The deaths of almost 100 gay men between 1970 and 1990 have been directly linked to hate crime by one of Sydney’s largest LGBT health charities.
Police had previously discovered 88 cases where gay men had died under suspicious circumstances between 1970 and 1990.
However, a new report from ACON, an LGBT health and advocacy charity in New South Wales has concluded that many of these deaths can be linked to both homophobia and inadequate investigations by police at the time.
In 2017, authorities began to re-examine 87 other cases, some of which were listed as suicides by police at the time.
The ACON report individually examined the 88 suspected anti-gay killings and found that there were multiple underlying themes in many of the attacks – determining that homophobia was a clear motivating factor in at least 50% of the cases.
As many as 30 deaths of gay men who died in Sydney and the surrounding area remain unsolved.
The report called ‘In Pursuit of Truth and Justice: Documenting Gay and Transgender Prejudice Killings in NSW in the Late 20th Century’ aimed to highlight both the deaths as a whole as well as the issues that have remained in the 40 years since these killings began.
The report found evidence of serial killings by groups of young men at the time, as well as highlighting the influence of the AIDS crisis and suggested a link between the large stigma surrounding HIV in the 1980’s and the attacks.
ACON CEO Nicolas Parkhill stated that the report was an important step in bringing a community perspective to a dark time in Sydney’s LGBT history.
(Don Arnold/Getty Images)
Parkhill said: “We know that a wave of violence swept through Sydney between the late 1970s and early 1990s, which claimed the lives of some gay men.
“We also know that many more, including transgender women, were brutally assaulted and terrorised and some of these cases remain unsolved.”
“Hate crimes hurt both physically and emotionally and affects individuals as well as the entire community. This independent and community-led report is an important step in the long road to justice and healing.
“By exploring the past, we hope to deepen our understanding of these events, which will help us improve current responses to LGBT hate crimes, enhance the criminal justice system and further develop violence prevention strategies.”
Parkhill then stated that it was important to note the progress that had been made in the last 40 years.
He added: “It is important to note these events occurred in a time when homophobic and transphobic prejudice and hate permeated our society, thriving in many environments including government agencies, public institutions, courthouses, workplaces, communities, schools and homes.
“The relationship between LGBT communities and NSW Police has moved forward in the last 40 years.”
A Denver gay couple was stabbed multiple times because they were holding hands.
Gabriel Roman and his boyfriend Christopher Huizar were enjoying a night out with friends when they were approached by a man yelling homophobic slurs at them just after midnight on Sunday, they claim.
In a matter of seconds, the man repeatedly stabbed both men as they tried to to run to safety. They were left with serious injuries. Huizar thinks the attack was triggered by the fact he and Roman were holding hands.
“There was blood everywhere, like so much blood,” he said.
According to Fox31, the pair were only a few blocks from home when a man addressed them with homophobic slurs, before running after them with his weapon.
“I remember him pulling me back and I think that’s when I got stabbed in my back,” recalled Roman.
Roman suffered deep stab wounds in his back and hand, while Huizar was stabbed in the throat.
“We’re running and I didn’t realise how bad it was until he’s like, ‘My hand!’ and that’s when I took my shirt off and I wrapped it around and there was blood everywhere, like so much blood,” said Huizar.
In the moment, the pair feared for both their lives.
“I’m thinking like, my boyfriend is going to die,” Huizar added.
The two finally managed to escape and collapsed in a 7/11 parking lot. Bystanders attended to their wounds and contacted 911.
Their attacker was eventually caught by the Denver police. Although he was arrested, they are still investigating the charges.
For Roman and Huizar, the wound runs deeper than the scars. Being attacked in their neighbourhood forced them to look at their community in a new, scary light.
“It’s way deeper than just the physical damage,” said Roman. “Of course we’re relieved this guy is caught or whatever, but there’s still that fright […] who else is out there like that?”
“It’s not going to stop me from being who I am or showing affection to my significant other but I will definitely be more cautious,” Roman added.
“We are not letting his define us. We love each other and wouldn’t want this to happen to anyone [else]. I’m just thankful we’re alive,” Huizar told the Gay Star News.
Roman and Huizar believe the ordeal will make them stronger as a couple.
A visitor places flowers at a makeshift memorial during a vigil for victims of a shooting at a gay nightclub in Orlando, Florida the previous day, in front of the United States embassy on June 13, 2016 in Berlin, Germany. (Adam Berry/Getty)
Hate crimes like this one are on the rise in the US. A 2016 FBI report on hate crime statistics showed that while 6,121 hate crimes were reported that year, 1,076 were based on sexual orientation bias. This showed an increase of 2 percent from the 2015 numbers.
124 were based on gender identity bias, targeting trans or non binary individuals, a 9 percent increase from the 2015 numbers.
However, the report noted that these numbers only represented d a portion of the hate crimes that happened that year, as reporting them to the FBI is not compulsory.
Sophia Grace Adler, 33, was arrested at the scene in downtown Portland and later charged with murder.
Sophia Adler (Multnomah County Jail)
She pleaded not guilty in court on Tuesday.
Pierce, from Boise in Idaho, was found lying wounded on the side of the street by emergency staff, but died within minutes of them getting to her, according to local TV channel KATU.
Those who knew her on the street have said that Pierce made it her mission to protect other homeless women.
Amber, a friend of Pierce, said she was present when the shooting happened.
“She died in my arms,” she said.
Amber is comforted (KATU)
“I heard Gigi say: ‘Don’t touch me,’” added Amber. “And the woman came up and hit Gigi in the face with her purse.
“That kinda set Gigi off. Gigi went to hit her, pulled back to hit her, and the next thing I know my ear’s ringing.
“There had been a gunshot. It all happened so fast.
“It always does. It all happened so fast.”
Highline Collective Dot Matrix Camo Print Short Sleeved Polo
SHOP LORD & TAYLOR! FREE SHIPPING AT $99!
Ad by lordandtaylor.com
Sergeant Chris Burley of the Portland City Police backed up this account.
He said: “We do believe that prior to the shooting there had been some type of disagreement or disturbance that was going on that led up to the shooting.”
(HECTOR MATA/AFP/Getty)
Josie Deleon-Summa, who got to know both Pierce and her suspected killer, paid tribute to the victim.
“Gigi was the kind of person that was just full of life, always trying to help somebody,” said Deleon-Summa.
She added that if Adler did shoot her, it was out of character.
“Something happened last night to make her snap,” she said. “But she’s a good kid. Just misunderstood. I don’t know exactly what happened between the two.”
Beefest, The Good One returns to the lawn of the Luther Burbank Center for the Arts on June 9!
Expect mouth puckering sour beers, hop bombs, barrel-aged brews, and a wide range of other cool libations that make Northern California one of the best beer producing regions in the world. More than 60 breweries & cideries will be pouring their samples for you to enjoy from 1-4:30 pm.
Generous community partners like Oliver’s Market, Trader Joe’s , and BJ’s Brewhouse will be serving delicious complimentary treats, while supplies last.
Net proceeds from Beerfest – The Good One benefit Face to Face, whose mission is “…ending HIV in Sonoma County while supporting the health and well-being of people living with HIV/AIDS.”
The number of Americans who openly identify as LGBT has hit a record high after increasing for the sixth year in a row, according to a new study.
Gallup – a research-based consultant company, known for its opinion polls worldwide – recently released new data that showed a record-breaking 4.5 of Americans surveyed identified as LGBT.
As part of the daily tracking performed by the major polling company, Gallup spoke to over 340,000 people in 2017.
In their polls, Gallup found that 4.5 percent of the population identified as LGBT, an increase from 4.1 percent in 2016.
The company began to ask whether survey-takers identified as LGBT in 2012 and has seen an increase every year since.
(Gallup Daily Tracking)
In 2012, 3.5 percent of the adults surveyed identified as LGBT, compared to 3.7 percent in 2014.
If 4.5 percent of the adult population of the US were LGBT, as this study indicates, it would mean that over 11 million adults in the US would currently identify as LGBT.
Gallup also found that there was a significant generational gap in how people identify.
The increase in Americans identifying as LGBT has been driven mainly by millennials, which Gallup records as those born between 1980 and 1999.
Gallup’s data showed that the percentage of LGBT millennials increased from 7.3 percent in 2016 to 8.1 percent in 2017 – up from 5.8 percent in 2012, when the company started research on the issue.
(Gallup Daily Tracking)
The Gallup surveys also included respondents born between 1913-1945.
Gallup also measured people who identified as LGBT by household income and by race and ethnicity.
The survey found that people with lower incomes were more likely to openly identify as LGBT, as they had seen every year since the start of polling about sexuality in 2012.
The results from another recent poll by Gallup marked the highest level of support the firm has ever recorded in more than 20 years of asking Americans about their views on the issue.
Gallup first surveyed Americans on the same-sex union in 1996. Back then, just 27 percent of those queried supported gay marriage.
However, according to the 2017 data, 67 percent of Americans support marriage equality.
The new data showed that 83 percent of those who classed themselves as Democrats said they support legally recognised same-sex marriage – compared to less than half (44 percent) of Republic respondents.
U.S. Rep. Dana Rohrabacher told a group of Realtors last week that homeowners should be able to refuse to sell their property to gays and lesbians, a statement that cost him the support of a key national Realtor group.
“Every homeowner should be able to make a decision not to sell their home to someone (if) they don’t agree with their lifestyle,” Rohrabacher told an Orange County Association of Realtors delegation at a May 16 meeting in Washington, D.C., according to Wayne Woodyard, a former Orange County Realtor president who was at the event.
On Thursday, Rohrabacher confirmed the accuracy of the sentiment, and added that homeowners should have the right to “choose who they do business with.”
“We’ve drawn a line on racism, but I don’t think we should extend that line,” Rohrabacher said.
“A homeowner should not be required to be in business with someone they think is doing something that is immoral.”
The statement ignited a protest by a Realtor gay-rights group, prompting the National Association of Realtors to withdraw its recommendation that members send campaign contributions to Rohrabacher.
“It was determined that Rep. Rohrabacher will no longer receive support from NAR’s President’s Circle,” an association statement said, referring to its list of recommended candidates. Rohrabacher’s stance, the 1.3-million-member trade group said, is contrary to NAR’s code of ethics, which bans discrimination on the basis of “sexual orientation or gender identity.”
“We certainly hope that Congress will … support the elimination of housing discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity.”
He’s facing 15 challengers, including eight Democrats as well as onetime political ally Scott Baugh, former Orange County GOP chairman.
“It certainly can’t do me any good to have people take me off their endorsement list,” said Rohrabacher, who represents California’s 48th District in coastal Orange County. “It’s sad to see (the association’s) priority is standing in solidarity with making sure a stamp of approval is put on somebody’s private lifestyle.”
Harley Rouda, a Democrat who is challenging Rohrabacher and a son of a former Realtor association president, called Rohrabacher’s statements “outlandish and unacceptable,” saying everyone should have the same rights to buy and sell a home.
“What Dana Rohrabacher fails to understand is discrimination is discrimination,” Rouda said. “It shows how backward his thinking is.”
Previously Rohrabacher had been designated as a “Realtor Champion,” eligible for support from top Realtor donors.
The Realtors Political Action Committee, the trade group’s campaign finance arm, also donated $5,000 to Rohrabacher’s re-election campaign in December and January, campaign finance reports show. Rohrabacher also received donations from numerous agents, real estate developers and Realtor groups.
The backlash occurred after Orange County Realtors met last week with Rohrabacher during NAR’s mid-year lobbying conference in Washington and asked him to support H.R. 1447, among other issues.
The measure expands the Fair Housing Act passed in 1968 to add anti-discrimination protections based on a person’s sexual orientation and gender identity. The existing law already forbids home sellers, landlords and lenders from discrimination based on a person’s race, color, religion, sex or national origin.
Rohrabacher’s remarks sparked outrage among gay and lesbian Realtors after Woodyard posted them on Facebook. The founder of a real estate gay-rights group then wrote to NAR President Elizabeth Mendenhall requesting the association revoke its support of Rohrabacher.
“When a supposed champion of the Realtor Party outright states that housing discrimination should be lawful, I hope you agree there should be cause for concern,” wrote Jeff Berger, a Florida agent and founder of the National Association of Gay & Lesbian Real Estate Professionals. “Ignoring the congressman’s comments belies the decades of serious work and progress NAR has made in the area of fair housing.”
Rohrabacher denied he’s trying to shore up his conservative flank in the face of opposition from Baugh. Indeed, he said, his stance likely will “alienate a certain number of gays who think I’m anti-gay, which isn’t the case.”
Rohrabacher added he vehemently opposes housing discrimination based on race, religion or a person’s sex.
But, he said, “there are some fundamentalist Christians who do not approve of their lifestyle. I support their rights.” He also said he believes the Realtor association’s stance is “way out of sync” with its own industry.
Rohrabacher distinguished race-based discrimination from choosing not to do business with someone because of their lifestyle or political beliefs.
Homeowners, for example, shouldn’t be allowed to deny a sale to an interracial couple, he said.
But Democrats or Republicans should be able to refuse a home sale to people with opposing political views.
Would Rohrabacher, who uses a medical marijuana cream to ease his arthritis and supports relaxed penalties for cannabis use, be OK if a home seller refused to do business with him based on that lifestyle choice?
A man who allegedly threatened to harm the LGBTQ community with explosives and twice stole a rainbow flag from the Guerneville Chamber of Commerce made an appearance in court Tuesday.
It began with a pride flag stolen, and then tossed into the Russian River. Today, the story entered a new phase in Sonoma County Superior Court. It has been symbolic from the start. “Every time he is in court, I will be here,” said Beth Sheets, who joined several other people in watching proceedings.
The flag, symbolizing LGBTQ pride, was stolen on April 26 from the building at 16201 First Street in the unincorporated area of Guerneville in Sonoma County.
The building arranged for a replacement, but the flag was again stolen on May 5. According to Sonoma County’s website, Guerneville became a “welcoming resort area for Bay Area gay men and lesbians” in the 1970’s.
A man named Vincent O’Sullivan, 55, is seen in this undated image.
This marked the first appearance of Vincent Joseph O’Sullivan, Jr. following his arrest last weekend. He pleaded not guilty to misdemeanor charges Tuesday of stealing a pride flag from the county flagpole in Guerneville, and also to felony charges of a hate crime by threatening to blow up gay people, a grocery store, and sheriff’s substation with a pipe bomb.
“It is a terrorist threat. He did not take action to carry out that act,” said Sonoma County Sherriff’s Department spokesman, Sgt. Spencer Crum.
In open-minded and permissive Guerneville, both alleged crimes resonate disturbingly. Hence, a large group who came to court today. “We’re here to protect ourselves from people who want to blow us up,” said Guerneville resident Jennifer Wentz.
“It is about a community of people who have been discriminated against,” added Beth Streets.
Beth Streets had lobbied with the county to place that pride flag in the town square, beneath the American and California flags. A surveillance video from last week shows two men. One of them covers the camera’s lens, and then the flag disappears. The thieves reportedly left a warning signed in the name of veterans. David Juarez told us today that the notes certainly do not speak for him. “I was leery of coming here. My husband said as a veteran and openly gay person you have to do that.”
So he did, and they did.
They will continue to be on hand as the cases move forward.
You might call it a matter of pride and principle.
NLGJA – The Association of LGBTQ Journalists is excited to announce that Entertainment Weekly Editor-in-Chief Henry Goldblatt will receive the Lisa Ben Award for Achievement in Features Coverage at its annual L.A. Exclusive benefit event on Friday, June 1. INTO Editor-in-Chief Zach Stafford and CBS News correspondent Jamie Yuccas will serve as co-hosts of the event.
Each year L.A. Exclusive brings together some of the nation’s top journalists at the Los Angeles LGBT Center’s The Village at Ed Gould Plaza, 1125 N. McCadden Place, to show support for NLGJA’s mission to advance fair and accurate LGBTQ coverage. The event is chaired by NLGJA national board member Senta Scarborough.
“We are extremely proud to have Jamie and Zach serve as co-hosts this year,” said NLGJA Executive Director Adam K. Pawlus. “We are also beyond excited to present our Lisa Ben Award to Henry Goldblatt, whose work to cover the LGBTQ community at Entertainment Weekly has exemplified NLGJA’s values.”
Goldblatt was named editor-in-chief of Entertainment Weekly in 2015, where he previously served as the brand’s deputy managing editor and director of brand development. In 2014, Goldblatt was named deputy editor of PEOPLE where he provided editorial oversight to all brand extensions, ran the magazine’s front-of-book sections and managed staffing, budgets and publishing/editorial collaborations. A 20-year veteran of Time Inc., Henry Goldblatt began his career as a reporter at Fortune where he wrote about the media business and ran the magazine’s news coverage. In 2002, he moved to EW and was instrumental in integrating the brand’s print and digital editorial operations. Goldblatt was named one of Columbia Journalism Review’s “Ten Young Editors to Watch” and won a New England Press Association award for articles on AIDS awareness.
Stafford is the editor-in-chief of INTO, a new digital lifestyle magazine launched by Grindr in 2017. Prior to this role, Zach served editor-at-large of OUT Magazine and as an award-winning investigative reporter at The Guardian, where he covered justice, violence and social issues in both his column and long-form features. He regularly provides commentary on radio, podcasts and has appeared on the BBC, CNN and “The Daily Show with Trevor Noah”. And he also is the co-editor of the bestselling book “Boys, An Anthology,” as well as his latest photo-essay book, “When Dogs Heal,” which explores the lives of HIV+ people and the pets that saved their lives.
Yuccas is a CBS News correspondent based in Los Angeles. Yuccas joined CBS News as a New York-based correspondent for CBS Newspath in August 2015. Her reporting has been featured across all CBS News broadcasts and platforms. During her time at CBS News, Yuccas has covered high-profile stories including Orlando’s Pulse nightclub shooting, the 2016 Rio Summer Olympics and the 2016 presidential campaign. Yuccas joined CBS Newspath from WCCO-TV, the CBS owned and operated station in Minneapolis where she had been a morning anchor and general assignment reporter since 2011. While there, she won two Emmy Awards and contributed reporting to the “CBS Evening News” and “CBS This Morning” for breaking news stories in the Midwest, including flooding in Minot, N.D., the Minnesota state government shutdown and winter weather and flooding across the region. She also won an Emmy Award for coverage of Hurricane Sandy in 2012.
About NLGJA – The Association of LGBTQ Journalists:
NLGJA is an organization of journalists, news executives, media professionals, educators and students working from within the news industry to foster fair and accurate coverage of LGBTQ issues. NLGJA opposes all forms of workplace bias and provides professional development to its members. For more information, visit www.nlgja.org.
The Department of Justice wants to stop collecting data about the sexual orientation and gender identity of 16- and 17-year-olds, officials announced this week.
The National Crime Victimization Survey is a twice-annual report that collects the data of up to 135 thousand households to understand the “frequency, characteristics, and consequences” of crime in the United States, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Since 2016, the NCVS has given participants 16 and older the option to confidentially list their sexual orientation and gender identity. The survey has been especially useful for acknowledging under-reported crimes.
In a statement released on Wednesday, the DOJ announced its intentions to raise the minimum age “due to concerns about the potential sensitivity of these questions for adolescents.”
The move drew a quick rebuke from advocacy groups, including the University of California-Los Angeles’ Williams Institute, a think tank dedicated to LGBTQ+ research and public policy. In a statement, the Williams Institute argued for the necessity of the data, saying it was essential for understanding violence against LGBTQ+ groups.
“The Bureau of Justice Statistics at the Department of Justice has been a leader in advancing knowledge about the LGBTQ+ population, but the Bureau’s new leadership seems to want to bury its head in the sand,” Director of Federal Policy Adam Romero says in the statement.
This point was echoed by another advocacy group, New York-based Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network. “What’s measured is what matters when it comes to public policy,” said executive director Eliza Byard to Mother Jones.
For instance, in August 2016, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention published data that detailed the health disparities and high rates of violence suffered by lesbian, gay, and bisexual high school students. The groundbreaking report has been “hugely important for designing public health programs run out of the CDC,” according to Byard.
On the CDC’s own website, the agency states, “Collecting information about students’ sexual identity and about the sex of their sexual contacts is necessary.”
While LGBTQ+ advocacy groups do not deny the sensitivity of the questions, they find the DOJ’s argument disingenuous. “Youth have been answering questions about their sexual orientation for years, in numerous studies, as well as on federal surveys,” said Kerith J. Conron, Blachford-Cooper Research Director and Distinguished Scholar at the Williams Institute.
Conron points out that two other national surveys have asked similar questions to even younger respondents. The 2015 Youth Behavior Risk Survey included respondents as young as 13, and the National Survey of Family Growth polls subjects as young as 15.
“We know that LGBTQ+ youth are more likely to be victimized, sometimes by their own families, and we need data from the NCVS to learn whether crimes are reported and how the criminal justice system is responding to young LGBTQ+ victims,” said Conron. “Instead of dropping these items from the NCVS, which were cognitively tested and performed well, the Department of Justice should focus on making it easier for youth to answer questions by investigating strategies to improve the data collection process.”
This latest move falls into a strategy of the Trump administration to ignore LGBTQ+ people into bureaucratic nonexistence, denying them use of government protection and services. For historically marginalized groups, the political nostalgia of “Make America Great Again” always represented a red flag of regressive policy. There is no “again” for racial, ethnic, sexual, or gender minorities; there is only the hard-won progress accrued over the last few decades and the current threat to that progress.
Since the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2015 that same sex couples have a constitutional right to marry, support for same-sex marriage has increased substantially. Currently, more than six in ten (61%) Americans say gay and lesbian couples should be able to marry legally, while only about half as many (30%) are opposed.
Strength of support for same-sex marriage has increased dramatically over the past decade, while strength of opposition has fallen in nearly equal measure. Today, Americans who strongly favor same-sex marriage outnumber those who strongly oppose it by more than a two-to-one margin (30% vs. 14%). In 2007, only 13% of the public strongly favored same-sex marriage, while nearly one-quarter (24%) strongly opposed it.1 Much of this shift has occurred within the last five years. As recently as 2013, more than four in ten (42%) Americans opposed same-sex marriage, including about one in four (23%) who strongly opposed it.2 Over the last five years, strong supporters of same-sex marriage increased only modestly, from 25% to 30%.
The rise in support for same-sex marriage, particularly over the last few years, has led to a milestone: Today a majority of all racial and ethnic groups favor allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry legally. Between 2013 and 2017, we have seen a double-digit increase in support for same-sex marriage among white (53% vs. 63%), black (41% vs. 52%), and Hispanic (51% vs. 61%) Americans.3 Currently, about four in ten (39%) black Americans, three in ten (30%) white Americans, and only about one-quarter (26%) of Hispanic Americans oppose same-sex marriage. Majorities of smaller racial and ethnic groups also support same-sex marriage today, including Asian-Pacific Islander Americans (72 percent), Native Americans (56 percent), and those identifying as multiracial or with another racial and ethnic group (66 percent).
Conservative Republican Holdouts
Partisan gaps in views of same-sex marriage persist, even as the public has become more supportive of the policy overall. Nearly three-quarters (73%) of Democrats and about two-thirds (66%) of independents favor same-sex marriage, compared to only 42% of Republicans. A slim majority (51%) of Republicans oppose same-sex marriage. However, opposition is mostly confined to conservative Republicans. Nearly six in ten liberal (58%) and moderate (59%) Republicans favor same-sex marriage, compared to only 36% of conservative Republicans. About six in ten (58%) conservative Republicans oppose it.
Among Democrats, as well, there is a considerable ideological divide. Nearly nine in ten (87%) liberal Democrats say same-sex marriage should be legal, compared to 67% of moderate and 52% of conservative Democrats. Four in ten (40%) conservative Democrats oppose same-sex marriage.
Liberal independents are roughly as supportive of same-sex marriage as liberal Democrats. More than eight in ten (82%) liberal independents favor same-sex marriage, compared to nearly three-quarters (73%) of moderate independents and fewer than half (49%) of conservative independents. More than four in ten (41%) conservative independents oppose allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry.
Declining Religious Resistance
Most religious groups in the U.S. now support same-sex marriage, including overwhelming majorities of Unitarians (97%), Buddhists (80%), the religiously unaffiliated (80%), Jewish Americans (77%), and Hindus (75%). Roughly two-thirds of white mainline Protestants (67%), white Catholics (66%), Orthodox Christians (66%), and Hispanic Catholics (65%) also favor same-sex marriage. A slim majority of Muslims (51%) favor same-sex marriage, but only 34% are opposed; 15% offer no opinion on this issue.
Over the last five years, opposition to same-sex marriage among nonwhite Protestants has dropped considerably. Most notably, black Protestants have moved from solid opposition to a plurality of support for same-sex marriage. In 2013, nearly six in ten (57%) black Protestants opposed same-sex marriage.4 Today just 43% oppose it, compared to nearly half (48%) who support it. Hispanic Protestants have moved from solid opposition to same-sex marriage to being divided over the policy. In 2013, nearly two-thirds (65%) of Hispanic Protestants opposed same-sex marriage. Today, 43% favor the policy, compared to 45% who oppose it and 13% who offer no opinion.
Opposition to same-sex marriage is now confined to a few of the most conservative Christian religious traditions. Only about one-third (34%) of white evangelical Protestants support same-sex marriage today, while nearly six in ten (58%) are opposed, including 30% who are strongly opposed. And just 40% of Mormons support same-sex marriage, compared to 53% who are opposed. Jehovah’s Witnesses, a racially mixed religious group, are the exception. Just 13% support the policy, compared to 63% who oppose it. However, nearly one-quarter (24%) of Jehovah’s Witnesses express no opinion on this issue.
Nevertheless, even those religious groups most opposed to same-sex marriage have become more accepting of it over the last five years. Since 2013, opposition to same-sex marriage has dropped 13 percentage points among white evangelical Protestants (from 71% in 2013 to 58% today).5 Over a similar time period, opposition among Mormons has dropped 15 percentage points (from 68% in 2014 to 53% today).6
Opposition to Same-Sex Marriage Declining Among Conservative Religious Groups
The Coming Generational Realignment
The issue of same-sex marriage is approaching consensus among young adults (age 18 to 29). More than three-quarters (77%) favor legalizing same-sex marriage, including nearly half (45%) who strongly favor it. Only 17% of young adults are opposed. In contrast, fewer than half (47%) of seniors (age 65 and up) say same-sex marriage should be legal, while about four in ten (42%) oppose it. Ten percent of seniors express no opinion on the issue. Notably, there is an increase in support at both ends of the generational spectrum, although more movement occurred among older Americans. Support for same-sex marriage among young adults is up five percentage points from 72% in 2013, and support among seniors is up 11 percentage points from just 36% in 2013.7
The generational divide cuts through every demographic group in the U.S. Even in groups most opposed to same-sex marriage, a majority of young adults favor this policy. A majority (53%) of young white evangelical Protestants favor legalizing same-sex marriage, compared to just one-quarter (25%) of white evangelical seniors. A majority (52%) of young Mormons also believe same-sex marriage should be legal, while only about one-third (32%) of Mormon seniors agree.8 While only 37% of black Protestant seniors favor same-sex marriage, nearly two-thirds (65%) of young black Protestants support it.
Wide Generation Gap on Same-Sex Marriage
The generation gap is larger among Republicans than Democrats. Young Republicans are more than twice as likely as senior Republicans to favor same-sex marriage (59% vs. 28%). In contrast, Democratic young adults and seniors largely agree on same-sex marriage (87% and 63% support it, respectively).
Among no racial or ethnic group is the generation gap wider than Hispanic Americans. Three-quarters (75%) of young Hispanics favor same-sex marriage, compared to only 38% of Hispanic seniors, a gap of 37 percentage points. Among white Americans, roughly eight in ten (79%) young adults favor same-sex marriage, compared to half (50%) of white seniors. And close to seven in ten (69%) young black Americans express support for same-sex marriage, compared to only 40% of black seniors. Finally, majorities of both young (84%) and senior (54%) Asian-Pacific Islander Americans favor same-sex marriage.
Enduring Gender Divides
More women than men in the U.S. support allowing same-sex couples to marry. Roughly two-thirds (65%) of women overall favor same-sex marriage, compared to fewer than six in ten (58%) men. The gender gap crosses lines of race and ethnicity, although its size varies substantially from group to group. Two-thirds (67%) of white women and fewer than six in ten (59%) white men favor same-sex marriage. Among Hispanic Americans, 64% of women favor it, compared to 57% of Hispanic men. And though support is much higher overall among API Americans than other ethnic groups, API women still express greater support than men (76% vs. 67%). Black Americans stand out here in not displaying a gender gap: Similar numbers of black women (53%) and men (50%) favor same-sex marriage.
Notably, the gender gap is slightly larger among young adults than older Americans. More than eight in ten (81%) young women favor same-sex marriage, compared to 72% of young men. The intensity gap is even larger among young people, with 52% of young women expressing strong support for same-sex marriage, compared to 38% of young men. Among seniors, the gender gap and intensity gap are somewhat more modest. Senior women are more likely to favor same-sex marriage than senior men (50% vs. 44%).
Most States Now Support Same-Sex Marriage
Recent dramatic shifts in support for same-sex marriage are also evident at the state level. Today, majorities in 44 states believe gay and lesbian couples should be allowed to legally marry, compared to only 30 states in 2014.9 In only six states does the issue of same-sex marriage garner less than majority support: Alabama (41%), Mississippi (42%), Tennessee (46%), West Virginia (48%), Louisiana (48%), and North Carolina (49%). But notably, only one state, Alabama, has a majority of residents who oppose same-sex marriage.
Substantial regional disparities in views of same-sex marriage are evident. New England is generally more supportive of same-sex marriage than any other region in the U.S. Roughly eight in ten residents of Vermont (80%), Massachusetts (80%), and Rhode Island (78%) support the policy. And nearly three-quarters of Americans living in Connecticut (73%), New Hampshire (73%), and Maine (71%) support it. A number of Southern states have only a slim majority expressing support for same-sex marriage, such as Kentucky (51%), Arkansas (52%), and Georgia (52%).
Religiously Based Service Refusals Remain Unpopular
Religiously based refusals of service to gay and lesbian people are relatively unpopular among the American public. Six in ten (60%) Americans oppose allowing a small business owner in their state to refuse products or services to gay or lesbian people if providing them would violate their religious beliefs. One in three (33%) Americans support such a policy. Eight percent offer no opinion. Attitudes have remained stable since 2015, when 59% of Americans opposed allowing business owners to refuse products or services to gay and lesbian people for religious reasons.10
Black Americans are more likely than any other racial or ethnic group to oppose religiously based service refusals. Nearly two-thirds (66%) of black Americans oppose them, compared to roughly six in ten Hispanic (61%), Asian-Pacific Islander (60%), and white (58%) Americans.
Women are more likely than men to oppose religiously based service refusals. Close to two-thirds (64%) of women oppose allowing small businesses to refuse to provide products or services to gay or lesbian people, compared to 55% of men. But the gender gap varies somewhat across racial and ethnic groups. It is most pronounced among white Americans: White women are far more likely to oppose them than white men (64% vs. 52%). Differences between black women and men (68% vs. 64% are opposed) and API women and men (58% vs. 61% are opposed) are much narrower. Hispanic women and men demonstrate a slightly wider gap than other nonwhite Americans, but still not as large a gap as that of white people: Sixty-four percent of Hispanic women oppose religiously based service refusals, compared to 58% of Hispanic men.
Only Mormons and White Evangelicals Support Religiously Based Service Refusals
Most religious groups do not believe small business owners should be allowed to refuse service to gay and lesbian people for religious reasons. Nearly nine in ten (86%) Unitarians and at least seven in ten Buddhists (73%), unaffiliated Americans (72%), and Jewish Americans (70%) oppose such a policy. And roughly two-thirds (65%) of black Protestants and about six in ten white mainline Protestants (60%), Hispanic Catholics (60%), white Catholics (59%), and Muslims (59%) also reject a policy allowing religiously based refusals to serve gay and lesbian people. Majorities of Orthodox Christians (57%), Hindus (56%), and Hispanic Protestants (55%) are also opposed to the policy.
Only two major religious groups believe small business owners in their state should be allowed to refuse service to gay or lesbian people on religious grounds—white evangelical Protestants and Mormons. Notably, they support this position at the same rate—53%.
Although there are profound generational differences among white evangelical Protestants regarding same-sex marriage, on the issue of service refusals the generation gap is minimal. Roughly half (49%) of white evangelical seniors and half (50%) of young adults would allow small business owners to refuse service based on their religious beliefs, while 40% of seniors and 45% of young adults would not.
Sharp Political Divisions
As with same-sex marriage, views on religiously based service refusals vary dramatically by political affiliation. More than three-quarters (76%) of Democrats and six in ten (60%) independents are opposed, compared to only 40% of Republicans. A slim majority (52%) of Republicans favor giving business owners in their state the right to refuse products or services to gay or lesbian people if providing them would violate their religious beliefs.
Among Republicans there are stark divisions by ideology. Nearly six in ten (59%) conservative Republicans say religiously based service refusals should be legal, compared to roughly four in ten (39%) moderate and about three in ten (31%) liberal Republicans. But a majority of moderate (55%) and liberal (63%) Republicans oppose such a policy.
There are also sharp ideological differences among independents. Conservative independents are roughly divided, with about as many supporting the right to religiously based service refusals as opposing (48% vs. 44%) it. In contrast, 63% of moderate independents and more than three-quarters (77%) of liberal independents do not think small business owners have this right.
Democrats are far more unified than Republicans and independents in their position on the matter. Majorities of liberal (85%), moderate (72%), and conservative (63%) Democrats oppose religiously based refusals to serve gay and lesbian people.
More Modest Generational Divisions
Although views on same-sex marriage are highly stratified by age, on the issue of service refusals there is greater consensus across age cohorts. A majority of Americans across generations oppose them. Two-thirds of young adults (67%) and a majority of seniors (53%) say small businesses should not be allowed to refuse to serve gay or lesbian people, even if doing so violates their religious beliefs. Only 36% of seniors say this should be allowed, while 11% express no opinion.
The Relationship Between Support for Same-Sex Marriage and Service Refusals
Even among Americans who oppose same-sex marriage, close to half (45%) are against allowing small business owners to refuse service to gay and lesbian people. A similar number (48%) would allow them this option if providing service violates their religious beliefs.
Opposition Across the Country
A majority of Americans in nearly every state believe small business owners in their state should not be allowed to refuse service to gay and lesbian people. Notably, state-level opposition to same-sex marriage or nondiscrimination protections for LGBT people does not reliably predict state-level support for religiously based service refusals. Whereas opposition to same-sex marriage and nondiscrimination protections is concentrated in the South, the states with the lowest levels of opposition to service refusals cluster in and near the Mountain West and Midwest. In three states—Utah (48%), North Dakota (49%), and South Dakota (49%)—fewer than half of residents oppose service refusals. A slim majority of residents of Idaho (51%), Oklahoma (51%), Nebraska (53%), and Montana (53%) object to them.
In contrast, New England states express the strongest objection to religiously based service refusals. At least two-thirds of residents of Vermont (74%), Massachusetts (70%), Rhode Island (69%), and New Hampshire (67%) oppose allowing small business owners to refuse gay and lesbian customers.
Americans Continue to Support Nondiscrimination Protections for LGBT People
Americans are broadly supportive of laws that would protect lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people against discrimination in jobs, public accommodations, and housing. Seven in ten (70%) Americans favor such laws, including more than one-third (35%) who strongly favor them. Fewer than one-quarter (23%) of Americans oppose legal nondiscrimination protections for LGBT Americans.
Although there is broad agreement about nondiscrimination laws, there are still notable differences by age and gender. Younger Americans tend to be more supportive of legal protections than older Americans. Nearly eight in ten (78%) young adults (age 18-29) favor nondiscrimination protections, including 45% who strongly favor them. Even among seniors (age 65 and up), who tend to be less supportive of same-sex marriage, more than six in ten (61%) favor nondiscrimination protections for LGBT Americans, and only 29% oppose them.
Gender differences on this issue are much more modest than with respect to same-sex marriage. Nearly three-quarters (73%) of women favor the passage of laws that would protect LGBT Americans from discrimination in jobs, public accommodations, and housing, compared to about two-thirds (65%) of men. But there is a considerable intensity gap: Four in ten (40%) women, compared to only about three in ten (29%) men, strongly favor nondiscrimination protections for LGBT people.
Americans, Regardless of Race and Ethnicity, Support Nondiscrimination Protections
There is only modest variation across racial and ethnic lines in support for nondiscrimination laws to protect LGBT Americans. About two-thirds (66%) of black Americans favor these protections, as do about seven in ten Hispanic (69%) and white (71%) Americans. Asian-Pacific Islander Americans demonstrate the highest levels of support, with 75% favoring nondiscrimination laws to protect LGBT Americans.
The gender gap is fairly constant across racial and ethnic groups, but there is considerable variation in its size. Black men express the lowest level of support for nondiscrimination policies aimed at protecting LGBT people, while API women express the greatest. More than six in ten (63%) black men favor nondiscrimination laws, compared to 66% of Hispanic, 67% of white, and 70% of API men. More than two-thirds (68%) of black women favor these policies, while more than seven in ten Hispanic (72%), white (74%), and API (81%) women say the same.
Support for Nondiscrimination Protections Transcends Partisan Boundaries
Nondiscrimination protections for LGBT people are broadly supported across party lines, although Democrats and independents register greater support for them. More than seven in ten independents (72%) and Democrats (79%) favor providing legal protections from discrimination for LGBT people, while nearly six in ten (58%) Republicans say the same. Notably, half (50%) of Democrats strongly favor these protections.
While political ideology also influences views on nondiscrimination protections for LGBT people, it plays a larger role in structuring the attitudes of independents and Democrats than Republicans. Six in ten (60%) conservative independents favor laws to protect LGBT individuals against discrimination in jobs, public accommodations, and housing, compared to about eight in ten moderate (77%) and liberal (82%) independents. Democrats demonstrate a similar pattern. While less than two-thirds (63%) of conservative Democrats support nondiscrimination protections, more than three-quarters (76%) of moderate and nearly nine in ten (87%) liberal Democrats say the same.
There are more modest ideological differences among Republicans. Roughly two-thirds of moderate (68%) and liberal (65%) Republicans support nondiscrimination protections for LGBT people, compared to 56% of conservative Republicans.
Near Consensus Among Religious Groups on Nondiscrimination Policies
Majorities of nearly every major religious group support legal protections against discrimination for LGBT Americans, with non-Christian religious groups tending to be the most supportive. No religious group is more supportive than Unitarians, among whom 95% favor nondiscrimination policies. At least three-quarters of Jews (80%), religiously unaffiliated Americans (79%), Buddhists (78%), and Hindus (75%) favor laws that protect LGBT Americans against discrimination in employment, housing, and public accommodations.
Support is also robust among most Christian religious communities. At least seven in ten white Catholics (74%), white mainline Protestants (71%), and Hispanic Catholics (70%) support nondiscrimination protections for LGBT people. Approximately two-thirds of Orthodox Christians (69%), Mormons (69%), and black Protestants (65%) favor them, as well as a majority of Hispanic Protestants (59%) and white evangelical Protestants (54%). While only half (50%) of Jehovah’s Witnesses support nondiscrimination protections, just over one-quarter (26%) oppose these protections, and roughly as many (23%) express no opinion.
Mormon Exceptionalism
Mormons are unique among religious Americans in their outlook on same-sex marriage and nondiscrimination protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people. Only 40% of Mormons favor allowing same-sex couples to marry, yet nearly seven in ten (69%) support laws that would protect LGBT people from discrimination in housing, public accommodations, and employment—a 29-point gap. Among no other major religious group is the gap on these two issues larger.
Majorities of Residents of Every State Favor Nondiscrimination Protections for LGBT People
Majorities of residents of every state favor nondiscrimination protections for LGBT Americans. Predictably, New England states express the most robust support for laws designed to protect LGBT people from discrimination. At least three-quarters of the residents of Massachusetts (80%), Vermont (79%), New Hampshire (78%), Connecticut (77%), Maine (75%), and Rhode Island (75%) favor nondiscrimination protections for LGBT Americans.
Conversely, states with the lowest levels of support are primarily located in the South, as only about six in ten residents of Mississippi (57%), Alabama (58%), Tennessee (60%), Louisiana (61%), and West Virginia (61%) say LGBT people should be legally protected from discrimination.
States in the West tend to demonstrate high levels of support for nondiscrimination protections for LGBT individuals. More than seven in ten residents of the Western U.S.—including Washington (73%), California (73%), Nevada (73%), Arizona (73%), and Oregon (72%)—favor laws that would protect LGBT Americans from discrimination. Notably, despite the fact that only 54% of Utahans favor same-sex marriage, fully 80% say they would support laws to protect LGBT people from discrimination.
Survey Methodology
The 2017 American Values Atlas (AVA) is a project of PRRI. Results for questions on specific issues (e.g. LGBT issues) are based on a subset of 40,017 telephone interviews (including 23,903 cell phone interviews) conducted between April 5, 2017 and December 23, 2017 by professional interviewers under the direction of SSRS. The AVA was made possible by generous grants from the Evelyn and Walter Haas, Jr. Fund, the Gill Foundation, the Nathan Cummings Foundation, and the Unitarian Universalist Veatch Program at Shelter Rock.
Throughout 2017, at least 1,000 interviews were completed each week, with about 600 interviews conducted among respondents on their cell phones. Each week, interviewing occurred over a five-day period, from Wednesday through Sunday or from Thursday through Monday. The selection of respondents within households was accomplished by randomly requesting to speak with the youngest adult male or female currently living in the household.
Data collection was based on stratified, single-stage, random-digit dialing (RDD) of landline telephone households and randomly generated cell phone numbers. The sample was designed to represent the total U.S. adult population from all 50 states, including Hawaii and Alaska. The landline and cell phone samples were provided by Marketing Systems Group.
The weighting was accomplished in two separate stages. The first stage of weighting corrects for different probabilities of selection associated with the number of adults in each household and each respondent’s telephone usage patterns. In the second stage, sample demographics were balanced to match target population parameters for gender, age, education, race and Hispanic ethnicity, region (U.S. Census definitions), population density, and telephone usage. The population density parameter was derived from 2010 Census data. The telephone usage parameter came from an analysis of the January-June 2017 National Health Interview Survey. All other weighting parameters were derived from an analysis of the U.S. Census Bureau’s March 2017 Current Population Survey.
The sample weighting was accomplished using iterative proportional fitting (IFP), a process that simultaneously balances the distributions of all variables. Weights are trimmed so that they do not exceed 4.0 or fall below 0.25 to prevent individual interviews from having too much influence on the final results. The use of these weights in statistical analysis ensures that the demographic characteristics of the sample closely approximate the demographic characteristics of the target populations.
The margin of error for the sample is +/- 1.2 percentage points at the 95% level of confidence. The design effect is 1.4. Table 1 shows the margin of error and design effect for each weekly survey at the 95% level of confidence. Tables 2 and 3 show the sample sizes for each state and metro area. In addition to sampling error, surveys may also be subject to error or bias due to question wording, context, and order effects.
