News & Events

Community Calendar

Gay rights groups angered by weaker antidiscrimination bill
Carolyn Lochhead, Chronicle Washington Bureau
Tuesday, October 2, 2007 (READ)

Chairman Andrews on ENDA
by: Jay Lassiter, BlueJersey,com
Tue Oct 02, 2007 at 03:38:40 PM EDT (READ)

Barney Frank Bails on the Transgender Community
Posted October 1, 2007 | 11:37 AM (EST) (READ)

A Moment of Truth
Bilerico.com, September 29, 2007 (READ)

HRC vows no ENDA if no trans protection (READ) 

October 3, 2007

STATEMENT OF EQUALITY FEDERATION

ON PROPOSED REMOVAL OF PROTECTIONS FOR TRANSGENDER AMERICANS

FROM FEDERAL EMPLOYMENT NON-DISCRIMINATION ACT

Equality Federation, the national alliance of 55 statewide lesbian, gay,
bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) advocacy organizations, categorically
rejects this justification and will actively oppose this or any version of
ENDA that would leave any part of the LGBT community behind.  Equality
Federation will support the Employment Non-Discrimination Act only if it
protects every member of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender
community.

To omit a segment of the community from anti-discrimination legislation is
wrong - philosophically, morally and strategically.  Our experience passing
similar laws in state legislatures has taught us that the wait for passing
legislation that protects transgender people after passing a bill that only
protects lesbians, gay men, and bisexual people can last anywhere from five
to twenty-five years.  This is one of the reasons that state groups in
recent years have focused on the strategy of including gender identity and
expression in our efforts from the beginning.

Equality Federation also opposes a sexual orientation only bill because
removing protections based on gender identity and expression actually hurts
all Americans. Such a strategy leaves a huge loophole in protection for
lesbians, gay men, and bisexual people.  If the revised version of ENDA were
to pass, employers could simply fire anyone for expressing their gender in a
way that does not conform to gender stereotypes.  Lesbians could be fired
for being too "butch", gay men could be fired for being effeminate, and the
revised ENDA would not offer any protection.

Equality Federation also questions the sudden need to rush any version of
ENDA into law.  We find it difficult to believe that a law protecting
lesbian and gay people from employment discrimination is likely to be signed
by our current president, and we have seen no evidence to the contrary.  If
the choice is between standing on principle and losing or abandoning
principle and losing, we see only one correct position to take:  ENDA must
protect all Americans from discrimination based on sexual orientation and
gender identity and expression.

Equality Federation members are state-based organizations answerable to LGBT
people in the states.  No other national organization has the direct
connections and the accountability to the LGBT community represented by the
Federation's members.  And though we are aware that this issue provokes
passionate debate within our community, Federation member organizations
overwhelmingly signed on to a recent community letter protesting the
stripped-down ENDA because it was the right thing to do.  Our community is
strongest when we all stand together.

Collectively, Federation members have the largest number of lobbyists and
professional advocates dedicated to LGBT issues in the nation.  Our members
also have more collective experience working with fair-minded legislators to
pass inclusive legislation than any other LGBT organization.  We are aware
of the challenges to passing transgender-inclusive legislation - but we know
from our experience that it can be done.  We have done it in thirteen states
so far.  

We call upon our allies both in the community and in Congress to stand on
principle and to support only employment nondiscrimination legislation that
provides real protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender
Americans.  Now is not the time to take what we are told we can get.  Now is
the time to provide strong and principled leadership and to argue for what
we need.  Equality Federation will not settle for less than an ENDA that
protects all members of our LGBT community, and we challenge any claims that
the LGBT community supports the compromise currently being proposed in
Congress.

Zogby Poll:

“If public officials in New Jersey come to the conclusion that civil unions for gay couples have not worked to provide equality under the law, and that the way to fix the law is to give gay couples the same right to marry as heterosexual couples, would you be fine with that or would you be upset by that?”  63% responded “fine with that,” while only 31% responded “upset by that.”

The poll also provides key political information to legislators for when they consider changing civil unions to marriage equality.  The poll asked:

“Which of the following do you think is most likely to happen to legislators if they were to allow gay couples to marry?  Those legislators would not be reelected, or nothing because people care about other issues more.”  72% said nothing would happen to legislators, while only 21% said legislators would not be reelected.

In response to the question, “Regardless of where you stand on the issue of allowing gay couples to marry, do you agree or disagree that gay couples will be allowed to get married in New Jersey in a couple of years anyway?”, 61% agreed, while only 29% disagreed.

The poll also asked the baseline question testing support for marriage equality versus civil unions in two different ways.  When voters were asked:  “New Jersey allows gay couples to enter into civil unions but not marry. Do you agree or disagree that New Jersey should give gay couples the same freedom to marry as heterosexual couples?” 48% supported marriage equality, while 45% opposed it. 

But when voters were asked:  “Which of the following comes closest to your own point of view:  (A) If gay couples want to marry, let them.  It will ensure equality and will not affect marriages of heterosexual couples anyway.  (B)  Allow gay couples to enter into civil unions, but not marriage. Allowing gay couples to marry will hurt the institution of marriage.  (C)  Do not allow gay couples to marry or enter into civil unions,”  48% of voters supported marriage equality, 30% supported civil unions but no more, and 20% supported neither marriage nor civil unions for same-sex couples.

The difference between the two questions may have been the concept of marriage for gay couples hurting the institution of marriage, the primary argument of marriage-equality opponents that New Jersey voters clearly reject.

“Regardless of whether any public official supports marriage equality or wants to maintain the state’s failed civil unions law,” said Steven Goldstein, chair of Garden State Equality, “no official in New Jersey can credibly say that marriage for gay couples is a divisive issue in the state.  Even voters who oppose marriage equality are ready to accept an upgrade of the state’s civil unions law to real marriage equality.” 

Recent Headlines:

Barre Montpelier Times Argus (VT): State to Consider Gay Marriage

Concord Monitor: State drops fight over benefits for same-sex couples

Concord Monitor: Gay couples learn that union isn't the same as marriage

Union Leader: Civil unions law's impact on firms expected to be minimal

Concord Monitor: Senate okays civil unions; parties divided

The Guardian (UK): 18th Century gay-rights activist discovered

Concord Monitor: Senior same-sex couples navigate system that doesn't recognize them

..read these articles and more..

This Week's Events:

27th - Capital Gay Men's Group Mini Groups and CGM Board Mtg

25th - Seacoast Outright Movie/Discussion Night - "Trick"

28th - Capital Gay Men's Group - Potluck

28th - Seacoast Outright - GLBT Dance

30th - Seacoast Gay Men's Group - Volunteering at ARS

31st - Manchester Outright - Weekly Meeting

..more events..