Everything2
Near Matches
Ignore Exact
Full Text
Everything2

Gay rights

created by oakling

(idea) by stewacide (4.5 y) (print)   ?   1 C! I like it! Wed Oct 24 2001 at 19:17:31

I've compiled information about the extent of gay rights for the United States and Canada. A lot of this information comes from http://www.religioustolerance.org, and a lot of it is from memory... and no, I'm not gay :)

It might be cool if other people would add information for other countries (my first hand knowledge is largely limited to the two below). I know many European countries (Scandinavia and the Netherlands especially) are very progressive, while I don't want to imagine the things they do to homosexuals in some others (e.g. Iran).

Canada

Canada has been quite progressive in the area of equal rights for gays (at least compared to its southern neighbour). Homosexual behaviour has not been illegal since the 50's (it is still illegal in many/most American states). Every province except Alberta has or is implementing provincial anti-discrimination laws covering homosexuals (Alberta nearly enacted the notwithstanding clause when forced to stop discriminating). Also, except for some conservative circles mainly in Alberta, homophobia and discrimination against gays is universally frowned upon.

Canada, while (for now) limiting the definition of "marriage" to heterosexual couples, has been extending "marriage rights" to homosexuals incrementally. Gay couples are now recognized as common law partnerships, and some provinces (BC and Quebec that I know of) have implemented legislation to this effect (extending marriage rights while not calling it marriage). The main rights they currently lack are the same tax advantages as heterosexual couples, and the right to adopt. Same sex marriages have become a very hot political topic in Canada, with support for such a measure split evenly (with a slight edge to the pro-same sex marriage side: with roughly 55% popular support). Politically, the NDP support full equal rights, the Bloc and (ruling) Liberals have opted for full rights with the exception of "marriage", while the Progressive Conservatives supports more-or-less the status-quo and the Canadian Alliance (again, primarily Alberta based) has taken a firm stance against any further measures.

Much of this is due to Canadians attitude towards religion. Canada has evolved a popularly supported notion of the separation of church and state over the years (compared to the constitutional, but often ignored American one). Only 20% of Canadian adults attend a house of worship regularly (compared to 40% of Americans). Also, the two main protestant denominations (the Anglican and United churches) are very liberal (to the point of allowing openly gay clergy), while the large Catholic population pays only lip service to Rome (and have no qualms about divorce, abortion, or homosexuality).

United States

The status of homosexuals in the US is probably well understood by most E2'ers (considering most are American), but I'll repeat some of the key points. Firstly, many US jurisdictions have various "sex laws" makes homosexuality or homosexual acts illegal, but these are rarely if ever enforced. Legally, there is little or no strong statutory protection for gays (as there are for religious and racial minorities).

The US government itself is carrying out some of the most disturbing cases of discrimination. As is widely known, there is a policy against permitting gays in the military. While a "don't ask / don't tell" policy was implemented to combat some of the worst abuses of this policy, 'out' members of the military are still routinely discharged.

The case of US boy scouts is possibly a worst injustice. The Boy Scouts of America have a policy of not allowing gay scout leaders (and scouts?). Many public schools (mainly in the North) that had hosted scout meetings were outraged at this discrimination and refused to let them on school property. The US Congress, fearing the demise of the Boy Scouts and growing gay-rights sentiments, issued an edict that schools that did not permit scout groups to meet on their property would have their funding withheld.

Politically in the US, both the major parties oppose same sex marriages, but the Democrats have taken a softer line of gay rights. Public sentiments reflect this, with those opposed to same sex unions stands at around 60%. Some outspoken conservative politicians are very 'out' with their homophobia. However, some left-leaning Democrats and Independants (Progressive Caucus types) have been vocal on the opposite side of the issue. Vermont has passed something of a same-sex marriage law (on court order), but this is not binding on other states. Several cities also register gay partnerships, but these have even less weight.

Again, this is probably due largely to the effects of religion in America. A very large number of Americans attend church regularly. Most Americans are protestants, and the major protestant churches in the US (e.g. the Baptist church) are very conservative / literalist. Catholics are also often more 'fundamentalist' than their counterparts in other Western, first-world countries.


I agree with whoever softlinked to Equal Rights, Not Gay Rights! - but I didn't create the nodeshell


(idea) by Cooz (2.3 y) (print)   ?   I like it! Tue Dec 07 2004 at 23:37:21

felt as though it was a good time to add my view on all of this.

I'd first like to state that the issue of gay marriage/gay rights is perhaps the most important collection of principles in the last 10 or 15 years. That is purely a perspective of my own, but I think many people could agree. States who, in the 2004 election referendums, voted for banning gay marriage in their respective constitutions, clearly have shown us that there is more to gay rights than politics. The issue uncovers extreme polarization not only in politics, but also in the moral, religious, and cultural landscapes. So few of the debates in this country, as well as throughout the world, cut so deeply into so many different realms of thought. Even young children bleed signs of being polarized on this issue. And if nothing else, we seem to be one of the few nations that have legally considered gay rights and gay marriage, without a sense of national compromise.

Someone in a class of mine today expressed the thought that "civil unions stigmatize gays." I whole heartedly agree with this. Parallels to the Brown vs. Board of Education case can be made with the issue of gay rights. A notion of "separate but equal" rings loud and clear in reference to civil unions.

As a result of these discrepancies, two sub-issues arise. The first is jurisdictional authority, or in other words, who gets to decide? Either the court systems can draw the line, or the people by way of legislature or referendum can decide. The "people" have signaled overwhelmingly, at least on a state-to-state level, that they are against gay marriage. But what about the courts? The most obvious example to bring up is the Massachusetts Supreme Court, which legalized gay marriage by way of a 6-3 decision. The 14th amendment undoubtedly plays a role here, perhaps motivating the winning justices with miniscule but enormously important phrases such as "equal protection of the laws." History can also be introduced perhaps as a sign of who should decide. Judges traditionally have had to protect the minority, something the legislative systems around the country haven't always been willing to do. Homosexuals are a minority. Should judges not be allowed to protect them also?

Examining the Massachusetts decision even further is important in understanding the two sides to the gay rights issue. Critical to note is the fact that civil unions were never mentioned as support or as part of the legal boundaries. Only when the legislature actually pondered the question did the justices say that civil unions were not adequate enough. The aforementioned quote about stigmatizing gays falls in line with this piece of the puzzle.

In my perspective, Chief Justice Marshall nails the issue into the table with two pieces of her decision. First, she invokes a John Stuart Mill style argument as she explains that the "plaintiffs seek only to be married, not to undermine the institution of civil marriage. They do not want marriage abolished." She goes on to further support the jurisdictional side of the issue by writing that "it is the function of the courts to determine whether these criteria are met and whether these limits are exceeded." A firestorm has erupted over that line in some ways, as Justice Spina disagreed with her by arguing that "the court has transformed its role as the protector of individual rights into the role of creator of rights, and I respectfully dissent." No doubt a reasonably valid rebuttal to Marshall's decision.

One final point I'd like to bring up is the lack of compromise in the US. Countries in Europe such as Germany, France, and Denmark all have civil unions; furthermore, there is a sense in those countries that with such a hotly debated issue, there needs to be some compromise. The lack of similar agreeable notions in this country is perhaps one among many possible reasons why the US isn't widely liked in Europe.

printable version
chaos

Why Won't Jesse Helms Just Hurry Up and Die? I'm not gay Why do heterosexual noders tell us as much, when defending homosexuals? Notwithstanding Clause
Boy Scouts of America gay culture "I was born this way" as justification for gay rights harms the gay and lesbian community The homosexual agenda
Big Gay Al Alberta NGLTF HRC
Don't ask don't tell Gay Martina Navratilova The Right To Be Offensive
The Hat Trick Vermont law allows same-sex civil unions Dear Mary Pim Fortuyn
A Prayer to Afflict the Comfortable America and Religion (in the aftermath of September 11, 2001) Masculism Human Rights Campaign
Y'know, if you log in, you can write something here, or contact authors directly on the site. Create a New User if you don't already have an account.
  Epicenter
Login
Password

password reminder
register

Everything2 Help

Cool Staff Picks
Drink up!
I really have to do you now
Sid Caesar
Georg Hegel
Camel
Genghis Khan
Everything Quests - The High Seas
Coins slip from my fingers
Numbers
The horse that freed the slaves
The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock
Gallipoli
Bottom
A Table Alphabeticall
New Writeups
Burkeafied
Premonition(event)
Wuukiee
Highly ornamental cultivars of brambles still have as many thorns as their wild counterparts(idea)
TheDeadGuy
Editor Log: May 2008(log)
everyday j.Lo
pray do not molest them(thing)
ammie
Bands Who Take Their Names from Eighteenth-century English Poetry and Prose(idea)
shaogo
Under My Thumb(review)
ammie
Rock On(person)
The Custodian
The Dresden Files(thing)
Ouzo
PETA becomes you, a proposed future(fiction)
Ereneta
Stone Soup, Part Two(fiction)
jjen
Sorrier than I ever thought I would be(personal)
locke baron
Moskva class antisubmarine cruiser(thing)
Wuukiee
May 15, 2008(idea)
locke baron
Kuznetsov class aircraft carrier(thing)
Adaptive Child
Annie's garden salsa(recipe)
This affordable entertainment brought to you by The Everything Development Company