Texas--Home of the Oppressors Part 1: LGBTQ

Alright folks, so I'm sure some of you have heard about the new Texas GOP Platform. I have spent literally hours going through it and finding that at least 75% of it is going to be directly harmful to at least one identity of persons at any given time. That being said, this is the first of a six part series about the implications this platform has for various groups of people and institutions.

You can't read this platform without feelings of extreme anger and outrage. The policies against homosexuality are similar to the sentiments and culture of the 1950's and seem model a less severe (for now) bill the Ugandans have proposed towards homosexuals. I literally found two pages of size 10 font of stances and proposed legislation that will directly hurt persons of the LGBTQ community. Hence this blog will be divided into three parts: Everyday Life and Marriage, Parenting, and Education.

Everyday Life and Marriage

"Marriage Licenses – We support legislation that would make it a felony to issue a marriage license to a same-sex couple

and for any civil official to perform a marriage ceremony for such."

So basically what this is saying that if you perform any sort of marriage ceremony for a same-sex couple you can be convicted of a felony. Just let that sink in for a second. The Texas GOP is hoping to use its legislative power to sever ties between straight allies and queer individuals. Think about it, what is the ultimate form of showing allyship can be proven almost without fail? Performing a marriage ceremony, giving your blessing to a same-sex couple. They hope to incriminate individuals based on their support of a community of people. Words can not fully express the repercussions of a bill like this.

"Homosexuality – We believe that the practice of homosexuality tears at the fabric of society, contributes to the breakdown

of the family unit, and leads to the spread of dangerous, communicable diseases. Homosexual behavior is contrary to the fundamental, unchanging truths that have been ordained by God, recognized by our country’s founders, and shared by the majority of Texans. Homosexuality must not be

presented as an acceptable “alternative” lifestyle in our public education and policy, nor should “family” be redefined to include homosexual “couples.” We are opposed to any granting of special legal entitlements, refuse to recognize, or grant special privileges including, but not limited to: marriage between persons of the same sex (regardless of state of origin), custody of children by homosexuals, homosexual partner insurance or retirement benefits. We oppose any criminal or civil penalties against those who oppose homosexuality out of faith, conviction, or belief in traditional values. "

Alright... So this stance on homosexuality has a lot in it. Firstly, they describe homosexuality as being the downfall of society. They obviously just haven't been paying attention, but society has been functioning since the dawn of time WITH LGBTQ people. This is just white male supremacists trying to make sure they maintain their power over yet another group of people.

The second crippling part they describe is that homosexuality is unnatural as said by God. I can't express how furious this makes me. There is such a thing as freedom of religion (this country was founded on it) AND separation of church and state. By explicitly saying that God says it isn't right and therefor shouldn't be tolerated is a blatant disregard for the Constitution and what the founding fathers stood for.

Thirdly, they describe how they plan on propogating slander to youth, by saying that homosexuality is not only not acceptable, but homosexual families don't even count as real families. By advocating in such a way it is just going to result in further generations of harsher prejudices and rises in hate crimes.

This last part is perhaps the most infuriating. This is the part where they call basic human rights as "special privileges." Being able to have custody of my children is a special privilege?! REALLY? I'll go further into this in the next section, but rest assured, this is taking the meaning of second class citizen to a whole new level.

Furthermore potentially the most harmful (and most Ugandan-like legislation) is their stance that homophobic actions should be pardoned and LEGAL if done in the name of their faith.. or heck, just because they felt like it. This is opening the doors for countless hate crimes and atrocities that will never see justice. It's like they want to hand people the keys to rape and violence, and say "hey, so because you think that person looks or acts queer you can go destroy their very existence and we'll pat you on the back for it. No repercussions for you!" Let's pause and let the implications of such a piece of legislation sink in. Your friends, family, children, or acquaintances can be beaten to a pulp, potentially murdered, and the perpetrator will get away with it because they were given permission by your government. If that doesn't make you want to speak up, I don't know what will.

"Texas Sodomy Statutes – We oppose the legalization of sodomy. We demand that Congress exercise its authority granted by the U.S. Constitution to withhold jurisdiction from the federal courts from cases involving sodomy."

Basically, they want to make it illegal to be a practicing homosexual. Is it just me or does it sound a big like Uganda? I don't think I need to go into much detail about how serious this is. If you make an entire group of people criminals based on their innate human nature, you are performing the ultimate form of prejudice. 'Nough said.

"Family and Defense of Marriage – We support the definition of marriage as a God–ordained, legal and moral commitment only between a natural man and a natural woman, which is the foundational unit of a healthy society, and we oppose the assault on marriage by judicial activists. We call on the President and Congress to take immediate action to defend the sanctity of marriage. We are resolute that Congress exercise authority under the United States Constitution, and pass legislation withholding jurisdiction from the Federal Courts in cases involving family law, especially any changes in the definition of marriage. We further call on Congress to pass and the state legislatures to ratify a marriage amendment declaring that marriage in the United States shall consist of and be recognized only as the union of a natural man and a natural woman. Neither the United States nor any state shall recognize or grant to any unmarried person the legal rights or status of a spouse. We oppose the recognition of and granting of benefits to people who represent themselves as domestic partners without being legally married. We advocate the repeal of laws that place an unfair tax burden on families. We call upon Congress to completely remove the marriage penalty in the tax code, whereby a married couple

receives a smaller standard deduction than their unmarried counterparts living together. The primary family unit consists of those related by blood, heterosexual marriage, or adoption. The family is responsible for its own welfare, education, moral training, conduct, and property. "

Alright, so there is loads of offensive jargon in this little platform excerpt. Firstly, this is again, a violation of church and state. If you look at marriage in a political sense (which we should), it is the contract between two people who are committing to care for one another, share possessions, and pay necessary taxes. It's basically the government's way of keeping tabs on people and deciding how much money they're going to take from them in form of taxes and what services they are able to provide to said person in these contracts. The government has no say as to what religion to define marriage with, especially since the definition varies depending on what religion you look at. It's place as government is to manage contracts, not religious affiliations.

Secondly, what is this "natural man" and "natural woman" business? I would like for you to define to me what a natural woman or man are. There are 5 known biological sexes, so someone who appears like a "natural woman" or a "natural man" could actually have the chromosomal makeup of someone who could be defined as intersex. That brings me to my next question... What happens to persons with ambiguous genitalia that were able to opt out of surgery? Where do they fit? What about ftm's or mtf's? They may appear like "natural" men and women, but what's between their legs might be another story. Where do they fit? Not only are they discriminating against the homosexual population, but they are completely writing off intersex individuals whom are also in all technical means "natural."

Next they're going so far as to say even if the US granted same-sex marriages, that Texas should not have to allow it and will not recognize it. Now, I'm all for states governing their people in ways that best represent their constituents, but Federal law is just that, Federal... meaning the rules apply to EVERYONE that is a part of our Federation. If Texas wants to be exempt from the rules, then they can just cede themselves.

Even worse they talk about how people who are not married should not receive the tax refunds they do because they are single and living with a partner. Let that process for a second. Basically they are saying that "Hey, so you want to marry someone of your same sex, so we're not going to let you get married or accept any of the benefits that go along with marriage. But since you're queer, we're not going to let you have any tax benefits you get by being legal single either. SUCK ON THAT GAYS." Again, in terms of government and contracts... if you do not have a contract with the government saying you are married, you are in the government's eyes single. Which means you deal with your taxes as a single person. I'd like to know how they plan on figuring out who's in a committed same-sex relationship to determine their tax status.... Profiling much?

Parenting

"Child Support and Visitation – We support equity between responsible parents in child support, custody, and visitation rights and costs, as well as the strengthening of laws designed to protect children from abuse. No parent/grandparent should be denied court ordered visitation, because of jurisdictional disputes between states. We also believe that no homosexual or any individual convicted of child abuse or molestation should have the right to custody or adoption of a minor child, and that visitation with minor children by such persons should be prohibited but if ordered by the court limited to supervised periods."

Alright folks, our friendly neighborhood Texas GOP wants to deny homosexual parents the rights to see their children. First off, queer folks won't be able to adopt children if they are in a same-sex relationship. I'm willing to bet that even if they caught wind of a parent being bisexual they would use that to take away parental rights. That's just speculation based on what I've read in this platform thus far.

Imagine this scenario... A man and woman got married, had children together, then got a divorce because the woman decided to pursue her homosexual identity. The husband could get full custody and not allow the children to see their mother at all (let's pretend she's a fabulous mother, but just happens to be gay) on the sole basis that she is a homosexual. What happens if the father is an abusive alcoholic? Would the Texas GOP rather those children grow up in a home of substance abuse or with a nurturing gay parent? You'd bet they'd choose the former.

"Adoption – We support reducing the time, bureaucratic interference and cost of adoption. The law should assure mothers of a choice in selecting a traditional home for their children at the time of terminating their rights for adoption. We oppose mandatory open adoption and adoption by homosexuals. "

Again, they want to remind everyone that queers should not be allowed to raise children. I think they need to read some statistics about how children growing up in gay households are just as well adjusted as those raised in straight households.

"Patient Protection – We support patients’ rights by calling on the state legislature to amend the Advance Directive Act to establish due process of law and ensure that a physician’s decision to deny life saving treatment against the patient’s will or advance directive is not due to economic or racial discrimination or discrimination based on disability. We also support the passage of legislation to amend the Advance Directive Act by requiring hospitals intending or threatening to withdraw life-sustaining treatment against the patient’s wishes or their advance directive to continue all treatment and care for such patients pending transfer to another facility."

Now this seems like a great statute to have. Except no where in there is sexual orientation or gender identity mentioned. What does this mean for the LGBTQ population? If you're queer people can withhold medical care from you because of your orientation or identity and not face opposition from the law.

Employment

"Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) – We oppose this act through which the federal government would coerce religious business owners and employees to violate their own beliefs and principles by affirming what they consider to be sinful and sexually immoral behavior."

Basically, this means if you're queer in any such way the Texas GOP fully agrees with you getting fired for it. They also support throwing out your job application even if you're the only qualified candidate based on your orientation. How do you like them apples?

"Equality of All Citizens – We deplore all discrimination. We also deplore forced sensitivity training and urge repeal of any mandate requiring it. We urge immediate repeal of the Hate Crimes Law. Until the Hate Crimes Law is totally repealed, we urge the Legislature to immediately remove the education curriculum mandate and the sexual orientation category in said Law."

This may be one of the scariest aspects of this platform. This not only affects queer identified persons, but people of color and immigrants as well. I would like to point out how contradictory this stance is. "We deplore all discrimination." "All" implies any sort of discrimination, including discrimination based on race, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, ability, class, etc. etc. But then they go on to say that they don't think sexual orientation should be a part of discrimination, because well, they just really don't like those homos. We'll I'm sorry Texas, but by saying that, you're discriminating. So much for deploring all forms of discrimination aye?

Furthermore, by excluding sexual orientation it would make repercussions of hate crimes against queer persons more tolerated, receiving minimal, if any sort of sentencing. This is promoting a terrorism on our own soil. If they succeeded in revoking the whole Hate Crimes Law, it will be any minority that will be living in a raised state of terror. This is not okay in any sense of the word.

Finally, in true Arizona fashion, the Texas GOP wants to completely cut ethnic studies courses. This will have terrible cultural implications, resulting in less understanding and further cultivation of bigotry and ignorance.

*sigh* This is a long post, and the next to come are just as long. It's time for everyone to take action, stand up and fight against these hateful platforms in order to preserve some rights for our brethren. We need to show solidarity for Texans fighting the good fight and give them as much support as possible. We can't let this type of hate be perpetrated in such significant and blatant forms from government. If there was ever a time to start flexing your voice, now is the time.

Stay tuned for Part 2: Women. I'll hopefully be posting that tomorrow.

If you would like to read the full platform for yourself you can find it here. All of the above quotes were taken directly from the Texas GOP Platform in full context.

Peace&Love,

Rae