War on LGBTQ Updates
War on LGBTQ Continues Updates
Disclaimar
I am trying not to comment on the nightmare that Trump 2.0 is becoming because well there is little I can do about it, and I don’t want to end up on a government hit list because I expressed even mild criticism of the new neo-fascist regime taking place.
I wanted to provide an update on my earlier blog post about the war on the LGBTQ+ community, where I expressed concern that if Trump returned to power, life for my LGBTQ+ friends would become very difficult. Unfortunately, my worst fears have been realized.
One of the most significant changes has been Trump’s official decree that the U.S. government will only
recognize two genders: male and female, assigned at birth.
This policy attempts to erase the legal status of transgender individuals and has been a long-standing demand of social conservatives. The ripple effects have been profound, including banning transgender people from serving in the military and even
restricting their ability to travel to the U.S.
I asked Copilot to provide additional background and included some links for
reference.
Copilot said:
The Trump administration has implemented several policies that have significantly impacted the LGBTQ+ community, particularly transgender individuals. These include executive orders and state-level initiatives that restrict rights and access to services. Here’s a breakdown:
Anti-LGBTQ+ Policies
Federal Actions:
The administration has reinstated bans on transgender individuals serving in the military, restricted gender-affirming healthcare for minors, and removed diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs from federal
agencies.
Travel Restrictions:
A recent State Department policy could deny visas to transgender individuals if their documents do not
match their sex assigned at birth. According to the new policy, visas can not be issued in cases of “gender fraud”. This policy is tied to broader efforts to exclude transgender athletes from women’s Sports.
Criminalization of Trans Identity:
In Texas, a proposed bill seeks to make identifying as transgender a felony under “gender identity fraud,” punishable by jail time and fines. While unlikely to pass, it
reflects a growing trend of extreme legislative measures targeting transgender individuals.
Banning Trans women from using the bathroom in Congressional buildings and other government facilities
the House of Representatives has banned trans women from using the wrong bathroom at the House of Represenatives. This policy was enacted to punish the only trans woman congresswoman. The House Seargent of Arms has been called several times to prevent alleged trans women from the crime of using the wrong bathroom. These demeaning bathroom bans are spreading everywhere. there will be more cases of trans people being arrested for using the wrong bathroom as these “bans” become widespread.
Ending DEI programs in the Federal government
President Trump has ended all DEI programs in the Federal government and has been pressuring State governments to do the same and even threathening to take away Federal funding from Universites who do not end DEI programs including ethnic studies programs, woman studies programs and queer studies programs. The crack down is widespread.
Government agencies have been scrubbing their public facing web pages to remove all references to DEI issues including banning the use of words such as race, gender, LGBTQ, trans, gay and references to native Americans for example. DOD removed pictures of the famous world war 11 Hiroshima bomber apparently because the plane name was Enola Gay and the AI program removed it due to the prohibited word, “Gay”.
Misusing AI to Scrub Government Web pages in an Orwellian manner
Musk and DOGE do not see this initiative as a fraudulent waste of taxpayer dollars which it is as government employees are being forced to spend time scrubbing government web pages in sn Orwellian program of offending phrases using AI programs.
CO-Pilot gives the latest background
President Trump’s anti-DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) campaign has been a significant and polarizing initiative. His administration has taken steps to dismantle DEI programs across federal agencies, universities, and even private companies. This includes executive orders and memos warning institutions that they could lose federal funding if they continue using race-based preferences in areas like admissions, scholarships, or hiring.
The campaign has led to federal investigations into over 50 universities, focusing on partnerships with organizations like the PhD Project, which supports underrepresented groups in business education. Critics argue these partnerships may involve race-exclusionary practices. Additionally, some universities are being scrutinized for offering race-based scholarships.
Supporters of the campaign claim it promotes merit-based opportunities and eliminates what they see as reverse discrimination against white and Asian American individuals. Opponents, however, argue that it undermines efforts to address systemic inequities and creates barriers for marginalized communities.
This initiative has sparked legal challenges and debates about the role of DEI in fostering inclusive environments. It’s a complex issue with far-reaching implications for education, employment, and social equity.
Left-Wing Analysis
Progressive voices argue that these policies are part of a broader rollback of civil rights, framing them as attacks on personal freedoms and human dignity. Critics
highlight the mental health toll and increased vulnerability to discrimination and violence for LGBTQ+ individuals.
Right-Wing Analysis
Conservative perspectives often justify these measures as protecting traditional values, religious freedoms, and fairness in areas like sports and education. They argue that such policies address societal concerns about gender identity and its implications.
Opposition to LGBTQ rights is often framed by critics as being rooted in traditional Christian values, with several biblical passages and religious arguments frequently cited. Here are some examples:
### Biblical Citations 1. **Leviticus 18:22** and **Leviticus 20:13**: These verses describe same-sex relations as an “abomination” and prescribe severe punishments in the context of Old Testament law[_{{{CITATION{{{_1
{25 Bible Verses about Homosexuality – What Does Scripture Say? –
Bible Study Tools](https://www.biblestudytools.com/topical-verses/bible-verses-about-homosexuality/).
- **Romans 1:26-27**: The Apostle Paul refers to same-sex relations as “dishonorable passions” and contrary to God’s natural order[_{{{CITATION{{{_
1{25 Bible Verses about Homosexuality – What Does Scripture Say? –
Bible Study Tools](https://www.biblestudytools.com/topical-verses/bible-verses-about-homosexuality/)
. 3. **1 Corinthians 6:9-10**:
This passage lists “men who practice homosexuality” among those who will not inherit the Kingdom of God[_{{{CITATION{{{_1{25 Bible Verses about Homosexuality –
What Does Scripture Say? – Bible Study Tools](https://www.biblestudytools.com/topical-verses/bible-verses-about-homosexuality/).
- **Genesis 2:24** and **Mark 10:6-9**:
These verses emphasize the union of a man and a woman in marriage as part of God’s design[_{{{CITATION{{{_
1{25 Bible Verses about Homosexuality –
What Does Scripture Say? – Bible Study Tools](https://www.biblestudytools.com/topical-verses/bible-verses-about-homosexuality/).
### Broader Religious Justifications – **Natural Law**: Some Christian theologians argue that LGBTQ relationships contradict “natural law,” which they interpret as God’s design for human sexuality and procreation. –
**Religious Freedom**: Critics often invoke religious liberty to justify actions or policies that oppose LGBTQ rights, claiming that compliance with such rights would violate their sincerely held religious beliefs
[_{{{CITATION{{{_2{Not Those People – American Bar Association](https://www.americanbar.org/groups/crsj/resources/human-rights/archive/not-those-people/)
[_{{{CITATION{{{_3{Religious Exemption, LGBT Rights, and the Social Construction of Harm and freedom …]
/1A03E3745B631E1831E652D3A44F9C18). –
**Gender Complementarity**:
The idea that men and women have distinct, God-given roles that complement each other is sometimes used to argue against same-sex relationships[_
{{{CITATION{{{_4{The Biblical Case for LGBTQ Inclusion –
The Reformation Project](https://reformationproject.org/biblical-case/).
These interpretations and arguments are not universally accepted within Christianity, and many theologians and denominations advocate for LGBTQ inclusion, emphasizing themes of love, justice, and equality. The debate often reflects broader tensions between traditional interpretations of scripture and evolving understandings of human rights and diversity.
These interpretations and arguments are not universally accepted within
Christianity, and many theologians and denominations advocate for LGBTQ
inclusion, emphasizing themes of love, justice, and equality. The debate often
reflects broader tensions between traditional interpretations of scripture and
evolving understandings of human rights and diversity.
Christian denominations hold a wide range of views on LGBTQ rights, reflecting diverse theological interpretations and cultural contexts. Here’s an overview:
Denominations Opposing LGBTQ Rights
- Roman Catholic Church: Officially opposes same-sex marriage and considers homosexual acts sinful, though it emphasizes compassion and respect for LGBTQ individuals.
- Eastern Orthodox Church: Similar to Catholicism, it opposes same-sex relationships and marriage, adhering to traditional teachings on sexuality.
- Evangelical Protestant Churches: Many evangelical groups, such as the Southern Baptist Convention, oppose LGBTQ rights, citing biblical interpretations that view homosexuality as sinful.
Denominations Supporting LGBTQ Rights
- Episcopal Church: Welcomes LGBTQ individuals and allows same-sex marriage ceremonies.
- United Church of Christ: Fully affirms LGBTQ rights, including marriage equality and ordination of LGBTQ clergy.
- Presbyterian Church (USA): Supports same-sex marriage and ordains LGBTQ clergy.
- Metropolitan Community Church: Founded specifically to serve LGBTQ Christians and advocates for full inclusion.
Divided Denominations
- Anglican Communion: Deeply divided, with some branches (e.g., Episcopal Church in the U.S.) affirming LGBTQ rights, while others (e.g., Anglican Church in Africa) oppose them.
- Methodist Church: The United Methodist Church is currently experiencing a schism over LGBTQ inclusion, with some congregations breaking away to form more conservative groups
Muslim Community
The Muslim community generally agrees with the anti-LGBTQ views of conservative Christians and in most Muslim countries LGBTQ people face discrimination if not legal consequences including in some cases execution. Hungary and Russia are also countries where anti-LGBTQ views have become government policy. Africa is also a hotbed of opposition to LGBTQ rights.
SE Asia more Tolerant
SE Asia especially Thailand is one of the few areas where LGBTQ rights are celebrated, Thailand has joined Tawain in legalizing same-sex marriages and Thailand remains the main destination for sex reassignment surgery.
The Biblical Case for LGBTQ Inclusion – The Reformation Project
What is ‘Pink Triangle’? Nazi era anti-LGBTQ symbol shared by Donald Trump
Marco Rubio May Have Just Banned Trans Foreigners Seeking Visas From US Entry
Texas bill would make identifying as transgender a state jail felony
On LGBT issues, both parties move left
Attack on LGBTQ+ rights: The politics and psychology of a backlash – Berkeley News
Fundamental rights of LGBTQ+ eroding as they’re weaponized by conservative forces – POLITICO
2020s anti-LGBTQ movement in the United States – Wikipedia
Earlier Posting
With Trump’s Election, the Republican-led War on the LGBTQ community will continue. Rep. Nancy Mace vowed to ensure that the only trans woman ever elected will not be allowed to use the woman’s bathroom in the People’s House. She even went around putting up signs in front of restrooms “Biological Women only” vowing she would not allow women with Penises to use the woman’s room. Trump’s nominee for Secretary of Defense has vowed to kick trans people out of the military. Trump has pulled back a bit, now says he does not want to weight in on bathroom bans as it only affects a few people. But the LGBTQ community is feeling the pressure and is afraid that the war against them will continue.
This is personal for me as I have had several trans friends over the years, one of my college roommate transited from a man to a lesbian woman, another friend transitioned from a woman into a man.
Here are some recent articles on this topic.
Getting rid of the LGBTQ Community
by legal fiat
the MAGA movement leaders
the cynical overlords behind Trump
have a plan to get rid of the trans community
and the LGBTQ Community
by legal fiat
their plans spelled out in the infamous
Project 2025 and Agenda 47
and speeches by Trump and Vance
and their craven fellow travelers
Declaring that there are only two genders
God assigned male and Female at birth.
Banning sex reassignment and changing IDs
Banning people from using the bathroom
of their choice
making using the wrong restroom
a federal sex crime
Enforced by citizen arrests
no doubt some people
will settle these disputes
through their Second Amendment rights.
the craven Supreme Court will no doubt
accept their claim they felt threatened
by a trans person using the wrong restroom.
Banning “biological” males from
participating in women’s sports.
Just like that, there would
There would no longer
be trans people.
firing LGBTQ people
from sensitive government jobs
turning it back to the states
to make such status illegal again
And gay marriage would be illegal.
Putting the LGBTQ community
back in the closet
or forcing them to flee
to more LGBTQ friendly countries.
Banning abortions nationwide
banning contraception too
banning porno and sex education
and making most divorces
illegal,
thus restoring the power
of the white man
to rule forever
just as God intended.
LGBTQ+ Americans stockpile meds and make plans to move after Trump’s win
Zoei Montgomery, a 25-year-old transgender woman, is preparing for Donald Trump’s second term by stockpiling medicines in case her access is cut off. (Annabel Clark for The Washington Post)
By Maham Javaid
and Casey Parks
Zoei Montgomery is so nervous about Donald Trump’s second presidency that she is making plans to escape to Canada if life in the United States becomes intolerable for her as a transgender woman.
The middle-school custodian fears that the incoming president will follow the lead of Republican governors who have restricted access to gender-affirming care and made it illegal for people to change their gender markers on official documents.
“I would hate to leave home,” said Montgomery, 25, who lives in Washington state. “But it makes me less anxious to have an exit plan in place.”
As Trump’s inauguration nears, some LGBTQ+ people are anxiously preparing for what they fear will be a rollback of their rights. Some in same-sex relationships are making plans to marry or to adopt children. Others are moving to states that they believe will offer them more protection. Transgender people are stockpiling medications, worried that their access to gender transition care will be cut off.
Trump has vowed to prohibit gender transition care for children and eliminate any federal spending on those treatments for adults. He has also promised to ask Congress to pass a bill stating that there are only two genders and that they are assigned at birth. And the incoming president wants to use Title IX protections to ensure that transgender women can’t play on women’s sports teams.
Tracking anti-trans legislation
(Created with Data wrapper/The Washington Post)
Anti-trans bills have doubled since 2022. Our map shows where states stand.
While some of his promises would be difficult to enact, and many others such as banning access to health care probably would be challenged in court, Trump will have the advantage of Republican control in Congress and could also enact some changes through executive action.
Trump’s transition team hasn’t provided further details on his plans, but a spokeswoman for the incoming administration said his campaign focused on “common sense policies” that Americans want.
“Clearly, the American people agree with President Trump and that’s why they voted for him in a landslide,” spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt said.
A survey conducted by Fox News and the Associated Press found that about 55 percent of voters said support for transgender rights in government and society “has gone too far,” and that 77 percent of this group supported Trump.
The survey also found that 51 percent of voters opposed laws banning gender-affirming medical treatment such as puberty blockers and hormone therapy for transgender youths. Among those who do support the ban, 65 percent supported Trump.
On Wednesday, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority appeared reluctant to block a Tennessee law restricting transgender minors from accessing puberty blockers and hormones as part of their gender transition care. The ruling will affect thousands of transgender youths who live in one of the 24 states, including Tennessee, that have banned similar treatments.
Trans rights were far from the top issue for many voters this election, said Republican pollster Robert Blizzard, but the topic was an animating force for some. Swing-state voters, he said, were angry with Democrats who they said pushed “trans ideology” onto children.
Blizzard, who did not do polling work for the Trump campaign, said voters were worried about children.
“That’s a big concern for a lot of folks across the country, minors making decisions that will change their lives and bodies long-term.”
Michele Zavos, a D.C.-based attorney specializing in LGBTQ+ family law, said it’s a “very complicated time” for the community.
“Rights that we thought were resolved seem to once again be at risk,” she said.
Even before Trump won the presidency, LGBTQ+ people had endured several tumultuous years. Republican lawmakers in statehouses and the U.S. Capitol have introduced a record number of bills aimed at restricting LGBTQ+ rights under President Joe Biden. Schools in Florida and North Carolina have fired gay teachers. Trans children have lost access to health care they describe as lifesaving. And Republicans spent at least $215 million on election ads that painted trans people as the nation’s most pressing threat.
In the initial weeks after the election, LGBTQ+ people and advocacy groups say some of their worst fears are already coming true. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-South Carolina) introduced a measure to bar trans women from women’s bathrooms in the Capitol and all other federal properties two weeks after Sarah McBride (D-Delaware) was elected the nation’s first transgender member of Congress.
Many of Trump’s Cabinet picks have also endorsed anti-trans policies.
Former Hawaii congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, the president-elect’s pick for director of national intelligence, introduced a bill in 2020 to prohibit trans women from playing on women’s sports teams. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Florida), Trump’s choice for secretary of state, introduced a bill in 2023 to ban anyone with a history of gender dysphoria from the U.S. military. And South Dakota Gov. Kristi L. Noem (R), selected to head the Department of Homeland Security, signed a ban on gender-affirming health care for trans youths last year.
Montgomery said she has been stockpiling estradiol and spironolactone pills since September. She now has enough to last her a few weeks if federal lawmakers banned her care, she said.
“Many people around me are acting like everything is the same since Nov. 5,” she said. “But nothing will be the same for the LGBTQ+ community once Trump’s in power, and he has promised that.”
‘Building a raft on a tsunami’
When Trump first won office in 2016, the LGBTQ+ community was celebrating several milestone victories. The Supreme Court had granted same-sex couples the right to marry the year before, and not long after, President Barack Obama directed schools across the country to allow transgender students to use bathrooms, locker rooms and other facilities that match their gender identity.
But some of those wins were quickly changed when Trump took office. Within a month of his inauguration, Trump revoked the Obama-era guidelines on transgender students. He also ordered the Pentagon to ban transgender service members from the military.
Later on, under Biden, GOP state lawmakers began targeting a range of things, such as LGBTQ+-friendly books in public schools and gender-affirming care for children. So far, 26 states have banned trans girls and women from playing on sports teams that align with their gender identity.
Then came this year’s presidential campaign. Candidates across the country ran more than 200 anti-trans ads on network TV, according to a Washington Post analysis of data compiled by AdImpact. Trump’s super PACs spent at least $50 million on anti-trans ads, and his campaign made “Kamala is for they/them” a reelection slogan.
“There’s a lot of general fear, panic and hopelessness in the community,” said Janson Wu, a senior director at the Trevor Project, a nonprofit that provides support to LGBTQ+ youths aimed at suicide prevention and crisis intervention.
“Many people, especially the younger ones, are wondering if they can continue living under these political attacks.”
While some queer and trans families did flee to more LGBTQ+-friendly states during the Biden years, others couldn’t afford to move, or didn’t want to, even as new laws restricted their rights. Now, nonprofit workers say they are hearing from a record number of people who want to relocate to liberal states with explicit protections for gay and trans people.
Keira Richards and a group of friends have been helping people move to Colorado since last year. Normally, their nonprofit, the Trans Continental Pipeline, works with an average of 15 people a month. In the week after the election, Richards said 350 people contacted the group to ask for assistance.
“They don’t want to leave,” said Richards, the Trans Continental Pipeline’s executive director. “But they just feel like they don’t have a choice.”
Richards’s group is staffed by five volunteers who operate on a shoestring budget. Most people need between $2,000 and $4,000 to move to Denver. And rents in the Mile High City aren’t cheap: The average apartment rent is nearly $1,700 per month, according to Apartments.com. Some of those contacting Richards say they can afford to pay only $400 a month.
We’re building a raft on a tsunami,” Richards said. “We’re just trying to be able to meet the need that is suddenly here.”
Jake Nichols, a gay 18-year-old from Jefferson City, Missouri, plans to move to California, where his grandmother lives, when he graduates from high school in May. Nichols said he withdrew his acceptance from a university in Missouri after he noticed how emboldened his classmates have become since Trump’s win.
“They say stuff like ‘You queer people will have to go back in the closet now,’ and ‘Without you parading around, we will make America great again like it used to be,’” he said. “Missouri’s not the place for me right now.”
Nichols said he is worried about an erosion of LGBTQ+ rights, including same-sex marriage, under Trump.
Although Trump did not focus on same-sex marriage during his campaign, many in the LGBTQ+ community are concerned that the high court could eventually rescind that right. They point to the court’s conservative supermajority and Justice Clarence Thomas’s concurring opinion in the case overturning Roe v. Wade, in which he stated that the justices should reconsider their 2015 ruling on same-sex marriages.
Bookstores, bars and ordained ministers across the country have offered to host or perform free weddings for gay couples since Trump was elected to another term. Some, like Harold’s Haunt, an LGBTQ+-friendly bar in Pittsburgh, are planning to put up wedding decorations for couples who “need to get married really quick.”
Other LGBTQ+ couples are worried about their parental rights.
Zavos, the family law attorney, said she has seen an uptick in calls, emails and Facebook messages from same-sex couples who fear that the incoming administration or the Supreme Court could curtail their adoption rights.
Some want to fast-track their adoption plans. Others want to start the lengthy second-parent adoption process, which would secure the parental rights of nonbiological parents. Zavos said LGBTQ+ families want to secure all the protections they can in a landscape where rights are being threatened.
“I had taken a semi-retirement,” Zavos said. “But given the circumstances, I will unretire to help the community through this crisis.”
An exit by kayak
Trump’s winning has been especially distressing for many young people. The Trevor Project registered a nearly 700 percent increase in calls, texts and chat messages to its crisis services the day after the election, compared with the weeks prior.
State laws targeting transgender people made trans and nonbinary youths between 25 percent and 27 percent more likely to attempt suicide at least once in the second and third years after being enacted, a recent study published in the Nature Human Behavior journal concluded.
Carolyn Fischer knows firsthand how devastating the election has been for some LGBTQ+ teens. She said her 16-year-old son, who is trans, made a pact with three other young trans people to die by suicide if Trump won. The children met on Discord, an online chat platform popular with video gamers, and Fisher said they had discussed how upset they were by the anti-transgender rhetoric coming from Republicans on social media and television.
A few days before the election, Fisher said, her son called the Rainbow Youth Project, a nonprofit that offers crisis counseling to at-risk LGBTQ+ youths and asked for help. All four of the trans adolescents are now receiving counseling, but at least one is still experiencing suicidal ideation.
Fisher and her husband are Republicans who had planned to vote for Trump. But on Election Day, they cast their ballots for Kamala Harris and decorated their front yard with a Pride flag to show support for LGBTQ+ people in the community.
Fisher and her husband have considered leaving their hometown to give their son a fresh start, but they don’t know where they should go.
“Nowhere in the country seems safe for LGBTQ+ kids right now,” she said.
Montgomery, the school custodian from Washington state, is so fearful about life during a second Trump administration that she is preparing an exit plan that includes a kayak.
Her first choice is to remain in Kitsap County, but if her access to gender transition care is limited, she said, she’ll take a ferry to British Columbia. In her “nightmare scenario,” transgender people would be forced to detransition or stop all gender transition medications and live in accordance with the sex they were assigned at birth. She said she would be afraid to go to any official U.S. port of entry if that happened and would instead kayak to Canada.
Montgomery estimates the 20-mile journey by sea would take at least four hours.
“If my worst fears came true,” she said, “I would be compelled to leave.”
rtainly! Let’s explore the positions on LGBTQ rights associated with Project 2024, Agenda 47, and recent speeches by Donald Trump and JD Vance:
- Project 2024:
- Overview: Project 2024 is a comprehensive policy handbook associated with the Trump administration. While it covers various topics, its stance on LGBTQ rights has been controversial.
- Key Points:
- Project 2024 calls for a ban on pornography, which is defined so broadly that it includes books featuring same-sex couples and even the existence of transgender people.
- The administration aimed to erode protections for transgender students and workers.
- It sought to weaken access to gender-affirming health care.
- Trump has distanced himself from Project 2024, but his campaign’s promises also veer sharply to the right regarding LGBTQ rights1.
- Agenda 47 (Trump):
- Overview: Dubbed “Agenda 47,” Trump’s policy platform targets public school teachers embroiled in culture wars and aims to undo civil rights protections for LGBTQ people.
- Specifics:
- Vance proposed a ban on gender-affirming care for minors, similar to a bill introduced by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene.
- Trump’s campaign pledges to dismantle Biden administration policies protecting transgender students under Title IX.
- The platform would proactively mandate discrimination by the federal government wherever possible2.
- Donald Trump’s Stance:
- History:
- Trump’s administration initiated efforts to erase protections for LGBTQ people during his tenure.
- He opposed federal protection for gay and interracial marriages, considering them a “bizarre distraction.”
- Trump defended his use of the term “groomer” (often used as a slur against LGBTQ people) in the context of bills preventing the sexualization of children3.
- Potential Impact:
- A second Trump administration would strip LGBTQ people of protections against discrimination in various contexts (employment, housing, education, health care, etc.).
- Proposed policies would ban transgender people from openly serving in the armed forces and block gender-affirming medical care for transgender individuals enrolled in federal healthcare programs4.
- History:
- JD Vance’s Stance:
- Controversial Remarks:
- Vance supported bills prohibiting “X” gender markers on U.S. passports and banning gender-affirming care for minors.
- He opposed federal protections for gay and interracial marriages.
- Vance defended his use of the term “groomer” in the context of bills preventing the sexualization of children5.
- Controversial Remarks:
In summary, both Trump and Vance have taken positions that raise concerns for LGBTQ rights. While Trump’s administration aimed to roll back protections, Vance’s controversial remarks have drawn criticism from LGBTQ advocacy groups. As voters, it’s essential to consider these stances when evaluating candidates’ impact on LGBTQ communities. 🌈🗳️
Sent by Copilot:
Certainly! Let’s explore the positions on LGBTQ rights associated with Project 2024, Agenda 47, and recent speeches by Donald Trump and JD Vance:
- Project 2024:
- Overview: Project 2024 is a comprehensive policy handbook associated with the Trump administration. While it covers various topics, its stance on LGBTQ rights has been controversial.
- Key Points:
- Project 2024 calls for a ban on pornography, which is defined so broadly that it includes books featuring same-sex couples and even the existence of transgender people.
- The administration aimed to erode protections for transgender students and workers.
- It sought to weaken access to gender-affirming health care.
- Trump has distanced himself from Project 2024, but his campaign’s promises also veer sharply to the right regarding LGBTQ rights1.
- Agenda 47 (Trump):
- Overview: Dubbed “Agenda 47,” Trump’s policy platform targets public school teachers embroiled in culture wars and aims to undo civil rights protections for LGBTQ people.
- Specifics:
- Vance proposed a ban on gender-affirming care for minors, similar to a bill introduced by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene.
- Trump’s campaign pledges to dismantle Biden administration policies protecting transgender students under Title IX.
- The platform would proactively mandate discrimination by the federal government wherever possible2.
- Donald Trump’s Stance:
- History:
- Trump’s administration initiated efforts to erase protections for LGBTQ people during his tenure.
- He opposed federal protection for gay and interracial marriages, considering them a “bizarre distraction.”
- Trump defended his use of the term “groomer” (often used as a slur against LGBTQ people) in the context of bills preventing the sexualization of children3.
- Potential Impact:
- A second Trump administration would strip LGBTQ people of protections against discrimination in various contexts (employment, housing, education, health care, etc.).
- Proposed policies would ban transgender people from openly serving in the armed forces and block gender-affirming medical care for transgender individuals enrolled in federal healthcare programs4.
- History:
- JD Vance’s Stance:
- Controversial Remarks:
- Vance supported bills prohibiting “X” gender markers on U.S. passports and banning gender-affirming care for minors.
- He opposed federal protections for gay and interracial marriages.
- Vance defended his use of the term “groomer” in the context of bills preventing the sexualization of children5.
- Controversial Remarks:
In summary, both Trump and Vance have taken positions that raise concerns for LGBTQ rights. While Trump’s administration aimed to roll back protections, Vance’s controversial remarks have drawn criticism from LGBTQ advocacy groups. As voters, it’s essential to consider these stances when evaluating candidates’ impact on LGBTQ communities. 🌈🗳️
Sent by Copilot:
Certainly! Transgender rights have been shaped significantly by court cases over the years. Let’s explore some notable ones:
- & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes v. EEOC & Aimee Stephens:
- Background: Aimee Stephens, a transgender woman, worked as a funeral director at R.G. and G.R. Harris Funeral Homes. When she informed her employer about her gender identity, she was fired. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) sued on her behalf.
- Outcome: The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that her employer engaged in unlawful sex discrimination by firing her because she’s transgender. The case reached the U.S. Supreme Court, which ultimately ruled in favor of Aimee Stephens, affirming that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act protects LGBTQ employees from workplace discrimination1.
- J. v. West Virginia State Board of Education:
- Context: Becky, a middle school student in West Virginia, wanted to try out for the cross-country team. However, a new state law would ban her from doing so because she is transgender.
- Legal Challenge: Becky and her parents sued, arguing that the law violates her rights. The ACLU, ACLU of West Virginia, Lambda Legal, and Cooley LLP represent her in this ongoing case1.
- Corbitt v. Taylor:
- Background: The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and ACLU of Alabama filed a federal lawsuit against officials of the Alabama Law Enforcement Agency (ALEA). The lawsuit challenges ALEA’s practice of depriving transgender people of driver’s licenses that reflect their gender identity.
- Legal Argument: The lawsuit alleges that this practice violates constitutional rights1.
These cases highlight the ongoing struggle for transgender rights in various contexts, including employment, education, and identification. Court decisions play a crucial role in shaping the legal landscape and advancing equality for transgender individuals. 🌈🏛️ Learn more
The GOP war on the LGBTQ community continues unabated
The republican rhetoric suggests that if the win the election (president) they will take action against the LGBTQ community including bans on LGBTQ people from serving in the government or military, authorizing discrimination against the LGBTQ community if it violates someone’s religious views, enacting a nation-wide standard regarding public access to bathrooms in public facilities, enacting a nation-wide ban on gender-affirming care for minors, and banning trans woman from participating in women’s sports.
Co-PIlot and Gemini provide some answers (below) and I have included some media accounts as well.
Co-PIlot answer
There has been a surge of anti-LGBTQ legislation in many states across the US, especially targeting transgender youth. According to the Human Rights Campaign1, some of the bills that have passed or are advancing in Texas, Florida and Utah are:
- Texas: The state legislature passed a bill that bans puberty blockers and hormone therapy for transgender kids2. It also passed a bill that restricts the college sports teams that transgender students can join2. Another bill that expands the definition of sexual conduct to include some drag shows also passed2.
- Florida: The governor signed a bill that bans classroom discussion about sexual orientation or gender identity in kindergarten through third grade3. This is known as the “Don’t Say Gay” bill, and critics say it will isolate and bully LGBTQ students3.
- Utah: The governor signed a bill that prevents transgender girls and women from competing on female sports teams4. This is the first anti-LGBTQ bill signed into law in 20234.
These laws are part of a coordinated nationwide campaign by anti-LGBTQ organizations and elected officials, and they have serious negative impacts on the mental health and well-being of LGBTQ people, especially youth32514. The ACLU is tracking these attacks and working with its affiliates to support LGBTQ rights everywhere5.
Yes, Florida passed a law that restricts transgender bathroom access in public facilities12. The law, known as the Safety in Private Spaces Act, took effect on July 1, 20232. It makes it a misdemeanor trespassing offense for someone to use restrooms or locker rooms that don’t align with their sex assigned at birth1. It applies to publicly-owned facilities in educational buildings, government buildings, correctional facilities and all school changing facilities2. The law also requires local school districts to craft code of conduct rules to discipline students who violate the law1.
The law has been widely criticized by LGBTQ+ advocacy groups, who say it will bar transgender people from using facilities in line with their gender identity and expose them to harassment and discrimination123. The ACLU has vowed to challenge the law in court and protect the rights of transgender Floridians3.
I could not find any information on whether anyone has been prosecuted under the law, but it is possible that some cases may arise in the future. The law allows the Attorney General to bring a formal complaint against any entity that willfully violates the law, starting from July 1, 20242.
Yes, there are other states that have passed laws that restrict transgender people’s access to bathrooms or facilities according to their gender identity. According to the Movement Advancement Project1, a total of 10 states have such laws as of January 2024. They are:
- Alabama: Bans transgender students from using bathrooms and facilities consistent with their gender identity in K-12 schools1.
- Idaho: Bans transgender people from using bathrooms and facilities consistent with their gender identity in all schools, colleges, and government-owned buildings and spaces1.
- Iowa: Bans transgender students from using bathrooms and facilities consistent with their gender identity in K-12 schools1.
- Kansas: Bans transgender students from using bathrooms and facilities consistent with their gender identity in K-12 schools1.
- Mississippi: Bans transgender students from using bathrooms and facilities consistent with their gender identity in K-12 schools1.
- North Dakota: Bans transgender students from using bathrooms and facilities consistent with their gender identity in K-12 schools1.
- Oklahoma: Bans transgender students from using bathrooms and facilities consistent with their gender identity in K-12 schools and at least some government-owned buildings1.
- South Carolina: Bans transgender students from using bathrooms and facilities consistent with their gender identity in K-12 schools1.
- Tennessee: Bans transgender students from using bathrooms and facilities consistent with their gender identity in K-12 schools1.
- West Virginia: Bans transgender students from using bathrooms and facilities consistent with their gender identity in K-12 schools1.
These laws are part of a coordinated nationwide campaign by anti-LGBTQ organizations and elected officials, and they have serious negative impacts on the mental health and well-being of LGBTQ people, especially youth1234. The ACLU is tracking these attacks and working with its affiliates to support LGBTQ rights everywhere3.
There are different reasons why some people oppose transgender bathroom access, but some of the common ones are:
- Disgust: Some people feel a strong sense of disgust or repulsion towards transgender people or anything that challenges their binary view of gender1. Disgust can influence moral judgments and make people more likely to reject or dehumanize those who are different from them1.
- Fear: Some people fear that allowing transgender people to use the bathrooms of their choice will endanger the safety or privacy of cisgender people, especially women and children23. They may believe that transgender people are predators or that cisgender people will be exposed to unwanted sexual advances or harassment in the bathrooms23.
- Ignorance: Some people are ignorant or misinformed about transgender people and their experiences. They may not understand what it means to be transgender, how gender identity differs from biological sex, or how transgender people face discrimination and violence in society45. They may also rely on stereotypes or myths about transgender people that are not based on facts or evidence45.
These reasons are not justified or supported by scientific research or human rights principles. Studies have shown that transgender people are not a threat to cisgender people in bathrooms, and that denying them access to the bathrooms of their choice harms their physical and mental health45. Transgender people have the right to use the bathrooms that match their gender identity, and doing so does not infringe on the rights of others45.
The scientific evidence on transgender bathroom access shows that:
- There is no link between allowing transgender people to use the bathrooms of their choice and the safety or privacy of cisgender people123. Studies have found that transgender-inclusive policies do not increase the risk of sexual assault, harassment, or voyeurism in public facilities123.
- There is a significant link between restricting transgender people’s access to the bathrooms of their gender identity and the harm to their physical and mental health4 . Studies have found that transgender people who face bathroom discrimination are more likely to experience urinary tract infections, kidney problems, dehydration, anxiety, depression, suicidal thoughts, and sexual assault4 .
Therefore, the scientific evidence supports the human rights of transgender people to use the bathrooms that match their gender identity, and refutes the transphobic arguments that are based on fear, disgust, or ignorance4 .
There are many examples of right-wing preachers who have made anti-LGBTQ comments, including calling for the execution of the LGBTQ community. Here are some of them:
- Steven Anderson: He is the pastor of Faithful Word Baptist Church in Arizona, and he has repeatedly called for the death of LGBTQ people, saying they are “abominations” and “pedophiles” who spread diseases1. He also praised the 2016 Orlando nightclub shooting that killed 49 people, most of whom were LGBTQ1.
- Kevin Swanson: He is the pastor of Reformation Church in Colorado, and he has advocated for the death penalty for homosexuality, saying it is a “biblical law” and a “covenantal requirement”2. He also blamed the 2012 Sandy Hook shooting that killed 26 people, including 20 children, on the acceptance of LGBTQ rights2.
- Charles Worley: He is the pastor of Providence Road Baptist Church in North Carolina, and he has proposed to put LGBTQ people in an electrified fence and drop food over them until they die out3. He also said that President Barack Obama is a “baby killer” and a “homosexual lover” who should be impeached3.
- Pat Robertson: He is the founder of the Christian Broadcasting Network and the host of The 700 Club, and he has made numerous anti-LGBTQ statements, such as saying that homosexuality is a “perversion” and a “sin” that leads to bestiality, pedophilia, and polygamy. He also blamed the 2010 Haiti earthquake that killed over 200,000 people on a “pact with the devil” made by Haitians to gain independence from France.
These are just some of the examples of the hateful and harmful rhetoric that some right-wing preachers have used against the LGBTQ community. Such rhetoric can incite violence, discrimination, and oppression against LGBTQ people, and it contradicts the principles of human dignity and equality.
President Trump has been widely criticized for his views and policies on LGBTQ rights, which have been seen as hostile, regressive, and harmful by many LGBTQ advocates and organizations. Some of the actions he has taken or supported include:
- Banning transgender people from serving openly in the military12.
- Rolling back protections for transgender students in schools34.
- Pushing for exemptions that would allow health care providers, employers, and adoption agencies to discriminate against LGBTQ people on religious grounds56.
- Cutting funding for HIV/AIDS research and prevention programs78.
- Opposing the Equality Act, a bill that would prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in various sectors910.
- Voting against a resolution condemning the use of the death penalty for same-sex acts in some countries1112.
If Trump were to run for a second term in 2024, he would likely continue to pursue these anti-LGBTQ policies and appoint judges and officials who share his views. He would also face strong opposition from LGBTQ activists and allies, who have mobilized to resist his attacks and advance LGBTQ rights at the state and local levels.
Nikki Haley is a former governor of South Carolina and a former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, who is considered a potential Republican presidential candidate in 2024. She has a mixed record on LGBTQ rights, which has evolved over time. Some of the positions she has taken or expressed include:
- Opposing same-sex marriage and defending South Carolina’s ban on it1314.
- Opposing a transphobic bathroom bill in South Carolina, saying it was unnecessary and divisive1516.
- Supporting the rights of transgender people to serve in the military, saying they should not be “singled out”1718.
- Voting for a resolution condemning the use of the death penalty for same-sex acts in some countries1920.
- Disputing that she opposes same-sex marriage, saying she supports “freedom”2122.
- Opposing transgender participation in women’s sports and transgender access to women’s locker rooms2324.
If Haley were to run for president in 2024, she would likely face criticism from both sides of the political spectrum on LGBTQ issues. She would have to balance her appeal to the conservative base of the Republican Party, which is largely anti-LGBTQ, with her attempt to reach out to moderate and independent voters, who are more supportive of LGBTQ rights.
President Biden has been a vocal and consistent supporter of LGBTQ rights, both as a senator, a vice president, and a president. He has been praised by LGBTQ advocates and organizations for his views and policies on LGBTQ issues, which have been seen as progressive, inclusive, and beneficial by many LGBTQ people. Some of the actions he has taken or promised include:
- Reversing the ban on transgender people serving openly in the military .
- Restoring and expanding protections for transgender students in schools .
- Issuing an executive order to prevent and combat discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in various sectors .
- Increasing funding for HIV/AIDS research and prevention programs .
- Supporting the Equality Act, a bill that would prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in various sectors .
- Issuing an executive order to advance the human rights of LGBTQI+ people around the world .
If Biden were to run for a second term in 2024, he would likely continue to pursue these pro-LGBTQ policies and appoint judges and officials who share his views. He would also face challenges from anti-LGBTQ forces, who have been trying to undermine his actions and enact discriminatory laws at the state and local levels.
Gemini’s Answer
there has been a lot of proposed and passed anti-LGBTQ legislation recently. Please list them particualary in Texas, Florida and Utah
You’re right, there has been a surge of anti-LGBTQ legislation in the United States recently, with Florida, Texas, and Utah being some of the most active states. Here are some examples:
Florida:
- “Don’t Say Gay” law (Parental Rights in Education Act): Prohibits classroom instruction on sexual orientation or gender identity from kindergarten to grade 3, and in a way that is not “age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate” in any grade. This law has been widely criticized for marginalizing LGBTQ students and creating a hostile school environment.
Florida Don’t Say Gay law protest
- Transgender athlete ban: Bans transgender girls and women from competing on female sports teams in public high schools and colleges. This law has been condemned by LGBTQ rights groups and athletes as discriminatory and harmful.
Texas:
- “Save Chick-fil-A” law (Freedom of Speech in Religious Institutions Act): Allows faith-based organizations to deny services to LGBTQ people based on their religious beliefs. This law has been challenged in court by LGBTQ rights groups.
Opens in a new windowtxvalues.org
Texas Save ChickfilA law protest
- Anti-trans healthcare bills: Several bills have been proposed or passed in Texas that would restrict access to gender-affirming healthcare for transgender youth. These bills have been met with fierce opposition from medical professionals and LGBTQ rights groups.
Utah:
- “Bathroom bill” (School Facility Privacy Act): Requires individuals to use restrooms corresponding to their sex assigned at birth in public schools and government buildings. This law has been criticized for discriminating against transgender people.
- “Don’t Say Gay” bill: A bill similar to Florida’s “Don’t Say Gay” law has been proposed in Utah, but it has not yet been passed.
These are just a few examples of the many anti-LGBTQ bills that have been introduced or passed in recent years. These laws have a negative impact on the lives of LGBTQ people and their families, and they create a climate of fear and discrimination.
It is important to note that there is also opposition to these laws, and many people are working to protect the rights of LGBTQ people. LGBTQ rights groups, such as the Human Rights Campaign and GLAAD, are fighting these laws in court and advocating for pro-LGBTQ legislation. Additionally, many businesses and organizations have spoken out against anti-LGBTQ discrimination.
The fight for LGBTQ rights is ongoing, and it is important to stay informed and engaged in order to make progress towards equality.
Here are some additional resources that you may find helpful:
- The Human Rights Campaign: https://www.hrc.org/
- GLAAD: https://www.glaad.org/
- The Trevor Project: https://www.thetrevorproject.org/
Utah legislature advances an extreme trans bathroom ban
Story by Daniel Villarreal • 5h
Utah legislature advances an extreme trans bathroom ban© Provided by LGBTQ Nation
On Friday, Utah’s state House of Representatives distinguished itself by becoming the country’s first legislative body to pass an anti-trans bill in 2024.
It also happens to be dangerously extreme, by seeking to make it a criminal offense for people to use a bathroom in a public building that doesn’t correspond with the gender on their birth certificate. According to Erin Reed, who tracks anti-trans legislation nationwide, the law raises the prospect of people forced to “potentially undergo a genital examination if under criminal investigation for being in the bathroom.” People determined under the law to have used the wrong bathroom inside public spaces, from colleges to Salt Lake City’s airport, could be sent to jail for up to 6 months.
Related:
Utah dad’s passionate defense of his elementary-age trans daughter is everything
His little girl has “nothing to do with any of this weird stuff” being spouted by those who should be protecting her.
The bill, which would need to pass the state’s Senate and be approved by the governor to become law, is so extreme that Reed and others have said it could even ensnare cisgender people and subject them to prosecution if someone thinks they’re peeing in the wrong place.
Subscribe to our daily newsletter to stay ahead of the latest LGBTQ+ political news and insights.
As Chris Geidner writes at Law Dork, “It is extreme legislation that explicitly retrofits the crimes of voyeurism and criminal trespass in the state to allow for the prosecution of many transgender people for using the right bathroom.”
When pressed on the House floor, the bill’s sponsor could not point to a single example of inappropriate behavior by a trans person in an Utah bathroom. But members of the Utah House—which meets for only 45 days a year and just started its 2024 session on Tuesday—nonetheless voted 57 to 17 to police bathrooms.
That the obviously transphobic and culture war catering move was a top priority says a lot about the leadership of my home state, which is on its way to becoming an uninhabitable toxic wasteland unless its politicians can stop the Great Salt Lake from drying up. Historically, Utah’s Republican majority has claimed to want to get government off your back—except for when it wants to look down your pants. Indeed, Utah legislators have long seemed to have a rather prurient interest in residents’ private lives and private parts.
Take the not-so-long-ago time Utah installed a “porn czar” in its attorney general’s office. In 2001, the state hired an unmarried Mormon virgin to police the state for smut and combat “cyber-sex.” The Washington Post reported that in her first months on the job, the bureaucrat was called upon to intercept a Victoria’s Secret catalog from a family mailbox, bar nude mannequin displays in store windows, and purge local libraries of R-rated movies. In 2018, the state legislature overturned the law creating the post. “The whole thing was a public-relations nightmare and kind of made Utah the laughingstock of the nation,” Sen. Todd Weiler, a Republican cosponsor of the rollback bill, told the Salt Lake Tribune.
The bathroom bill is, of course, far more intrusive, and would have far more harmful and repressive impacts than the porn czar ever did. But the drive for invasive legislation that could literally see local cops checking people’s genitalia overlaps with the lawmakers’ longstanding and unhealthy interest in what goes on behind closed doors.
Black said the bill aims to answer “The defining question of this decade, ‘What is a woman?’”
“Indeed, this bill only serves to codify that which is already indisputable but has sadly been weaponized by a radical political movement intent on rewriting the laws of nature to fit their twisted agenda,” Black said in a news release.
This article first appeared on Mother Jones. It has been republished with the publication’s permission.
While LGBTQ+ rights continue to gain traction across America, there are still those, including lawmakers, who aren’t in support. In Tennessee, a state representative is championing a bill through the Tennessee legislature to ban the display of Pride flags on state property. According to the rep, parents are interested in raising their kids with values “that were in existence at the time that our country was founded.”
The Republican State Rep. Gino Bulso first introduced House Bill 1605 in December 2023. It was interesting that amongst the values, Bulso did not include slavery, eradication of the indigenous population, and other values that existed when America was founded. Nonetheless, he believes families need values that existed during the nation’s founding years.
However, Bulso is not alone in his beliefs. Speaker of the U.S. House, Mike Johnson (R-LA), a Christian nationalist who believes that civic life and government should be based on the Bible. Bulso maintains that 18th-century values should guide Americans.
“Certainly, you know, 50 years ago, we had a consensus on what marriage is; we don’t have that anymore,” Bulso told WKRN in Nashville. “One hundred years ago, we had a consensus on sexual morality; I don’t think we have that anymore. So the values that I think most parents want their children exposed to are the ones that were in existence at the time that our country was founded.”
Utah House passes transgender bathroom ban© Provided by The Hill
Utah’s Republican-controlled House voted Friday to pass a sweeping proposal to keep transgender people out of restrooms and locker rooms that match their gender identity in taxpayer-funded buildings, sending the measure to the state’s majority GOP Senate for consideration just three days after the start of the session.
House Bill 257 aims to prohibit individuals from using gender-designated facilities that differ from their sex assigned at birth in government buildings, correctional facilities and domestic violence shelters unless they have undergone a transition-related surgery and legally amended the sex on their birth certificate.
The proposal would require new government buildings to include single-occupant restrooms and changing rooms while existing ones must be studied to assess “the feasibility of retrofitting or remodeling” facilities to improve privacy.
Utah House lawmakers voted 52-17 on Friday to pass the bill. Three Republicans joined all Democrats in voting against it.
The bill, if passed, would make Utah the third state to adopt explicit restrictions on transgender bathroom use in buildings other than schools. A Florida law passed last year prevents transgender people from using facilities consistent with their gender identity in all government-owned buildings, and a North Dakota law restricts bathroom use in correctional facilities.
As of January 18, GOP lawmakers have introduced 285 anti-LGBTQ bills, with a focus on restricting transgender rights and LGBTQ visibility.
The bills seek to ban drag performances, limit gender-affirming health care, and remove LGBTQ content from school libraries.
Most bills target the transgender community, aiming to redefine transgender existence in law or restrict self-identification and access to services.
“Transgender people across the country are enduring a historic and dangerous effort to control our bodies and our lives, fueled by extremist politics with the goal of erasing us from public life,” attorney Harper Seldin said.
“Taken together, these proposals are a blatant effort to deny transgender people the freedom to be ourselves at school, at work, and the support of the medical care many of us need to live.”
“In South Carolina, one bill would ban Medicaid coverage for gender affirming care up to the age of 26, expanding restrictions on care far into the adult age range,” transgender advocate Erin Reed said.
At least 200 bills focus on educational matters, while over 120 seek to restrict gender-affirming health care for minors.
Legal challenges have arisen from families and doctors due to restrictions on gender-affirming care.
The Human Rights Campaign anticipates a record number of anti-LGBTQ legislation in the upcoming state legislative sessions, including bills that deny legal recognition of transgender people and restrict LGBTQ visibility.
Related video: LGBTQ Rights Groups Want the UN to Investigate Texas (Dailymotion)
ithin the first week of Florida’s legislative session, which commenced recently, Republican lawmakers introduced several bills specifically targeting LGBTQ individuals, exceeding the count of days in the new year.
Some of the bills introduced in Florida during this legislative session are notably extreme. These include proposals to alter the state’s definition of sex and criminalize “lewd or lascivious grooming.” These measures stand out as among the most stringent of the hundreds filed in state legislatures nationwide.
Another bill suggests preventing government employees from being obligated to use pronouns requested by their colleagues. Additionally, a proposal aimed at shielding children from “harmful material” online. However, the vagueness of the term “harmful material” raises concerns among advocates, as it could potentially encompass LGBTQ content.
In a further development, a proposal from Republican state Sen. Jason Brodeur seeks to categorize almost all published accusations of anti-LGBTQ bias as “defamation per se.” This bill would prevent journalists from defending such accusations by referencing the subject’s “Constitutionally protected religious expression or beliefs” or scientific beliefs. Those liable in successful lawsuits under this proposal could face damages of at least $35,000.
ALSO READ: 5 Countries with Strict Anti-LGBTQ+ Laws
“Florida has, for years, been an innovator of new assaults on freedom and equality, and this year’s slate of bills is no different,” remarked Brandon Wolf, a spokesperson for LGBTQ advocacy group the Human Rights Campaign, who is also a survivor of the Orlando, Florida, Pulse nightclub mass shooting.
Related video: LGBTQ Rights Groups Want the UN to Investigate Texas (Dailymotion)
He added, “This session, we’ll see escalating attacks on education, medical freedom, and the fundamental right of transgender people to exist as their authentic selves.” A proposed bill by Republican Rep. Dean Black mandates Floridians to sign an affidavit aligning their IDs with the sex on their original birth certificate.
Transgender individuals would be compelled to surrender existing IDs displaying their gender identity and would be unable to obtain such identification in the future. This measure poses significant hurdles for transgender individuals, impacting their access to identification reflecting their authentic gender identity.
POLL — Should Public Schools Include Critical Race Theory and Sex Education in Their Curriculum?
Black’s bill mandates health insurance policies covering transition-related procedures, including “Treatment to detransition.” The proposed legislation requires coverage of conversion therapy in health insurance policies. Specifically, it calls for mental health services to address a person’s perception that their sex is inconsistent with their sex assigned at birth, affirming their birth sex.
The proposed bill further mandates any school district or state agency collecting vital statistics for anti-discrimination compliance or data purposes to identify the birth sex of individuals in the dataset. This provision could potentially limit data collection on transgender people.
ALSO READ: ACLU Records Rise in LGBTQ Legislation in 2023
The LGBTQ society has become a regular fixture in the modern day. But according to The American Civil Liberties Union, they have been getting a lot of legal bills. Backed into a corner, they now speak up, hopeful for public sympathy, which they used to get — until now.
This year, state legislators passed a record-breaking number of laws, and they all targeted LGBTQ privileges in the U.S. The ACLU said it noticed at least 508 bills impacting the community in 2023.
It also says that 84 of these bills are now laws. The rise in legislation clashed with an increase in threats of violence against the LGBTQ community.
The federal security agencies are sounding the alarm. However, activists say that despite the record-breaking wave of anti-LGBTQ bills, other lawmakers have stepped up to combat such efforts.
ALSO READ: 5 Countries with Strict Anti-LGBTQ+ Laws
“We’ve also witnessed incredible moments of strength in states and communities across the country who have made sure this political assault does not go unnoticed or is made any easier for politicians opposed to our very existence,” said Gillian Branstetter, Communications Strategist at the ACLU, in a statement to ABC News.
The vast majority of legislation passed across the country has impacted gender-affirming care for minors, blocking trans youth from accessing treatments in some cases, including puberty blockers, hormone therapy, and surgeries.
Advocates tracking several bills they call ‘anti-LGBTQ’
POLL — Should Laws Be Enacted To Protect LGBTQ+ Individuals From Workplace Discrimination?
These laws do not apply to such treatments in cases where the subject is a cisgender or intersex youth. The majority of those who support the law are against gender transitioning. They believe that it is harmful to youth and young adults.
The more lenient ones want patients to wait until they are older to make such decisions. Georgia Governor Brian Kemp is one such man. In March 2023, he signed a bill in his state banning doctors from starting hormone therapy for transgender youth under the age of 18. All “to ensure we protect the health and wellbeing of Georgia’s children.”
In September, a judge let the state enforce the ban after it faced a lawsuit. But there’s more where that came from.
At least 14 laws impacting the LGBTQ community are currently in the middle of legal battles. And if what Sarah Kate Ellis, president and CEO of LGBTQ media advocacy group GLAAD, said is true, it is just the beginning.
Ellis says, “The silver lining in this year of challenge is how LGBTQ people and our allies showed up for our community and everyone’s fundamental freedoms.”
Aside from Georgia, other states considered hostile towards the LGBTQ include Ohio and Wisconsin. Fortunately, several states have passed protection laws for the LGBTQ community. They include Minnesota, Michigan, New York, and California.
Atransgender “bathroom ban” in North Carolina caused a national uproar in 2016. Bruce Springsteen, Cyndi Lauper, Nick Jonas and a long list of other A-list performers canceled shows in the state. Global corporations Deutsche Bank and PayPal torpedoed plans to expand in Cary and Charlotte. The NCAA moved its scheduled championship games elsewhere.
Now, eight years later, after Utah passed a similar bill on Monday, the reaction beyond the state’s borders appears to be more of a shrug.
Neither of Utah’s largest businesses released statements in response to the legislation. Tens of thousands of out-of-towners, and an ensuing economic boost, were just heading home from the Sundance Film Festival, held annually in Park City. Global sensation — and queer icon — Bad Bunny is slated to headline a concert in Salt Lake City in upcoming weeks. Next month, Salt Lake City will be hosting first- and second-round games in the NCAA men’s basketball tournament.
Representatives for the NCAA, Bad Bunny and Sundance did not immediately return requests for comment.
In fact, nine other states passed so-called transgender bathroom bills in the years between those passed by North Carolina and Utah, with little fanfare as well.
Protesters hold signs that read,© Jill Knight
Allison Scott, who volunteered as an on-the-ground activist in North Carolina to fight HB 2, described this week’s lackluster reaction to Utah’s “bathroom bill” and the several others that have been passed in recent years as “very telling.”
“We were all saying that with HB 2: ‘It’s not over,’” said Scott, who is also the director of impact and innovation for the Campaign for Southern Equality, an LGBTQ advocacy group. “Now, here we are several years later and we’ve seen these bills grow and increase and grow and increase year over year over year, and we’re right back not only where we started but worse.”
While the enactment of the Utah law has immediate implications for the state’s trans community, the tepid response to its passage also reflects a broader retreat on transgender rights that less than a decade ago galvanized corporate America, elite sports and Hollywood.
Utah House Bill 257, which is titled “Sex-based Designations for Privacy, Anti-bullying and Women’s Opportunities,” limits transgender people’s access to bathrooms in public schools and government-operated buildings. These include restrooms at Salt Lake City International Airport, which is managed by local government, and in Utah’s public hospitals and universities. It also specifies the state’s legal definition of “male” and “female” is based on a person’s genitalia at birth rather than their gender identity.
The bill makes exceptions for trans people who have received genital surgery and changed their gender marker to match their gender identity on their birth certificates.
Critics of the legislation have said the law will create a “dangerous situation for trans youth.”
Supporters of the legislation have argued that without a measure in place, men posing as trans women will go into women’s public restrooms and commit sexual misconduct.
Rep. Kera Birkeland, who sponsored the Utah law, said that the bill was necessary to close a “giant loophole for predators” and will only criminally charge offenders who commit “an offense of lewdness,” as the bill states.
“If the people just go in and use the bathroom the way they’re supposed to be used, they will be fine. That has remained consistent throughout the bill, throughout any change,” Birkeland said in a phone call. “We’re not targeting just people who are transgender or people who are like, ‘I’m going to miss my flight, I’m going to duck into the men’s bathroom because the line is shorter.’”
She also pushed back on criticism that the bill would create an environment where Utahns are policing trans people in public restrooms, pointing to a provision in the bill that would criminally charge people for falsely reporting trans people in public restrooms.
“We do not want to incentivize any vigilante people out there trying to be jerks,” she said. “The whole goal is just to ensure that everyone feels like they have a safe place to do private things.”
Erin Reed, a transgender journalist and advocate, pushed back on this, arguing that the legislation will create disruption for trans people regardless of the bill’s specifics.
“People are not going to go through the fine points of a 12-page law,” Reed said. “More likely than not, you’re just going to see trans people and cis people challenged in bathrooms.”
Aside from Utah and North Carolina, lawmakers in nine other states have enacted similar legislation in recent years, including in Florida, Tennessee and Kentucky, according to a tally by The Associated Press. The measures largely restrict trans people’s access to restrooms solely in schools or in schools and government-operated buildings.
But North Carolina’s law, HB 2, went further, barring trans people from using restrooms and changing facilities that matched their gender identities in most public spaces.
A sign that reads,© Jonathan Drake
HB 2 — which was later partially repealed in 2017 — also prevented local governments from passing LGBTQ nondiscrimination measures and rendered then-existing protections, including one in Charlotte, moot. For this reason, the law affected a much broader segment of the population compared to today’s bills and therefore drew national ire, said Shannon Gilreath, a professor at Wake Forest University’s School of Law and a faculty member of the university’s gender and sexuality program.
“When one’s own interests are not directly compromised by some form of discrimination, one is less likely to respond or to care,” Gilreath said. “I might not believe that’s necessarily the right attitude to have — to do what’s expedient versus to do what’s right in a situation — but that’s human nature.”
Some studies back Gilreath’s line of reasoning.
A survey from the nonpartisan research group Public Religion Research Institute conducted last year found an estimated 79% of Americans support anti-discrimination protections for LGBTQ people. Policies that largely favor trans Americans solely received significantly less support, the poll found. However, Americans who say they know at least one trans person are much more likely to support pro-trans policies, a 2022 survey from the Pew Research Center found.
Reed said that what’s changed from 2016 to now is that people — and even billion-dollar corporations — have become afraid of provoking the far-right.
She pointed to a group of conservative provocateurs who collectively have amassed tens of millions of social media followers in part by stoking outrage over LGBTQ issues. In several instances, threats of violence have followed the subjects of posts made or amplified by the group of right-wing influencers.
“These people are scary,” Reed said. “If the NBA All-Star Game threatened to pull a game right now? In this atmosphere? Today? They’d get bomb threats from conservatives.”
Last year, bomb threats were made to Budweiser factories across the country after trans influencer Dylan Mulvaney’s brand partnership with Bud Light created an online firestorm in pockets of right-wing social media. Target also pulled some of its LGBTQ-themed merchandise for Pride Month from its shelves last year after it said it received “threats impacting our team members’ sense of safety and wellbeing while at work.”
Pride month merchandise at the front of a Target store in Hackensack, N.J. (Seth Wenig / AP file)© Seth Wenig
Reed also suggested that it might not be politically advantageous for Republicans to go against the grain when it comes to issues that affect trans people.
Republican Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine faced political blowback after vetoing a bill that would ban gender-affirming care for minors in the state in December. Former President Donald Trump urged Ohio state lawmakers to override the veto, writing on his social media platform, Truth Social, that he was “finished” with the Republican governor. Ohio senators overrode the governor’s veto last week.
In recent weeks, local activists had been unsure whether Utah Gov. Spencer Cox would sign HB 257. Cox in 2022 vetoed legislation that aimed to limit transgender students’ ability to compete on girls sports teams in school, citing the disproportionate rate of suicidal ideation among trans kids.
But since then, anti-LGBTQ political rhetoric and legislation have surged.
Conservative lawmakers introduced more than 500 anti-LGBTQ bills in state legislatures across the country, according to a tally by the ACLU, with the majority of them targeting trans people. Seventy-five of those bills became law, including a ban on gender-affirming care for minors in Utah, which Cox signed into law.
Cox signed Utah’s “bathroom bill” on Monday evening with little fanfare and issued a short statement after weeks of speculation on his position.
“We want public facilities that are safe and accommodating for everyone and this bill increases privacy protections for all,” the statement read.
The law is effective immediately.
In addition to Utah, legislators in five states — South Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia, Kansas and Iowa — have introduced their own “bathroom bills” or legislation that further expands “bathroom bills” already on the books, according to the American Civil Liberties Union.
This article was originally published on NBCNews.com
Donald Trump Downplays Transgender Issues: ‘Very Small Number of People’
President-elect Donald Trump said transgender issues only affect a “very small number of people.”
Trump was named TIME Magazine‘s 2024 Person of the Year on Thursday. In his interview with the magazine, he said “the bathroom issue” only pertains to a small amount of people and it’s tearing the country apart. He also advocated for people to go “along with” the Supreme Court‘s rulings.
“I don’t want to get into the bathroom issue. In a study published by Statista in July, the organization found that around 7.6 percent of adults in the United States identified as a part of the LGBTQ+ community in 2023, which is more than double the numbers in 2012.
The study found that as of 2021, around 97.4 percent of people assigned female at birth still identified as such.
2022 survey data from Gallup, the Williams Institute and Pew Research suggests that between .5 and 1.6 percent of adults in the United States identify as transgender or nonbinary.
However, YouGov showed that the public believes that as many as one in five people is transgender.
During his 2024 presidential campaign, Trump ran an advertisement focusing on transgender rights, famously saying “Kamala is for They/Them” and that “Donald Trump is for Us
Kamala even supports letting biological men compete against our girls in their sports,” the ad read. “Kamala is for they, them. President Trump is for you.”
Trump told TIME that “it’s true, Trump is for us.”
A spokesperson for Trump said that he has plans for Day 1 in office, which range from settling the Russian and Ukrainian war to removing protections for transgender students.
“I am a big believer in the Supreme Court, and I’m going to go by their rulings, and so far, I think their rulings have been rulings that people are going along with,” Trump said, “but we’re talking about a very small number of people, and we’re talking about it, and it gets massive coverage, and it’s not a lot of people.”
Earlier this week, the Supreme Court turned down an appeal involving a challenge to a school’s plan for transgender students.
The “bathroom issue” has been prevalent in Congress recently, as Republican Representative Nancy Mace, of South Carolina, has filed a bill seeking to ban transgender women from using women’s bathrooms at the U.S. Capitol. Mace’s posts come ahead of Representative-elect Sarah McBride, the first openly transgender woman elected to Congress, joining the House in January.
“We support gay marriage, and voted for the Respect for Marriage Act twice. However, if you think protecting women is discrimination, you are the problem,” Mace posted to X, formerly known as Twitter. “We don’t care if you’re trans, if you have balls we don’t want you in the women’s bathroom.”
The House sergeant-at-arms would reportedly be responsible for enforcing the ban, as Mace said in a few of her posts. A copy of the bill shared by Axios shows that bathrooms would be divided along the lines of “biological sex.”
Trump said in his interview with TIME that he does agree with McBride, suggesting the lawmakers should be focused on more important issues.
“I do agree with that,” Trump said. “On that—absolutely. As I was saying, it’s a small number of people.”
Medium
Substack
Substack Podcast
Spotify Podcast
Wattpad
