![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
textualdevianceWhile we're all getting (quite appropriately) angry over that nasty discriminatory shit in Virginia, and the ongoing fight over gay marriage, I think it might be worth backing up a little bit to understand where this country is really at. Same-sex marriage is a worthy goal indeed, but frankly, it's a pipe dream when you realize that:
Most states still don't even have anti-discrimination laws.
Only twelve states-- CA, CT, HI, MD, MA, MN, NV(!), NH, NJ, NY, RI, VT and WI-- have laws prohibiting discrimination in private employment. Additionally, several large or particularly liberal cities and counties in other states have those laws (for instance, Seattle, Portland, Phoenix, Denver, Atlanta...)
What this means on a practical level: I live in Snohomish county. Neither the county, nor any cities in it have anti-discrimination laws, nor does my state. If I were to get a job at, say, a small real-estate agency here, and I parked my car, festooned with rainbow stickers, in their parking lot, and my boss saw that, and decided that he'd rather not work with a queer, he could legally fire me. He wouldn't even have to come up with a fake reason. He could specifically tell me that he doesn't want to work with someone queer, and bang, I'm gone. And I would have absolutely no legal recourse.
Another angle: Public accomodations. Only 11 states-- CA, CT, HI, MD, MA, MN, NH, NJ, NY, RI, VT, WI-- have laws against discrimination in public accomodations. Note the absence of NV on that list.
What this means on a practical level: If a same-sex couple wanted to go to Reno and get a single-bed hotel room, they could legally be turned down for that room. Now, in Reno, this isn't likely to happen, because gay money is just as good as straight money, but in other places, absolutely. Say you wanted to stay at a nice bed and breakfast in Taos, NM. You could be refused. Say you like the looks of a small boutique hotel in Boulder, CO. You could be refused. A roadside motel along I-5 near Albany, OR? You could be refused.
One more: Housing. An even smaller number: only 10 states. CT, HI, MD, MA, MN, NH, NJ, RI, VT, WI
What this means on a practical level: If a gay couple wanted to rent an apartment in Monterey, CA, they could legally be refused. If they wanted to buy a house in Medford, OR, they could be refused. Or a vacation home in Lake Tahoe.
And this doesn't even count other essential things in life that most gay people in most places can be denied, such as access to education and credit, or even the right to sit down and have a nice meal in a restaurant, or shop at a grocery store. In most places in the country outside of large cities and liberal college towns, a gay person can legally be denied most of the most basic needs in life. Michigan (and apparently a few other states) is now trying to make it so people can even discriminate against gay people for *health care.* Have a tooth that needs a filling in Lansing? Best not assume any given dentist will treat you, if you're gay.
People have been working to try to get statewide anti-discrimination laws going in most states. They continue to fail. Some places have even had anti-discrimination laws repealed (Such as Iowa and Cincinnatti)
Now, if we can't even guarantee the right to rent an apartment or have a job, how can we hope that the rest of the country is going to be nice enough to let people marry whomever they fall in love with? Remember that there are only 10% of us, and nearly 45% who belong to religions which actively encourage anti-gay discrimination. Our only hope is to try to encourage the other 45% of the country to side with us instead of them.
So what do we do? Well, there's one thing: Register. Vote. Get Bush the fuck out of office, and replace him with the imperfect but at least compassionate Kerry. Only then do we even have the smallest hope of having any freedom left at all.
Most states still don't even have anti-discrimination laws.
Only twelve states-- CA, CT, HI, MD, MA, MN, NV(!), NH, NJ, NY, RI, VT and WI-- have laws prohibiting discrimination in private employment. Additionally, several large or particularly liberal cities and counties in other states have those laws (for instance, Seattle, Portland, Phoenix, Denver, Atlanta...)
What this means on a practical level: I live in Snohomish county. Neither the county, nor any cities in it have anti-discrimination laws, nor does my state. If I were to get a job at, say, a small real-estate agency here, and I parked my car, festooned with rainbow stickers, in their parking lot, and my boss saw that, and decided that he'd rather not work with a queer, he could legally fire me. He wouldn't even have to come up with a fake reason. He could specifically tell me that he doesn't want to work with someone queer, and bang, I'm gone. And I would have absolutely no legal recourse.
Another angle: Public accomodations. Only 11 states-- CA, CT, HI, MD, MA, MN, NH, NJ, NY, RI, VT, WI-- have laws against discrimination in public accomodations. Note the absence of NV on that list.
What this means on a practical level: If a same-sex couple wanted to go to Reno and get a single-bed hotel room, they could legally be turned down for that room. Now, in Reno, this isn't likely to happen, because gay money is just as good as straight money, but in other places, absolutely. Say you wanted to stay at a nice bed and breakfast in Taos, NM. You could be refused. Say you like the looks of a small boutique hotel in Boulder, CO. You could be refused. A roadside motel along I-5 near Albany, OR? You could be refused.
One more: Housing. An even smaller number: only 10 states. CT, HI, MD, MA, MN, NH, NJ, RI, VT, WI
What this means on a practical level: If a gay couple wanted to rent an apartment in Monterey, CA, they could legally be refused. If they wanted to buy a house in Medford, OR, they could be refused. Or a vacation home in Lake Tahoe.
And this doesn't even count other essential things in life that most gay people in most places can be denied, such as access to education and credit, or even the right to sit down and have a nice meal in a restaurant, or shop at a grocery store. In most places in the country outside of large cities and liberal college towns, a gay person can legally be denied most of the most basic needs in life. Michigan (and apparently a few other states) is now trying to make it so people can even discriminate against gay people for *health care.* Have a tooth that needs a filling in Lansing? Best not assume any given dentist will treat you, if you're gay.
People have been working to try to get statewide anti-discrimination laws going in most states. They continue to fail. Some places have even had anti-discrimination laws repealed (Such as Iowa and Cincinnatti)
Now, if we can't even guarantee the right to rent an apartment or have a job, how can we hope that the rest of the country is going to be nice enough to let people marry whomever they fall in love with? Remember that there are only 10% of us, and nearly 45% who belong to religions which actively encourage anti-gay discrimination. Our only hope is to try to encourage the other 45% of the country to side with us instead of them.
So what do we do? Well, there's one thing: Register. Vote. Get Bush the fuck out of office, and replace him with the imperfect but at least compassionate Kerry. Only then do we even have the smallest hope of having any freedom left at all.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
no subject
It frightens me that so many people are so complacent about what they *do* have. In many places, including apparently parts of the US, gays only have the right not to be imprisoned, murdered or lobotomised for being gay...and even then that's open to interpretation. That's not something to put any faith in. Too many people think "Queer as Folk" is a huge leap forward. It's not, it's a fucking smokescreen.
(no subject)
From:no subject
no subject
no subject
Though there's a couple things i would take to issue.
1: From all i've seen read studied [ie in college sociology or anthropology or whatever courses], about 87% of America claims to be Christian. Thus i'm not entirely sure where that 45% is coming from.
2: I do somewhat take exception to the assumption that everyone who is a member of x group [in this case people who assert on national census surveys or whatever that they are Christian] automatically detest hate fear attack-on-sight willfully-discriminate-against anyone who happens to be homosexual.
I in fact know many people who may disagree with homosexuality, but will in no way be hateful vengeful brainwashedly-zealous about it or whatever. As a corrolary, i myself am a vegetarian but that does not mean i automatically go hate on and try to guilt-trip or convert or whatever people who eat meat, leaves more Tofu for me if nothing else.
3: As a corollary to number 2, believe it or not, not everyone who disagrees with homosexuality is Christian or even vaguely religious. I can't right off give an outlined cited example of all the reasons people may or may not agree, but i can assert that not everyone who disagrees it's because of some 'religious brainwashing' or whatever.
4: Similarly, not everyone who is Christian is in fact a rabid Bush's-leg-humping Republican. For that matter most Republicans aren't that rabidly zealous or whatever either. There are, believe it or not, Democratic Christians, Socialist Christians [for instance the man who wrote the Pledge of Allegience was a Socialist Christian Baptist pastor], Green Party Christians, &c &c.
5: Relating back to number 2, as is almost always the case, the very vocal opinionated bigoted whatever demographic also tends to be the extreme minority. Thus, the number of people who tote around God Hates Fags signs [aside from being rampantly moronic and doing an extreme dis-service to the creed and faith they pretend to represent], are probably an even smaller minority percentage-wise than the number of homosexuals in this nation [i hear figures anywhere from 6-11% depending on how one counts or breaks it down].
6: As much as i do not think or claim Bush is by any means perfect, the other candidates have done, if anything, an outstanding job of not inspiring me with any sort of confidence as to their competence coherence integrity or general ability to make up their mind on an issue or claim [cough Kerry, repeatedly, cough]. Now i'm not saying that necessarily makes Kerry or whomever a bad person, or Bush a saint. Just that, well basically it looks like they all lose.
7: Therefore [if you really wanted i could diagram the symbolic logic of this series], while i agree that non-dscrimination is totally a good policy or legislation or whatever, i by no means see anything which would seem to lead me to the same sort of Neo-McCarthyist Queer-Scare Witch-Hunt conclusion that you seem to derive from the fact that so few states have this legislation. The possible alternative [though note possible, just what came to mind first], is that it hasn't been enough of an issue for them to have needed to legislate on it; now i have no way of backing that up, like i said it's just a thought. However.
No offense, mind you. Just had to express a few things.
(no subject)
From: