quarters of Americans both say Congress should pass employment nondiscrimination laws to protect transgender people, and favor Congress’s recent expansion of hate crimes legislation to protect transgender people.

·              Three-quarters of Americans agree that Congress should pass laws to protect transgender people from job discrimination.

·                     Solid majorities of every major religious group agree that Congress should pass laws to protect transgender people from job discrimination, including nearly two-thirds (65%) of white evangelical Protestants.

·                     A majority (55%) of Republicans agree that Congress should pass laws to protect transgender people from job discrimination, as do overwhelming majorities of Independents (79%) and Democrats (86%).

·              Approximately three-quarters (74%) of Americans also favor Congress’ recent expansion of federal hate crime laws to include crimes committed on the basis of the victim’s gender, sexual orientation or gender identity, compared to only 22% who oppose.

·                     Solid majorities of every major religious group favor Congress’ recent expansion of hate crimes legislation to include gender identity. White evangelical Protestants demonstrate the lowest support, but nearly two-thirds (64%) of this group favor including gender identity in hate crimes laws.

·                     A majority of Republicans (56%) and approximately 8-in-10 Independents (79%) and Democrats (84%) also agree.

Approximately two-thirds of Americans both report being well informed about transgender people and issues, and generally understand what the term “transgender” means.

·              Two-thirds of Americans agree that they feel well informed about transgender persons and issues, while 3-in-10 disagree.

·              In order to determine whether Americans understood the term “transgender,” PRRI conducted a follow-up survey in September 2011 that asked respondents to report what the term “transgender” meant to them in their own words. Among the 91% of Americans who report that they have heard of the term transgender, 76% give an essentially accurate definition. Thus, overall, more than two-thirds (69%) of Americans are able to identify what the term “transgender” means without any assistance.

·                     Forty-six percent define a transgender person as someone who switches from one gender to another, either generally (39%) or through a medical procedure (7%).

·                     Eleven percent define a transgender person as someone who lives like the opposite gender (6%) or identifies more with the opposite gender (5%).

·                     Ten percent describe a transgender person as someone who is born the wrong sex or born in the wrong body.

·                     Nine percent define a transgender person as someone who has identified with both genders.

·              The following are examples of verbatim responses:

·                     “A person who feels like they are more like the other sex”

·                     “It’s someone born one sex, and they think they’re another”

·                     “Generally someone who thinks they are in the wrong body”

·              Eleven percent of Americans say that they have a close friend or family member who is transgender, compared to 58% who say that they have a close friend or family member who is gay or lesbian.

#FAIL! No Referendum On FAIR Education Act

Well, well! The heterosexual supremacists at StopSB48.com have officially admitted that they have failed to collect enough signatures to place a referendum on the enactment of the FAIR Education Act on the 2012 ballot.

This is great news because despite the hysterical pleadings of StopSB48.com and the (mostly religious) professional homophobes who supported the signature gathering campaign, all the bill would do is make sure that the contributions of LGBT citizens are included when the historical contributions of other marginalized groups are also taught. This is what our opponents call "the homosexual agenda."

Gov. Brown Signs Two Bills Outlining Transgender Protections

The legislative session in California has come to a close and Governor Brown is busy signing or vetoing bills that made it through the Democratically controlled legislature.

Two bills that are of great interest to the LGBT community are Assembly Bill 433 and Assembly Bill 887.

The Transgender Law Center trumpeted the enactment of the bills into law (and explained what they do):

These laws have been years in the making.  Through our statewide survey of almost 650 transgender Californians, the 1,200 calls that our legal team receives annually and our conversations with you at events around the state, we discovered two problems that continued to resurface: We found that California's nondiscrimination laws were often not accessible to those who needed them the most. Employers, health care providers, housing authorities - even transgender and gender non-conforming people - were unaware that it is illegal to discriminate against transgender Californians. Our legal rights were hidden within the definition of "gender", leaving many people in the dark about their rights, and many institutions out of compliance responsibilities. This had an especially severe impact on low-income and trans communities of color who tend to face employment discrimination at higher frequencies within transgender communities.   We heard from many transgender people who were unable to change their birth certificates and other identity documents due to financial and medical barriers. Onerous and outdated standards for court-ordered gender changes created unfair and damaging barriers that disproportionately impacted trans people of color, immigrant trans people, low-income trans people and others who could not overcome the many hurdles to securing basic identity documents. These are identity documents we all need to work, travel, and be our authentic selves. With the help of your input and our partners at Equality California and GSA Network, we came up with two legislative solutions to these problems. The Gender Nondiscrimination Act (AB 887) takes existing protections based on gender and spells out "gender identity and expression" as their own protected categories in our nondiscrimination laws. By making these protections explicit, people will more clearly understand California's nondiscrimination laws, which should increase the likelihood that employers, schools, housing authorities, and other institutions will work to prevent discrimination and/or respond more quickly at the first indications of discrimination. The Vital Statistics Modernization Act (AB 433) will alleviate the confusion, anxiety and even danger that transgender people face when we have identity documents that do not reflect who we are. The bill will streamline current law and clarify that eligible petitioners living or born in California can submit gender change petitions in the State of California. The Vital Statistics Modernization Act conforms California's standards to the standards set by the United States Department of State for gender changes on passports, and it makes common-sense changes to the law that ensure the process is simple for qualified petitioners to navigate.

It should be noted that California law already prohibited discrimination against transgender individuals but because the words "gender identity" or "gender expression" did not appear in the most common places in the California code lawyers would look these anti-discrimination protections were not well publicized or well-understood.

The new laws make it explicitly clear that California's non-discrimination laws also cover transgender residents.

Prosecutor Decides To Retry Brandon McInerney (As An Adult)

Lawrence King (left) and the person who shot him to death, Brandon McInerney 

Well, this is interesting news. Last month a mistrial was declared in the first trial of Brandon McInerney for the murder of Lawrence King. MadProfessah was ashamed at the result and implored prosecutors to retry McInerney for the point blank shooting of his middle school classmate in February 2008.

Today comes word that prosecutors will again try McInerney as an adult for the crime, but will drop the hate crime charge, basically making the wrong choice TWICE. Many LGBT activists like myself insist that the murder was a hate crime, because it is clear that McInerney targeted King for death because of his gender identity. However, since both boys were under 18 years old (McInerney had barely turned 14 at the time of the crime) there are also many LGBT activists who disagree with the decision to try him as an adult.

The San Jose Mercury News reports:

Prosecutors on Wednesday announced their intention to pursue a murder charge in adult court against 17-year-old Brandon McInerney. However, a hate crime charge will be dropped, Deputy District Attorney Maeve Fox said.

Last month, a judge declared a mistrial after a nine-woman, three-man panel couldn't reach a unanimous decision on the degree of McInerney's guilt for killing 15-year-old Larry King. After a series of votes, seven jurors were in favor of a voluntary manslaughter conviction, while five others supported either first-degree or second-degree murder.

Superior Court Judge Charles Campbell set a Nov. 21 trial date, according to Fox, but it's unclear if it will be held in Ventura County. The first trial was moved to Los Angeles County due to pretrial publicity.

McInerney was 14 in February 2008, when he is accused of killing King at E.O. Green Junior High School during a computer lab class.

Prosecutors contend McInerney embraced a white supremacist philosophy that sees homosexuality as an abomination. Police found Nazi-inspired drawings and artifacts at his house, and a white supremacist expert testified at trial the hate-filled ideology was the reason for the killing.

Authorities maintained the shooting was premeditated and deserving of a murder conviction. During the trial, Fox noted at least six people heard McInerney make threats against King in the days leading to the shooting.

Defense attorneys acknowledged that McInerney was the shooter but explained that he had reached an emotional breaking point after King made repeated, unwanted sexual advances. They also have argued that juvenile court would be the best venue to try their client.

The reactions from the LGBT community to this news will not be good.

Largest Private Employer In U.S. Adds Trans Protections

Well this is good news! The largest private employer in the United States (and 3rd largest in the world!) is Walmart, and they just recently announced that they have changed their discrimination policies to protect transgender employees.

According to the Windy City Times:

Big box retail giant Wal-Mart has added transgender protections to its employee non-discrimination policy.The protections include gender identity and gender expression said Phillip Keene, a company spokesperson.
Keene did not confirm when the new policy went into effect, only that the change was made "several weeks ago."
News of the new policy has not been widely publicized.
Sexual orientation protections are already a part of the company's "Discrimination and Harassment Prevention Policy."

Unless the Employment Non-Discrimination Act passes Congress and  is signed by the President , this is probably the largest expansion of job protections that will happen in  the Congressional term.

SHAME: Hung Jury In Trial Of Gay Teen's Killer

Madness! Apparently the jury in the trial of Brandon McInerney for the killing of teen age Lawrence King who was widely perceived as gay (even though he was probably transgender) is unlikely to reach a verdict even though they have only been deliberating since last Friday.

The defense has released all sorts of information to paint the confessed killer in as a favorable a light as possible with the jury, including the fact that the fellow teenager was abused by his alcoholic and violent father (who is now dead). The defense has also put the onus on King, claiming that he was the aggressor in the relationship with McInerney, a "gay panic defense" which has sent LGBT blogs hissing with anger, and may be illegal under California law.

The Los Angeles Times reports:

Jurors weighing the fate of an Oxnard teenager accused of killing a gay classmate indicated Thursday that it is unlikely they will be able to reach a verdict in the high-profile case.

But the judge hearing the case indicated it is likely he will ask jurors to continue their deliberations, even though they have already taken votes – two of which were 8 to 4 and a third was 9 to 3. Jurors did not indicate whether they were leaning toward guilt or acquittal.

Jurors in the case, in which Brandon McInerney fatally shot 15-year-old Larry King in a junior high school computer lab, were ordered earlier Thursday to continue deliberating despite the failed votes.

If there’s a mistrial, it would bring to a close a trial that has been followed closely by gay-rights groups that have fought hard to protect gay and transgendered students from campus bullying.

But as the weeks of testimony continued and a more nuanced portrait emerged of what was happening at E.O. Green Junior High before the shooting, it also raised a host of thorny questions.

The prosecution says it was a calculated murder carried out in part because McInerney was exploring white supremacist ideology and didn't like homosexuals.

Defense attorneys painted a different picture, that of a bright but abused 14-year-old who snappedafter being sexually harassed by King.

Asked Thursday by Superior Court Judge Charles Campbell when it was possible the jury could reach a decision with more time, the forewoman of the panel said “I suppose it’s possible.”

She indicated, though, that it was seemed “unlikely” jurors would come to an agreement in the case.

Jurors also asked for a clarification in jury instructions pertaining to “what is a person of average disposition” and “what does it mean to act rashly.”

The jury began deliberating Friday, weighing eight weeks of testimony in a trial that included nearly 100 witnesses. Many of those testifying were students and teachers at E.O. Green Junior High School in Oxnard who saw tensions on campus rising after King began coming to school dressed in makeup and girl's boots.

If it is true that the jury is unable to reach a verdict and McInerney will not face any criminal sanctions that will be a devastating loss for LGBT youth in California and around the country.

Hat/tip to TowleRoad.

CA Legislature Passes Gender Equality Bill

Excellent news from California. Although our state already has the strongest LGBT protections available under state law in the country, there are always was to improve. The State Senate put the last touches on AB 887, the Gender Non Discrimination Act, authored by out lesbian Assemblymember Toni Atkins of San Diego, by passing it by a vote of 25-13 this week.

San Diego Gay and Lesbian News reports:

AB 887 protects all Californians. No matter your skin color, your age, where you come from or whether you're gay, straight, or transgender, we are all protected by the same rights," Atkins said. 

"We share equal protection in employment, housing, and education. This bill ensures that no one is left out."AB 887 seeks to strengthen employment, housing, and other civil rights protections for all Californians, particularly those who face discrimination based on gender identity and expression. 

While California anti-discrimination laws already define "gender" to include a person's gender identity and gender expression, AB 887 explicitly enumerates gender identity and expression as protected categories in a number of state codes to provide clarity to those who are victims of unlawful discrimination as well as for business owners, employers and other entities required to comply with the anti-discrimination protections.

I presume Governor Jerry Brown will happily sign the bill into law soon.

Jury Deliberating Anti-Gay Hate Crime Verdict

The trial of Brandon McInerney for the point-blank shooting (twice!) of fellow teenager Lawrence King has now reached the jury deliberation stage.

Towleroad posts the AP report:

"Jurors began their discussions on Friday to determine whether 17-year-old Brandon McInerney is guilty of first-degree murder in the slaying of 15-year-old Larry King at E.O. Green Junior High School in Oxnard. The panel is expected to deliberate for only a couple of hours because a juror has a prior commitment...McInerney has pleaded not guilty to one count each of murder and a hate crime. If convicted, he faces more than 50 years in prison. Jurors also can consider a conviction of voluntary manslaughter, which carries a maximum 21-year term."

MadProfesssah has been following the story of this case very carefully, from the reports of the shooting, to the debate over whether the death penalty should be a factor and jury selection and now the trial itself.

WATCH: Amazing Transgender Rights Ad From Argentina