Articles in News
Firing of transwoman because coworkers might feel "uncomfortable" is discrimination, Court rules
U.S. District Judge Richard W. Story handed down a decision finding the firing of Vandy Beth Glenn—a former Georgia state legislative editor who announced that she would be transitioning from a man to a woman—unconstitutional.Born Glenn Morrison, the plaintiff alleged that her boss, Georgia Legislative Counsel Sewell Brumby, dismissed her after two years of employment because the gender transition she was about to undergo would make coworkers feel “uncomfortable” and be seen as “immoral” by Georgia lawmakers. In Glenn v. Brumby et. al., Sewell argued that lawmakers “would no longer trust his office if a transgendered person worked there,” states UPI.com.But in a 50-page decision, Story wrote: “[A]voiding the anticipated negative reactions of others cannot serve as a sufficient basis for discrimination and does not constitute an important government interest.”
… In this case, “the court proved that the Georgia General Assembly isn’t above the constitution,” says Lambda Legal transgender-rights attorney Dru Levasseur, who is co-representing Glenn, in a press release. “The evidence was clear—Vandy Beth was fired because her boss didn’t like who she is, and that kind of treatment is unfair and illegal.”
Sara’s News Roundup 7/11/10
DOMA Section 3 ruled Unconstitutional, violates equal protection
“In one challenge brought by the state of Massachusetts, Judge Joseph Tauro ruled that Congress violated the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution when it passed DOMA and took from the states decisions concerning which couples can be considered married. In the other, Gill v. Office of Personnel Management, he ruled DOMA violates the equal protection principles embodied in the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.”
This court has determined that it is clearly within the authority of the Commonwealth [of Massachusetts] to recognize same-sex marriages among its residents, and to afford those individuals in same-sex marriages any benefits, rights, and privileges to which they are entitled by virtue of their marital status. The federal government, by enacting and enforcing DOMA, plainly encroaches upon the firmly entrenched province of the state, and, in doing so, offends the Tenth Amendment. For that reason, the statute is invalid.
DOMA fails to pass constitutional muster even under the highly deferential rational basis test. As set forth in detail below, this court is convinced that “there exists no fairly conceivable set of facts that could ground a rational relationship” between DOMA and a legitimate government objective. DOMA, therefore, violates core constitutional principles of equal protection.
[T]his court notes that DOMA cannot possibly encourage Plaintiffs to marry members of the opposite sex because Plaintiffs are already married to members of the same sex. But more generally, this court cannot discern a means by which the federal government’s denial of benefits to same-sex spouses might encourage homosexual people to marry members of the opposite sex. And denying marriage-based benefits to same-sex spouses certainly bears no reasonable relation to any interest the government might have in making heterosexual marriages more secure.What remains, therefore, is the possibility that Congress sought to deny recognition to same-sex marriages in order to make heterosexual marriage appear more valuable or desirable. But to the extent that this was the goal, Congress has achieved it “only by punishing same-sex couples who exercise their rights under state law.” And this the Constitution does not permit.“For if the constitutional conception of ‘equal protection of the laws’ means anything, it must at the very least mean that the Constitution will not abide such a bare congressional desire to harm a politically unpopular group.”
But even if Congress believed at the time of DOMA’s passage that children had the best chance at success if raised jointly by their biological mothers and fathers, a desire to encourage heterosexual couples to procreate and rear their own children more responsibly would not provide a rational basis for denying federal recognition to same-sex marriages. Such denial does nothing to promote stability in heterosexual parenting. Rather, it “prevent[s] children of same-sex couples from enjoying the immeasurable advantages that flow from the assurance of a stable family structure,” when afforded equal recognition under federal law.Moreover, an interest in encouraging responsible procreation plainly cannot provide a rational basis upon which to exclude same-sex marriages from federal recognition because, as Justice Scalia pointed out in his dissent to Lawrence v. Texas, the ability to procreate is not now, nor has it ever been, a precondition to marriage in any state in the country.
In the wake of DOMA, it is only sexual orientation that differentiates a married couple entitled to federal marriage-based benefits from one not so entitled. And this court can conceive of no way in which such a difference might be relevant to the provision of the benefits at issue. By premising eligibility for these benefits on marital status in the first instance, the federal government signals to this court that the relevant distinction to be drawn is between married individuals and unmarried individuals. To further divide the class of married individuals into those with spouses of the same sex and those with spouses of the opposite sex is to create a distinction without meaning. And where, as here, “there is no reason to believe that the disadvantaged class is different, in relevant respects” from a similarly situated class, this court may conclude that it is only irrational prejudice that motivates the challenged classification. As irrational prejudice plainly never constitutes a legitimate government interest, this court must hold that Section 3 of DOMA as applied to Plaintiffs violates the equal protection principles embodied in the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Being LGBT in Juneau, 40 years apart
Sara Boesser, writer of the weekly News Roundup, and Lauren Tibbitts, leader of the JDHS Gay Straight Alliance, were interviewed on “Call Dr. E” on KTOO radio earlier this week. If you missed the live show, you can listen to “Being LGBT in Juneau” in the KTOO archive HERE.
The show should be very interesting: I’m just having my 40th high school reunion this weekend. The other guest, Lauren Tibbitts, just graduated this summer from the same Juneau high school I attended. I realized I was a lesbian while attending my high school; Lauren realized she was bisexual in the same high school 40 years later. The show will be reflections on some of the differences 40 years can make in the same town being a GLBT teenager.
Thanks to Sara and Lauren for sharing their perspectives as LGBT women in southeast Alaska, and to Dr. Elaine Schroeder for moderating the show.
Pride Float destroyed & rebuilt for July 4th parade wins Grand Prize (video and links)
The return of Sara’s NEWS Roundup (7/5/10)
Watch: Drag Queen Bingo & Alaska Pride Parade (videos)
Thanks to KTVA channel 11 for airing several stories throughout the week of Alaska PrideFest this year. Here are KTVA’s stories on the annual Drag Queen Bingo at Snow City Café, a benefit for AMP; and at Anchorage’s annual Pride parade and festival.
Watch: Elena Kagan on DADT & marriage
Alaska GOP platform opposes gays, supports creationism and unqualified judges
“We affirm the family, defined as people living together related by blood, marriage or adoption, as the foundational unit of society. We embrace the definition of marriage in our State constitution as the union of one man and one woman and support reserving certain benefits to this union alone.”
“We support requiring active, written parental consent prior to teaching any sex education curricula. Any such curriculum must be age appropriate and abstinence based. We also support teaching prenatal development. We oppose teaching or promoting alternative lifestyles as legitimate or desirable.”
“We oppose any modification of the application of the current “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy as adopted in 1993 to implement Public Law 103-106.”
“We support teaching various models and theories for the origins of life and our universe, including Creation Science or Intelligent Design. If evolution outside a species (macro-evolution) is taught, evidence disputing the theory should also be presented.”
“We support a change to the Alaska Constitution that would eliminate the practice of the Alaska Judicial Council to limit the list of potential appointees to only those it finds “qualified.” The council could still give its rating, but the Governor could choose a nominee from all applicants.”
“We endorse the Human Life Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Man is made in the image of God; therefore, we embrace the sanctity of life from the moment of conception until natural death. We heartily encourage our elected officials to use every legal means to protect the unborn and recognize the worth of even the smallest members of the human race.”
“We are committed to the protection of full civil and equal rights for all people and the continued efforts to eliminate all forms of discrimination.”
“Alaskans must be guaranteed the freedom to make and act on personal decisions regarding religion, reproduction, medical care, and marriage and life partners.”
“Every worker is entitled to a living wage and a safe, healthy, harassment-free workplace that promotes equal employment opportunity in all terms and conditions of employment. We expect the enforcement of nondiscrimination laws and the promotion of Alaska preference in hiring.”
“We believe that the U.S. government should support multinational efforts through the United Nations and elsewhere to stop genocide, reduce hunger and disease, protect human rights, and to promote justice, prosperity and peace in the world.”
Openly gay Ray Boltz performs in Anchorage, July 11
Ray Boltz is performing in Anchorage on July 11 — and the concert is FREE! Yes, that’s right, you can hear this acclaimed gay singer perform for free by registering HERE before they run out of tickets.
Ray Boltz sold over 4.5 million records and was the recipient of two Dove awards before coming out as a gay man and retiring from Christian music. After a five year break from the stage, Boltz recorded True, with songs about same-sex marriage (“Don’t Tell Me Who to Love”), bias crimes (“Swimming Hole”), and the conservative claim of a gay ‘agenda’ (“Following Her Dreams”).
“Don’t Tell Me Who To Love” was featured in this Soulforce video on Prop 8. Check it out:
In several of the songs on True, Boltz tries to reconcile being gay with his Christian faith.
“I don’t believe God hates me anymore,” said Boltz in an interview with the New York Times. “I always thought if people knew the true me, they’d be disgusted, and that included God. But for all the doubts, there’s this new belief that God accepts me and created me, and there’s peace.”
Both Bolz and his ex-wife Carol have been vilified by religious extremists for becoming LGBT advocates. She manages his website and blogs her support at My Heart Goes Out.
Mrs. Boltz also realizes better than anyone how many former fans vehemently object. She fields the e-mail messages that pour into the Web site, the ones that say, “We will be destroying all your cds cassettes etc immediately” and “Instead of converting to man-love, why not goat love?”
Ugh. Sounds like something Prevo would say. So if you enjoy gay-themed songs or contemporary Christian music, go to this free concert and support Ray Boltz in his return to the stage as an openly-gay man. And bring your straight Christian friends and relatives! They need to hear his message as much as LGBT people do.
The Anchorage concert is sponsored by the Metropolitan Community Church (MCCA) and St. Mary’s Episcopal Church. For more on Boltz and his tour with another recently out singer Azariah Southworth, visit the Living True tour.
