“Gov. McCrory’s actions today are a poor effort to save face after his sweeping attacks on the LGBT community, and they fall far short of correcting the damage done when he signed the harmful House Bill 2 into law which stigmatizes and mandates discrimination against gay and transgender people. With this executive order, LGBT individuals still lack legal protections from discrimination, and transgender people are still explicitly targeted by being forced to use the wrong restroom.
“An impressive and growing number of businesses, faith leaders, and public figures have come out to condemn House Bill 2 as an unnecessary and dangerous measure that unfairly targets gay and transgender people. Regardless of political affiliation, more and more political leaders also understand that discrimination is bad for business and politically toxic. The public believes in equality and fairness and House Bill 2 and measures like it are out of step with the values of most Americans.
“Efforts to divide the LGBT community by extending limited protections but leaving in place the rules mandating discrimination against the transgender community will only strengthen our resolve to fight back against this discriminatory and misguided legislative action. We call on Gov. McCrory and the North Carolina legislature to repeal House Bill 2 and replace it with full non-discrimination protections for all LGBT people.”
So for my son’s friend at UNC-CH housing, do you think she will be housed according to her gender identity since they have no gender neutral housing… its a public school… but not sure what they would say would be the common sense solution…
Buzz feed is reporting Executive order maintains a ban on cities enacting nondiscrimination ordinances … I thought it read that local governments can choose??
North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory issued an executive order on Tuesday that attempts to quell the backlash to an anti-LGBT law he enacted last month, saying the order “clarifies existing state law” while increasing privacy and equality.
The order, however, does not change the elements of the statute that have been criticized by LGBT advocates and other opponents of the law. The order maintains a ban on transgender people using restrooms that match their gender in government buildings and schools. It also does not withdraw a ban on cities enacting nondiscrimination ordinances that protect LGBT people.
Rather, the order confirms that private businesses can establish their own rules for restrooms and locker rooms. It also purports to expand the state’s employment policy by saying state agencies may not engage in “unlawful discrimination” in employment practices on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.
“I know these actions will not totally satisfy everyone, but the vast majority of our citizens want common sense solutions to complex issues,” McCrory said in a video statement.
McCrory has repeatedly suggested transgender women must be banned from women’s restrooms because they would prey on women and girls — a fear never documented in 17 states and 225 cities that currently ban transgender discrimination.
Chase Strangio, a lawyer for the ACLU, told BuzzFeed News in a statement. “This order in no way changes the many and serious harms of House Bill 2.”
“Perhaps most concerning,” Strangio said, “it reiterates the anti-trans components of the law. It is nothing short of a political ploy to manage the backlash while still harming the most vulnerable members of the community and leaving the entire LGBT community without comprehensive legal protections.”
@runswimyoga The text of the executive order reads:
My reading is that this allows local governments to establish policies pertaining to their employees but not the jurisdiction as a whole. Wilmington or Raleigh can enact protections for city employees, but HB 2 remains a slap in the face to every transgender person in Wilmington, Raleigh, or wherever that wants to use a public restroom or a HS locker room.
I suppose the first element (“Maintains common sense gender-specific restroom and locker room facilities in government buildings and schools”) could be enforced however NC wants. That means McCrory could enforce the law in a way that almost suggests he’s joined the 21st century, but future governors could interpret this passage however they deem fit. Individuals’ definitions of “common sense” don’t always have much in common.
“Buzz feed is reporting Executive order maintains a ban on cities enacting nondiscrimination ordinances … I thought it read that local governments can choose??”
Reading the gov’s statement again - it just says private companies and local govts may enact nondiscrimination policies for its own employees. So yes, it does not allow cities to enact non discrimination ordinances.
In effect the governor appears to have simply issued a word salad.
If you were an engaged same-sex couple or the parents/friends of an engaged same-sex couple, if that couple were denied service for their wedding without explicitly being told it was because they are homosexual, would you assume that that was the real reason? I’m curious about what your immediate, gut-level reactions to such a denial would be.
@zoosermom My gut level would not automatically be that it was bc of homophobia…
I would think that it was bc of whatever reason they gave… You would have to give a reason … I can’t do flowers bc we are booked … but at some point they would have to become unbooked… what reason are you talking about that you would give??
With my son and his roommate, I wished he would have been given any other reason than homophobia i.e. “I am going to have to back out due to personal reasons that have nothing to do with you” we would not have jumped to the homophobia conclusion if that was the case…
But now w that outright discrimination … someone else’s homophobia has put a dark stain on my son’s college experience before he has even stepped foot on campus…
In my church, it really does happen that marriages or baptisms are refused for a lot of reasons completely up to the pastor’s discretion. As I said earlier, my denomination has long been one of the most gay-friendly, but gay and straight couples can be and are refused. For example, if a mixed couple asks to be married and one of the partners can’t unambiguously say that he or she will live and accept the teachings of the church, they will be declined. If new parents state that they want to raise their baby between two religions, they will be declined. If a couple appears to not be committed to a true Christian marriage (for example if one is a gold digger or a green-card seeker), they will be declined. If the pastor believes there is abuse, they can be declined or counseled. It happens for all sorts of reasons, and I was wondering if the families of gay couples would automatically assume discrimination every time they were denied service. Just looking to get a sense of personal perceptions, that’s all.
Runswimyoga, by the way, I am truly and sincerely sorry about what happened to your son. It must break your heart. I can’t imagine such bigotry, but I’m sure you don’t have to imagine it because you live it.
It would break my heart if my son had to face that, but it would also break my heart if he ever did such a thing, although I can’t imagine that he would. I hope your son finds a wonderful roommate who is deserving and appreciative of all that he is.
@zoosermom Well we were Catholic and my son was refused confirmation until he promised that he in his heart would try not to be gay… of course he couldn’t do that so we left the Catholic church …We were told we could go to a different parish and most likely wouldn’t be refused there but we thought shopping around for acceptance is ridiculous…
The Christian faith doesn’t condone discrimination Jesus was about serving people sins and all not refusing people.
Zoosermom, religious institutions are allowed to not marry/baptize/whatever whomever they want.
I would assume anyone who is declined by your church would be told the truth as to why.
If I suspected discrimination because I was same sex couple I would wait a few days and send in a beard to order exactly what I wanted and when I wanted it. Then I would sue them.
I respectfully disagree. If a faith (as mine does) holds every person to the same standards and actually does conduct marriages for gay couples who go through counseling and show the pastor that they are committed to a Christian marriage, then I think that is the farthest thing from discrimination. It is the embodiment of fairness. Same with denying people who are gay or straight who don’t meet the same threshold. They will be denied regardless of gay or straight.
So the questions is whether religions or providers should have standards at all or if they should be compelled no matter what. What are your thoughts on that?
@zoosermom Not long ago, a family member died in a Texas hospital with her partner of 50+ years by her side. Finding a priest to administer the last rites wasn’t easy, and the indignities didn’t stop there. The state of Texas didn’t consider their relationship “real,” so a small inheritance for someone who more civilized states considered a spouse was taxed at the same rate I’d pay if I left my estate to Donald Trump. I hit the roof when I heard about this, and I told her to sue in federal court. This brave woman - who’d seen more injustice in her lifetime than I’d survive - said that if she were 20 years younger, she’d like nothing better. Thankfully, Edith Windsor fought that battle - and won.
Today, one of my childhood best friends is living in a small town in GA. Two restaurants have made it clear he’s not welcome. That could be because of his immaculate table manners, his reserved manner, and his willingness to have a respectful conversation with anyone who’s interested. It could be something else. He suspects the latter. Change is slower than we’d like.
It’s hard to say why someone is denied service, but it happens. For LGBT people, these “scheduling conflicts” or “special difficulties” seem to be more common. In a specific case, bias is hard to prove or disprove, but the aggregate effect is clear. In many towns, the dividing line doesn’t run along the railroad tracks, but through the bedroom.
