Aiming to curb the effects of gentrification and displacement on LGBTQ heritage and culture in San Francisco, a city-sanctioned group of cultural activists, community organizers and city staff has developed a series of wide-ranging policy proposals in a draft report recently presented to the San Francisco Historic Preservation Commission.
Regarded as the first comprehensive effort of its kind anywhere in the world, the report from the LGBTQ Cultural Heritage Strategy Working Group makes recommendations in three general areas: community services and education; economic opportunity and equity; and arts, culture and heritage. The draft report is available here.
This monumental undertaking was initiated by a 2016 resolution by former San Francisco Supervisor Scott Weiner, now a member of the California State Senate. In addition to addressing housing, services and economic opportunities, the report prioritizes several key proposals crafted by the Arts, Culture and Heritage Committee, a group of about 20 participants which we were honored to cochair over the last year.
Drawing on input from a number of community workshops and meetings, as well as a public survey that received 1,500 responses, our committee established a goal to “honor, protect, and celebrate our rich and diverse LGBTQ+ heritage while nurturing our community of artists and community organizations.”
Five Key Strategies
We enumerated five key strategies: 1) Support and advance LGBTQ cultural districts; 2) establish a permanent Museum of LGBTQ History and Culture; 3) create an LGBTQ Historic Preservation Advisory Group; 4) increase access to affordable housing and workspace for LGBTQ artists; 5) develop LGBTQ focused heritage and arts programming and K-12 and post-secondary curricula and educational materials.
The draft report spells out objectives and action steps to move these strategies forward. Based on feedback from the Historic Preservation Commission and others, the report will be refined in the coming months, then presented for approval to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors. Along with the Mayor’s Office of Transgender Initiatives and the San Francisco LGBT Community Center, the GLBT Historical Society likely will take a leading role in implementing the recommendations.
We hope the Citywide LGBTQ Cultural Heritage Strategy will serve as a blueprint to guide San Francisco municipal policy and budget development to protect and support the heritage and culture of our diverse communities — in particular those under the greatest economic duress such as the transgender community and queer communities of color. And we trust it will provide a jumping off point for LGBTQ communities in cities worldwide that hope to develop their own preservation and heritage initiatives.
Terry Beswick is executive director of the GLBT Historical Society. Shayne Watson, an architectural historian and preservation planner, is co-author of the Citywide Historic Context Statement for LGBTQ History in San Francisco and is founding chair of the GLBT Historical Society’s Historic Places Working Group. Ramona Webb is associate artistic director of the Queer Cultural Center, a multiracial community-building organization that fosters the artistic, economic and cultural development of San Francisco’s LGBTQ community.
October is Bullying Prevention Month and Thursday, Oct 18 is #SpiritDay, a tradition started in Oct 2011 after a number of LGBTQ young people were lost to bullying & suicide. To visibly let our LGBTQ youth know they are loved & supported by a community that cares, we wear purple (the color for Spirit on the rainbow flag) and, since 2012, we’ve been making a big, beautiful, community collage!
Visit our website for full details on these 3 ways you can get involved this year and show support for LGBTQ youth:
Make a donationto help us address bullying & support more LGBTQ youth in Napa & Sonoma counties!
Octubre es el mes de prevención del acoso y el jueves 18 de octubre es el #DíaDeEspíritu (#SpiritDay), una tradición que comenzó en octubre del 2011 cuando fallecieron varios jóvenes LGBTQ debido al acoso y al suicidio. Para proclamar visiblemente a nuestras/os jóvenes LGBTQ que son amadas/os y apoyadas/os por una comunidad a quien si le importan, nos vestimos de morado (el color de Espíritu de la bandera del arco iris) y, cada año desde 2012, ¡hemos creado una gran y hermosa colección de fotos comunitarias!
Aquí hay 3 formas en que Ud. puede participar este año para mostrar su apoyo a jóvenes LGBTQ:
Lesbian candidate for Texas governor Lupe Valdez rejected anti-transgender bathroom legislation — once a priority for anti-LGBT Gov. Greg Abbott — as “fear-mongering” in a debate Friday night with her opponent.
During the debate at the Lyndon B. Johnson Presidential Library in Austin, KSAT-TV anchor Steve Spriester asked Abbott whether he’d sign a bill barring transgender people from using the restroom consistent with their gender identity.
Abbott, the Republican incumbent, initially dodged and talked about his priorities, including cutting property taxes, job creation and arresting gang members, eliminating gun violence in schools and taking care of Hurricane Harvey victims.
“That is going to be my agenda this coming session. Period,” Abbott said.
Pressed by Spriester on whether the anti-trans bathroom would be on the agenda, Abbott replied, “Not on my agenda.”
Arguably Abbott’s assertion anti-trans legislation isn’t a priority for him marks a slight change in position for the governor, who last year called for a special session of the Texas legislature to pass anti-trans legislation.
But when asked if he’d sign such a measure should it came to his desk, Abbott hedged.
“I won’t sign hypothetical bills,” Abbott said. “All I can tell you is what my agenda is, which I did, and what I’m going to be focused on during the session.”
Valdez, a Democratic candidate and the first openly gay person to run for governor in Texas with a major party nomination, took the opportunity of her time to respond to denounce the anti-trans legislation.
“He listed gang members and several other things, and I’m almost wondering does that mean that transgenders are gang members because that’s what he was going after,” Valdez said. “There is a continual fear-mongering, and I don’t believe in laws that start out with fear. We need to stop the fear-mongering in our laws and get down to what really matters to all Texans: To have an equality life, to have an equal and fair opportunity in this state instead of just dealing with people that you don’t agree with.”
Although anti-LGBT forces last year sought to pass an anti-trans bathroom bill in Texas, the measure was defeated in the state legislature following outcry from the business community and LGBT advocates. Abbott called for a special session of legislature solely for the passing the legislation to give the measure new life, but it still didn’t succeed. Major businesses — including IBM, which has a large presence in Texas — opposed the legislation.
In a seeming attempt to justify the anti-trans legislation, Abbott responded by talking about the importance of safety, which has been a talking point for proponents of bathroom bills.
“All Texans want to make sure that they and their families are safe,” Abbott said. “One reason I talk about safety tonight is because I talk about safety every day.”
Concerns laws against discrimination enabling sexual predators has proven unfounded based on the lack of problems in jurisdictions with such laws on the books, including 20 states and D.C.
The Williams Institute at the University of California, Los Angeles, made public a study that found after passage of these laws, there were actually fewer incidents of privacy and safety violations than in places without gender-identity inclusive public accommodations laws.
Abbott then pivoted to law enforcement organizations that have endorsed him for re-election, asserting they support because they know he’ll “work with law enforcement to keep Texas safe.”
Valdez, a former Dallas County sheriff, conceded these organizations endorsed him, but attributed that to her sher tenure as sheriff, when she said “took on the good ‘ol boys” and made changes.
“Not everybody was happy, and yes, they have a habit of endorsing the incumbent, but the governor holds the purse, and he holds it with a vengeance,” Valdez said. “I personally know about that, so why wouldn’t they endorse him?”
Despite the expected Democratic “blue” wave in November, Abbott enjoys a healthy lead over Valdez in the polls. Last month, a Quinnipiac poll found Abbott has a 19-point advantage and leads Valdez 58-39.
A federal judge ruled Sunday that a 2017 law replacing the controversial HB2 doesn’t prohibit transgender people from using restrooms and other public facilities that correspond to gender identity.
U.S. District Judge Thomas D. Schroeder also allowed a legal challenge to go forward on one part of the new law, known as HB142. The challenge is to the part of the law which, until Dec. 1, 2020, prohibits local governments from passing any nondiscrimination ordinances regulating public accommodations or private business practices.
“While HB142 does not prohibit plaintiffs’ efforts at advocacy, it plainly makes them meaningless by prohibiting even the prospect of relief at the local level,” Schroeder wrote in his opinion.
House Bill 142 was passed and signed into law last year to replace House Bill 2, which is known mostly for requiring transgender people in government buildings and schools to use restrooms, locker rooms or showers that corresponded to the genders listed on their birth certificates — not the person’s gender identity.
House Bill 2 also established a statewide nondiscrimination ordinance that excluded LGBT people. Another part of the law, later repealed, kept people from filing workplace discrimination lawsuits in state courts.
Republicans in the General Assembly quickly passed HB2 after the Charlotte City Council approved a nondiscrimination policy that allowed transgender people to use public facilities according to gender identity. Republicans argued that HB2 was needed to keep girls and women safe from sexual predators who might take advantage of an ordinance similar to Charlotte’s.
House Bill 2 sparked a national backlash in which several sporting leagues pulled events from the state and musical stars canceled concerts. Some businesses called off expansion plans in the state because of the law. Lawsuits were filed against HB2 in U.S. District Court.
An amended lawsuit set its sights on HB142. Plaintifffs argued that the new law didn’t solve anything and created new problems. They said the law was so vague that transgender people didn’t know if they would be criminally prosecuted for using restrooms that correspond to their gender identity.
Schroeder held a hearing in June in U.S. District Court in Winston-Salem on motions to dismiss that were filed by House Speaker Tim Moore, R-Cleveland and Senate Leader Phil Berger, R-Rockingham. The University of North Carolina system also filed a motion to dismiss.
In his ruling Sunday, Schroeder largely rejected arguments that transgender people were being harmed because of the new law’s vagueness. He said he was not persuaded that transgender people were being harmed because of the new law. He said the new law appeared to return things to the pre-HB2 status quo, when transgender people frequently used restrooms according to gender identity.
But Schroeder also found there were possible equal protection issues with the part of HB142 that prohibits local governments from passing anti-discrimination ordinances. He said the law makes it harder for transgender people to advocate for policy changes that would benefit them.
“It is definitionally the case that a facially neutral law will ‘on its face,’ treat all citizens ‘in an identical manner,'” Schroeder wrote. “But in the instant case, plaintiffs allege that ‘the reality is that the law’s impact falls on the minority.’ It is transgender individuals, not biological-access advocates, who allege denial of the equal protection of the laws.”
Berger and Moore did not have immediate comment on the decision.
Joaquin Carcano, lead plaintiff in the lawsuit, said she was relieved “to finally have the court unequivocally say that there is no law in North Carolina that can be used to bar transgender people from using restrooms that match who we are.”
“For the past two and a half years, I have been unable to use restrooms in my home state without worrying that I will be subject to discrimination, harassment or even arrest,” she said in a statement. “Our community has faced so much discrimination because of HB2 and HB142, and this decision will give us more support to defend the rights and basic humanity of our community members across the state.”
Chris Brook, legal director of the ACLU of North Carolina, said the decision lessens some but not all of the harm of HB142 and HB2.
“The court’s decision does not account for the very real injuries LGBT people have faced under both HB2 and HB142, but we will continue fighting for the rights of all LGBT people in North Carolina as this case proceeds. The bottom line is that LGBT North Carolinians deserve to feel secure in knowing that when they go about their daily lives and interact with businesses open to the public, any discrimination they encounter is unacceptable.”
A lesbian has filed a lawsuit accusing US authorities of denying her of spousal survivor’s benefits because her long-term partner died before same-sex marriage was legal.
Helen Thornton, from Washington state, lodged the case with LGBT+ civil rights organisation Lambda Legal, seeking the the benefits based on her relationship with her parter of 27 years, Margery Brown, who died in 2006.
Thornton claims that it is unconstitutional for the Social Security Administration (SSA) to exclude her from claiming benefits because she was unable to marry her partner before she died.
Same-sex marriage was legalised in all 50 states in the US in June 2015, following a Supreme Court decision.
“The federal government is requiring surviving same-sex partners like Helen to pass an impossible test to access the benefits that they’ve earned through a lifetime of work: they need to have been married to their loved ones, but they were barred from marrying by discriminatory laws then in existence,” said Lambda Legal counsel Peter Renn.
“We are beyond the day when the government can deny equal treatment to same-sex couples. But, by withholding these benefits, the federal government is breathing life into the same discriminatory marriage laws that the Supreme Court has already struck down.”
In the US, couples are generally required to be married for a minimum of nine months before their spies dies in order for the living partner to get survivor’s benefits.
The amount of money given in these benefits is based on the income of the deceased partner.
Do You Need Medigap Insurance Coverage At 65?
How do you approach health care & Medicare when you reach retirement age? What’s most important?
Ad by Ensurem
Thronton and Brown met at a women’s art group in 1978 and started a relationship a year later, which lasted until Brown’s death in 2006.
“Margie and I were fortunate to share 27 years of love and commitment together on this earth,” said Thornton.
“Like other committed couples, we built a life together, formed a family, and cared for each other in sickness and in health.
“Although we wanted to express our love for each other through marriage, discriminatory laws barred us from doing so before Margie’s death.”
She added: “Now, in my retirement years, I’m barred from receiving the same benefits as other widows, even though Margie and I both worked hard and paid into the social security system with every paycheck.”
Thornton, 63, is semi-retired and has a job looking after animals to supplement her income.
She applied for survivor’s benefits in 2015, when she was 60 years old, which is the age surviving spouses are eligible to receive the benefit.
However, the SSA rejected her application because the couple were not married at the time of Brown’s death.
“Same-sex couples who weren’t able to marry faced discrimination throughout their lives, and now the surviving partner faces it all over again, after their loved one has died. It’s like pouring salt in a wound. Denied equality in life, they are denied equality once again in death,” Renn added.
Longtime LGBT rights advocate Nancy Russell, a retired U.S. Army Lieutenant Colonel, was hopeful that the three 11-foot-tall black granite panels designated as the centerpiece of a National LGBT Veterans Memorial would be installed in D.C.’s Congressional Cemetery in time for a Memorial Day dedication in 2015 or 2016.
Russell, who’s 80 years old and serves as chair of the memorial’s board of directors, joined several other LGBT veterans in announcing plans for an LGBT veterans memorial in the nation’s capital in 2012. The proposed memorial was immediately embraced by LGBT veterans and their supporters throughout the country.
But now, six years later, the board has raised only about 25 percent of the estimated $500,000 cost for building and installing the monument and paying the balance owed for the purchase of the land in Congressional Cemetery where the monument and surrounding space will be located, according to Marty Gunter, the memorial project’s development director.
“We’re still working very hard on this,” said Gunter, a U.S. Marine Corps veteran. “Nancy and I speak on a very regular basis about moving this project forward,” he said, adding that the board was in the process of retaining a professional fundraiser.
Russell and Gunter both live in San Antonio, Texas, where the memorial project’s official headquarters is located.
Gunter said the board was also planning to set up one or more online fundraising sites such as GoFundMe or Benevity, which encourage workplace giving and corporate philanthropy for specific charitable causes.
Also under consideration, according to Gunter, was an appeal for help from an LGBT supportive public relations firm that could help publicize the memorial and its fundraising effort.
“Just getting the word out, that’s been the hard part of it to be honest with you,” he said. “Some potential large donors said they wanted to donate. But they always wanted to wait until after the election or after this or after that,” Gunter said.
“I think it’s going to be those small donors and the veterans, the everyday veterans that are going to build this memorial,” he said. “I do believe there’s a need for it. I just feel very confident that we can do it.”
In August 2014, the board announced the selection of a design for the memorial prepared by an architect. It consists of three black granite panels or pillars standing 11 feet high, five feet wide and one foot thick.
Two of the official emblems of the nation’s six military branches are planned to be placed on each of the three pillars, with the Navy and Marines on one, the Army and Air Force on another, and the Coast Guard and Merchant Marines on the third.
“This monument is simple yet stately and will stand proudly on its site just as those it represents served this country with pride,” says a statement released at the time the design was announced.
“The pillars will be placed in a triangle to allow space for visitors to walk inside where there is a flag pole and inscriptions explaining the Memorial’s meaning and the history behind it,” the statement says.
The statement notes that a significant part of the funding for the project was expected to come from LGBT veterans who want to have their service memorialized by purchasing paver stones with their name and service information engraved on them. The pavers would be placed on the memorial’s grounds, the statement said.
Russell said at that time that additional funds were expected to be raised through the purchase of space for the interment of cremated ashes of veterans and their partners or spouses also within the memorial grounds if there was a demand for such interment.
Gunter said no funds have been raised so far from the purchase of interment sites or pavers and he doesn’t expect such purchases to take place until the memorial is built.
Paul Williams is president of Congressional Cemetery, which is privately owned by the LGBT-supportive Christ Church of Capitol Hill. He said the cemetery enthusiastically supports the LGBT Veterans Memorial.
He said the cemetery allowed the memorial’s organizers to make a down payment on the cemetery plots where the memorial will be located knowing they had yet to raise the money to pay it all at that time. But he said that under Congressional Cemetery’s financing policy the memorial cannot be installed until the plots are paid in full.
Williams said the place reserved for the memorial is located near the gravesite of U.S. Air Force Sgt. Leonard Matlovich, who came out as gay on the cover of Time magazine in 1975 as the first active duty service member to challenge the military’s ban on gays.
Matlovich, who died in 1988, was buried in a section of the cemetery that Williams says has become the burial site for other LGBT people, including LGBT military veterans and is referred to as the cemetery’s “gay corner.” He said Congressional Cemetery is believed to be the only known cemetery anywhere that has an LGBT section.
Matt Thorn, executive director of OutServe/SLDN, a national group that advocates for active duty LGBT service members, said his group would be willing to help the LGBT Veterans Memorial project in any way it can.
“We wholeheartedly support a memorial,” he said.
Also serving on the National LGBT Veterans Memorial board are longtime gay activist and Marine Corps veteran Tom Swann Hernandez of Palm Springs, Calif.; and 86-year-old Navy veteran, cryptographer and Russian linguist Jim Darby of Chicago.
The two said they also are hopeful that the LGBT community and its supporters will recognize the importance of the memorial to veterans like them and make a contribution so the memorial becomes a reality.
Contributions can be made through the memorial’s website at nlgbtvm.org or by mailing a donation to NLGBTVM, P.O. Box 780514, San Antonio, Texas 78278-0514.
UN expert on sexual orientation and gender identity Victor Madrigal-Borloz (Photo: Facebook)
A collection of LGBTI and transgender groups have welcomed a United Nations report on gender identity. The report said member states should not classify varied forms of gender as diseases.
The UN Independent Expert on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity, Victor Madrigal-Borloz, released his report ahead of the UN General Assembly in New York this week.
The UN expert urged countries to respect gender as an important part of identity. The report also provides guidelines on how to prevent violence and discrimination based on gender identity.
The expert called on all states to ‘adopt all measures necessary to prevent, investigate and punish violence and discrimination based on gender identity perpetrated by both State and non‑State actors’.
The groups were grateful to the report ‘for giving trans and gender diverse people’s human rights the careful attention they deserve’, according to the statement.
‘We applaud the inclusion of specific terminology particularly relevant to our communities,’ the statement said.
The report explores terms such as trans, gender diversity, non-binary and gender-affirming treatment and how they differ in different cultures and regions.
The UN expert also said children shared the same human rights to access legal gender recognition and gender-affirming healthcare.
‘Gender diversity in childhood is a central issue for us’ the LGBTI groups said.
‘We highly appreciate the support expressed by the Report to the full recognition of children as subjects of human rights’.
It called on healthcare professionals, parents, and others to respect children and youth’s choice of gender
The Independent Expert on protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity is appointed by the UN Human Rights Council and was first mandated in 2016.
The expert issues reports to the Human Rights Council and the General Assembly.
Police arrest men on suspicion of homosexuality | Photo: Facebook/Arc en ciel
25 September 2018
LGBTI groups in Senegal said an increase in arrests for alleged homosexuality is a government crackdown on the LGBTI community.
The latest arrests of two men and two women in the capital, Dakar, prompted the comments. Police arrested the four after people in their neighbourhood circulated videos of them engaged in sexual acts.
‘Acts against nature’ are illegal and punishable by up to five years in prison and fines of up to US$2,500.
The recent arrests follow the conviction of Cheikh Abdel Kalifa Karaboué for ‘acts against nature ‘for drugging and raping a coworker. Dakar’s High Court sentenced him to four years in jail and ordered him to pay the victim US$3,586 in compensation.
But LGBTI groups argued the arrests are a political ploy to appear tougher on the LGBTI community.
‘As the elections in Senegal approach, parties are making their stand against the LGBTIQ+ community by arresting members of the community,’ PanAfrica Ilga wrote in a statement. Pan Africa ILGA (PAI) is the African region of the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association (ILGA).
‘The Senegalese candidates and government needs to be held accountable for their homophobic stance and the human rights violations being perpetrated as a platform for election. We stand in solidarity with our Senegalese comrades,’ the group said.
Senegalese LGBTI group Arc en Ciel said young LGBTI people needed training in coping with the crackdown.
‘With the approach of presidential elections, the hunt for sexual minorities begins because the government is preparing to answer those who label them pro-homosexual,’ the group wrote on Facebook.
Jared Polis, Kyrsten Sinema, Nelson Araujo and Tammy Baldwin are LGBT candidates running in November. (Washington Blade photos by Michael Key)
With the 2018 congressional mid-terms fast approaching, a record number of LGBT candidates are seeking election to all levels of government ranging from federal office to state attorney general, many under a banner of challenging President Trump.
Amid expectations of a “blue” wave of Democratic wins in November, political observers say wins for these LGBT candidates constitute a “rainbow” wave and break pink ceilings in races where no LGBT candidate has won before.
The LGBTQ Victory Fund, which endorses LGBT candidates, has backed 218 candidates so far in the 2018 cycle. That’s up from the 160 candidates the Victory Fund endorsed in 2016 and the 162 it endorsed in the 2014 cycle.
Annise Parker, a lesbian former mayor of Houston and CEO of the Victory Fund, said in an interview with the Washington Blade her organization endorsed slightly half of “an unprecedented number” of more than 430 openly LGBT candidates running this cycle.
“It’s part of a larger surge of candidates who are women candidates, who are people of color, candidates who are from immigrant communities — all of whom feel they are under attack and want to have a place in the political process to push back on some of the rollbacks on civil rights,” Parker said.
Among the candidates Victory Fund has endorsed this cycle are 13 candidates running for federal office, including two running in U.S. Senate races, four candidates running for governor, as well as candidates seeking state legislative seats and statewide office.
Another factor in having a record number of openly LGBT candidates running for office, Parker said, is the success enjoyed by previous LGBT candidates who sought office and won elections.
“Success breeds more candidates who want to obtain that same success,” Parker added.
In the aftermath of the 2018 primary season, the Democratic National Committee is claiming an even broader number of at least 126 LGBT candidates this cycle as a result of these hopefuls winning the Democratic nomination in their states.
The portion of non-incumbents in this list is high. Of the 19 openly LGBT people nominated by Democrats for federal office, 14 are non-incumbents. Of the 13 openly LGBT people nominated by Democrats for statewide office, nine are incumbents.
Democrats also nominated at least 101 openly LGBT non-incumbents for state legislative seats across 32 different states and U.S. territories, according to the DNC.
Lucas Acosta, director of LGBTQ media for the DNC, said the party is proud of the number of LGBT candidates running under the Democratic banner this election cycle.
“In 2018, LGBTQ Democrats are stepping up to the plate, making history, and breaking records,” Acosta said. “Our community deserves a seat at every table and a voice in every legislature. Too often, decisions about us are made without us. That’s why the DNC is excited to support LGBTQ candidates up and down the ballot across the country.”
Many of these LGBT candidates would achieve significant milestones by winning elections no LGBT person has won before:
• Two candidates — Jared Polis and Lupe Valdez — could be the first openly gay people to win elections as governor. Polis is running in Colorado and Valdez is running in Texas.
• Another candidate, Christine Hallquist, is running in Vermont and could be the first openly transgender person to be elected and serve as governor.
• In Oregon, Gov. Kate Brown is seeking re-election after being appointed to office and winning election to one term. Brown, who was the first openly LGBT and first out bisexual to win election as governor, would be the first openly bisexual person to win re-election as governor.
• In Arizona, Kyrsten Sinema could be the first openly bisexual person elected to a seat in the U.S. Senate. Also running for re-election to the U.S. Senate in Wisconsin is Tammy Baldwin, an LGBT favorite and the longest-serving openly gay member of Congress.
• Two candidates — Ricardo Lara and Nelson Araujo — could the first openly gay people of color to win election to statewide office. Lara is running in California to become insurance commissioner and Araujo is running in Nevada to become secretary of state.
• The 14 non-incumbent openly LGBT Democratic nominees running for federal office could significantly shake up LGBT representation in Congress if they each won. Those wins would more than triple the current number of eight lesbian, gay and bisexual lawmakers serving in the House and Senate.
In the aftermath of primary season, Democrats have nominated for governor one candidate for each letter of the LGBT acronym. Valdez represents the lesbian community in Texas, Polis represents the gay community in Colorado, Brown represents the bisexual community in Oregon and Hallquist represents the transgender community in Vermont.
Parker said LGBT candidates are “achieving milestones just by sheer number of people running,” but particularly in those gubernatorial races.
“With four candidates interestingly representing every aspect of the alphabet — lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender,” Parker said. “We’ve broken a milestone just by them becoming nominees whether or not they win in November.”
Parker said the LGBT women candidates are poised to make great strides in the upcoming election as female candidates generally have won over male contenders in the 2018 primary season. Among them are Gina Ortiz Jones, a lesbian Air Force veteran running for Congress in Texas, and Angie Craig, who’s running for election to Congress in Minnesota after losing by one point in 2016.
“Whether lesbian or bisexual or straight, women candidates are outperforming male candidates in most races,” Parker added.
Click on map to view larger version
In contrast to the wide array of LGBT candidates the Democrats have nominated for office, the Republican Party’s embrace of LGBT candidates is much smaller. There has always been a significant disparity in the number of LGBT candidates nominated by the parties, but Republicans have in years past usually at least fielded one openly LGBT candidate, such as perennial Massachusetts congressional candidate Richard Tisei.
The Victory Fund — which as a bipartisan organization has traditionally endorsed Republican LGBT candidates as long as they support LGBT rights — has thrown its support behind five GOP contenders this cycle, four of whom will be on the ballot in November.
But Parker said the number and nature of LGBT candidates running on the Republican ticket has declined from previous years.
“There was a slow rise of Republican congressional nominees,” Parker said. “For example, in 2012, there was one, in 2014, there were two, in 2016, there were three. Unsuccessful, but they were running. This year there were none.”
Parker attributed the lack of LGBT candidates running under the Republican banner to the anti-LGBT policies of the GOP and Trump administration.
“It’s not there aren’t LGBT Republicans,” Parker said. “I think the Republican Party is making it harder and harder for mainstream, fiscally conservative, socially liberal candidates to get elected and there are candidates either choosing to stay closeted or switch parties or not run.”
Gregory Angelo, president of Log Cabin Republicans, said LGBT candidate recruitment “has never been the mission of Log Cabin Republicans,” but disputed the notion LGBT Republican candidates are in decline.
“There were a number of gay Republicans running for federal office this year, all of whom Log Cabin Republicans was tracking; unfortunately none emerged victorious in their primaries,” Angelo said.
Significant attention is also being placed on transgender candidates, who previously had infinitesimal representation in public office. That changed in 2017 after Virginia State Del. Danica Roem (D-Manassas) became the first openly transgender person elected and seated to a state legislature and other transgender candidates won in local races.
The Victory Fund has endorsed 11 transgender candidates this cycle, eight of whom will be on the ballot in November. The most high profile is Hallquist’s quest for the governorship in Vermont.
Parker credited Hallquist for being nominated in “the highest level race” for a transgender candidate and being “a well-qualified candidate, very comfortable with the issues in Vermont and well known in the state.”
“The fact that voters in Vermont got behind an openly trans candidate in a big way and carried her to a primary victory and positioned her to be the Democratic nominee as governor is…a new milestone for the community,” Parker said.
Drawing a distinction between transgender candidates and the decline in LGBT Republicans candidates, Parker said “there are more out trans elected officials than out Republican LGBT elected officials.”
But being nominated for public office is one thing and winning the election is another. Many of these LGBT candidates face daunting odds in winning election in November and may have to rely on the boost from the expected “blue” wave to achieve victory. Among them is Hallquist, who’s running against a popular GOP incumbent in Vermont.
In Texas, a Quinnipiac poll found Valdez is significantly behind Gov. Texas Greg Abbott, who as part of a significant anti-LGBT record made an unsuccessful attempt at passing anti-trans bathroom legislation a priority. Abbott leads Valdez 58–39 percent among likely voters.
But in Arizona, a new CNN poll this week shows Sinema leading Republican opponent Martha McSally by seven points, 50-43.
Parker cautioned against placing too much emphasis on the need for these candidates to win election to make an impact.
“Don’t discount the fact that they run and whether or not they win or lose,” Parker said. “If they run good races and address issues important to their constituents, they are plowing the ground for the next wave of candidates, and the next and the next.”
Still, Parker acknowledged wins for these candidates would be significant, especially if they’re part of a “blue” wave that wins a majority in the U.S. House, or even the U.S. Senate, in November.
“Many of them are in marginal seats, ‘red’ to ‘blue’ seats,” Parker said. “If they win their seats, they’re going to be part of the Democratic wave that looks poised to sweep into Washington and if there’s a change in leadership in the House of Representatives, it creates a whole new ball game.”
The call to protect religious freedom — often code among social conservatives for the ability to discriminate against LGBT people — continued to be a rallying cry at the annual anti-LGBT Values Voter Summit, where attendees declared support for President Trump and his policies ahead of the upcoming congressional mid-term elections.
Speakers over the weekend at the annual confab in D.C. for social conservatives from Vice President Mike Pence on down repeatedly incorporated the term in their speeches, stoking paranoid fears that “religious freedom” is in peril and promising the Trump administration will act to preserve it.
But what do social conservatives envision when they hear from political leaders about religious freedom being in danger? After all, the concept of religious freedom being imperiled could also apply to Trump’s travel ban on Muslim-majority countries, but social conservatives have championed that policy.
Attendees at the Values Voter Summit who spoke to the Washington Blade about religious freedom largely signaled it was in fact a term used to express concern about the growth of LGBT rights and the desire for exemptions from laws that prohibit discrimination against LGBT people.
Kenny Nelson, a 20-year-old attendee from New York, said religious freedom constitutes the ability to exercise conscience “in the free markets,” including the denial of services to LGBT people.
“You have the right to say I don’t want to bake a wedding cake because I don’t support gay marriage,” Nelson said. “That’s really all religious freedom is to me, being free to express religion without persecution.”
Nelson said discussion is warranted over the ability to deny employment to LGBT people “like if you come out as something, will you get fired,” but in his circles a prohibition on anti-LGBT discrimination is the province of the states, not the federal government.
“I think that conservatives don’t like tackling that because it should be left up to the states, or something of that nature,” Nelson said. “We need to let people be free.”
But Nelson pivoted to the idea that religious people are facing discrimination in the workplace instead of LGBT people when elaborating on the issue.
“We need to let people be fired for whatever, but if you’re religious and you get fired, I think maybe religious freedom to me is being able to express your religious views without being totally persecuted for it by lawyers,” Nelson said.
Although federal civil rights laws don’t explicitly prohibit anti-LGBT discrimination in the workforce, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 does prohibit discrimination on the basis of religion.
Asked to identify any incident of individuals fired for their religious beliefs, Nelson identified David and Jason Benham, real estate entrepreneurs who were among the speakers at the Values Voter Summit.
In 2014, the Benham brothers were to set to launch a home improvement show called “Flip it Forward,” but HGTV scrapped the idea after comments emerged from the brothers over their opposition to abortion and same-sex marriage.
David Benham wrote a 2012 article for the Christian Post in favor of Amendment One, a constitutional amendment that banned same-sex marriage in North Carolina. Benham called opposition to the amendment “a clear glimpse into why morals are declining so rapidly in our culture today” and said redefining marriage “because of one small group of people” would erode the concept of family.
“They got essentially fired for their religious beliefs, ultimately,” Nelson said. “So, yeah. I guess it can happen. I guess it’s sort of an outlier, so to speak. I’m really more focused on being able to say, ‘Hey, these are my religious beliefs, if I don’t want to provide you service, I don’t have to.’”
Two examples of individuals attendees referenced for acting in the name of religious freedom were Jack Phillips, the Colorado owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop who refused to sell a custom-made wedding cake to a same-sex couple and whose case went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, and Barronlle Stutzman, the owner of Arlene’s Flowers in Washington State who refused to sell floral arrangements for a same-sex wedding.
Cindy Vick, a 59-year-old homemaker from Arlington, Wash., said religious freedom is under threat and cited as examples both Phillips and Stutzman, whom she called “true heroes.”
“They did not deny service to anyone because of any discrimination,” Vick said. “They could not because of their conscience and their religious beliefs partake of a same-sex marriage, so therein lies the difference. It was according to their faith.”
Vick drew a distinction between refusal of services for an individual based on religion or race and refusing it based on sexual orientation, insisting one is discrimination but the other is not.
“Discrimination would be when the customer walked into their store and if you’re black or yellow or red or green, and I refuse you service because of your color, or you are a certain race, or you subscribe to a certain belief system, [so] I refuse to sell you my cake or my flowers,” Vick said. “But that wasn’t the case, they didn’t refuse on those terms.”
Vick also expressed opposition to the underlying idea of same-sex marriage despite the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2015 in favor of marriage rights for gay couples, saying “in the Bible it’s defined as a man and a woman.”
“You’re wanting to rewrite the definition of marriage, so call it something else, but it’s not marriage,” Vick added. “It’s a bogus term for the true meaning of marriage, and that’s what because of their conscience, due to their religious beliefs, they could not participate in.”
Phillips was among the speakers at Values Voter Summit. Introduced on stage as “Jack the Giant Slayer,” Phillips and was praised as an individual who stuck to his religious principles in the face of the intolerable forces of the LGBT left.
Recounting the story of gay couple Charlie Craig and David Mullins coming into Masterpiece Cakeshop to buy a wedding cake, Phillips said, “I knew this was a wedding cake that I could not create because I believe marriage is between a man and a woman.” That line got huge applause from attendees at the Values Voter Summit.
After he refused Craig and Mullins service, Phillips said the couple flipped him off and swore at him as they exited Masterpiece Cakeshop. The baker also said he had to endure hate emails and death threats and his daughter was threatened, but he stuck to his principles.
Phillips became emotional when he recalled years later reading from the Supreme Court orders list it had agreed to take up his case, acknowledging justices take up relatively few cases.
The decision the Supreme Court handed down in the Masterpiece Cakeshop case wasn’t exactly what Phillips wanted. Alliance Defending Freedom asserted the court should find Phillips has a First Amendment right to refuse service to same-sex couples. Justices instead delivered a narrow ruling for Phillips based on the facts of the case, finding an anti-religion sentiment within the Colorado Civil Rights Commission.
Other attendees at the Values Voter Summit had a broader interpretation of the concept of religious freedom that wasn’t limited to refusal of service for LGBT people.
One 23-year-old attendee from central Kansas, who spoke on condition of anonymity, looked at the reports on religious persecution of Christians overseas when asked about the term religious freedom.
“You look at other countries like North Korea and Iran and other countries, less so, even like maybe Turkey where you can’t be a pastor without getting jailed,” the attendee said. “Religious freedom is the ability to witness, to talk to others about your faith, to live your faith out.”
But when asked if religious freedom could also be an excuse for anti-LGBT discrimination, the attendee said individuals should be able to refuse service to LGBT people if it contradicts their faith.
“It’s freedom to worship God,” the attendee said. “Now, you can’t violate your belief. If you believe something is wrong, then you can’t do something the opposite, like Jack Phillips.”
Omar Navarr, another attendee and the Republican candidate running against Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) in the congressional mid-term elections, had a different take on the concept of religious freedom and said it has a freedom of expression component.
“If you go to California, for example, if I go anywhere, try to express myself and my beliefs and my religious beliefs, I’ll be attacked and vilified for it,” Navarr said.
Navarr cited as an example of religious freedom under threat “being allowed to pray at a school because obviously that’s one of the things that the other side has cracked down on.”
“Tolerance is everything, and we have to make sure that we can have tolerance for religious freedom,” Navarr said. “I wasn’t so religious growing up or anything. I was actually a converted Christian, but at the same time, I believe that Christians should have the right to believe whatever they want to believe in as long they’re not pushing it so much into policy and stuff like that.”
Despite the presence of Phillips on stage at the Values Voter Summit, Navarr denied religious freedom formed a basis on which individuals could engage in anti-LGBT discrimination, saying, “I don’t see it in that.”
“There are different views that are out there,” Navarr said. “Like in anything, you’re going to have one side where they’re going to be discriminating against gays, and then, the other side that isn’t. Most Christians are not going to be doing that, for the most part.”