POCATELLO — Myths and facts about anti-discrimination laws designed to protect the gay and transgender community were addressed by University of Utah law professor Dr. Clifford Rosky at a presentation held Tuesday night at Idaho State University.
About 20 people attended the event, which was sponsored by the American Civil Liberties Union.
Rosky has worked closely with Equality Utah, a group pushing to add the words “sexual orientation and gender identity” to Utah’s state civil rights law. Utah’s legislative leaders did not allow the issue to be debated or subject to a vote this year. Idaho has experienced the same push with proponents unable to get a full hearing on the issue with the state legislature during the past two legislative sessions.
Twenty cities and counties in Utah have adopted anti-discrimination ordinances that outlaw discrimination when it comes to employment, housing and public accommodations against members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transexual community. The laws are similar to the one passed by the Pocatello City Council in 2013, which will face a referendum vote May 20.
Rosky told the group at the Pond Student Union that protections against discrimination based on race, religion, gender or handicap would simply be expanded to protect the LGBT community as well.
“Unfortunately experience has shown that gay and transgender people are not always judged by the quality of their work or their ability to pay rent,” Rosky said.
The law professor said a lot of people think discrimination against gay and transgender people is already illegal, but that is not the case. He said numerous studies show gay and transgender people are discriminated against in the workplace.
Rosky said that in an Equality Utah survey conducted last year, 43 percent of lesbian, gay and bisexual Utahans and 67 percent of transgender Utahans reported that they had experienced discrimination in employment.
Rosky also walked through the history of resistance to accepting homosexuals as part of American communities citing Anita Bryant’s 1977 crusade in Florida where the former Miss America painted gay people as child molesters.
Bryant launched a successful “Save Our Children” campaign to kill a Dade County ordinance that prohibited discrimination based on sexual orientation.
“Thirty-five years ago it worked,” Rosky said. “Most Americans thought gay people were child molesters.”
Experience and more contact with the gay community has dispelled that myth, according to the law professor.
However, he said the same argument is now being used when it comes to members of the transgender community.
Rosky walked through what he called the common myths touted by opponents to anti-discrimination ordinances.
Among of them are assertions that no problem of discrimination against gays or transgenders exists in a community, that the law would create unreasonable expenses and that laws don’t change people’s behavior.
Rosky said national data shows the problem is real and discrimination does take place when it comes to employment and housing. He said in the 21 states where gender identity and sexual orientation have been added to civil rights protections, the average number of cases filed per 10,000 gay or transgender residents is less than five per year. As far as the laws not being effect, Rosky said studies show the opposite.
“If you pass the law, people stop discriminating,” Rosky said.
As far as the argument that the laws violate a person’s right to exercise personal religious views, Rosky said, “These laws regulate the conduct of businesses, not individuals.”
The Utah professor also rejected the argument that the laws give “special rights” to gay or transgender people.
“It’s the same rules for everyone,” he said. “Everyone has a sexual orientation.”
Rosky also talked about the upcoming May referendum and said that primary elections generally bring out less voters.
“These are turnout elections,” Rosky said. “It (the city ordinance) will be won or lost by knocking on doors and making phone calls.”
(9) comments
Regardless of the misinformation presented by the ISJ and the advertising which will be done by people who receive funds from Planned Parenthood, the HRC, and a multitude of militant LGBT activist groups, the truth remains:
The referendum to overturn the Nondiscrimination Ordinance has always been about protecting ALL Pocatello citizens from discriminatory, oppressive law. Pocatello’s so-called “non-discrimination ordinance” legalizes and promotes discrimination and bigotry against Pocatello citizens who just want to work hard, earn a decent living and raise their families.
It is UNFAIR; these laws are being used across America to force private citizens to participate and/or facilitate same-sex wedding and/or commitment ceremonies and celebrations in contradiction to their beliefs when an abundance of other businesses are readily available.
It is UNFAIR; Pocatello business owners who REGULARLY service the LGBT population without exception could face jail time and/or fines for abiding by their convictions in LIMITED SITUATIONS in which their business overlaps into the marriage industry.
It is UNFAIR; that the privacy rights of our girls and women are put into jeopardy to be abused by criminals who will exploit the law.
It is UNFAIR; that people of varying faith backgrounds are being TARGETED by EXTREME activists who are using these laws, NOT to protect OUR LGBT community, but to legalize DISCRIMINATION and BIGOTRY against people of faith who disagree with their views.
It is UNREALISTIC to expect Pocatello will not have faith based business owners, like those of Elane Photography in New Mexico, Sweet Cakes by Melissa in Oregon and Arlene’s Flowers in Washington State, and other artists, musicians, printers, counselors, etc. who will be targeted in the future.
It is DISHONEST that the proponents of these laws don’t readily ADMIT it is their intention to not only overturn Idaho’s marriage amendment, but to also enact state level protections, so that they may codify their view of morality and incorporate it into our public schools.
The people who ultimately will be harmed directly or indirectly by this law will be our Pocatello friends, family, neighbors and coworkers. These same people, who hold traditional beliefs, have no objections to providing jobs, housing or services to those of the LGBT community and they DO NOT CONDONE BLATANT DISCRIMINATION, nor are they hateful and bigoted. Pocatello MUST REPEAL the ordinance to PROTECT our community from the HATRED, BIGOTRY, COERCION AND DISCRIMINATION of the extremists who want to RIDICULE, STIGMATIZE AND CRIMINALIZE PEOPLE OF TRADITIONAL BELIEFS
Join our efforts and Vote YES on Prop. 1 and REPEAL Ordinance # 2921 on May 20th.
ISJ -Thank you for reposting our original comments and for your apology. Thank you also for removing our comments that were posted in error on an unrelated article. However, you have not corrected the factual errors in the article. Will you correct and publish the factual errors? If you don't intend to, why would you not correct easily verifiable facts?
Another subscriber has asked on a separate FB comment whether the Idaho State Journal subscribes to any code of ethics. We are unable to find a code of ethics listed on your website. Maybe we are not seeing it. As this other subscriber noted, many newspapers, including the Idaho Falls Post Register, adhere to the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics and link to it from their page. Do you adhere to this? If so, perhaps misunderstandings can be avoided if the code of ethics was available for the public to read and if there were clear channels to follow when there is a dispute over facts. Again, maybe we're not looking in the right place. Journalistic ethics are important, wouldn't you agree?
ISJ Webmaster - Thank you for re-posting the deleted comments.
In reference to the removal of two comments posted by Stand Up Pocatello under this article, when they are shooting at you for delivering the truth, you can rest assured that you are on target with the truth. Being shot down by having your comments removed confirms the truth of your statement.
Censorship from the ISJ?
On Monday evening, SUP posted a 7 point breakdown of ISJ's article "Professor Dispels Myths about LGBT Laws" which was published on page A-10 in the Sunday, 04/06/14 edition as two comments under the electronic version of the article on the ISJ webpage.
Sometime late last night, our comments were deleted. Why?
Perhaps SUP was too harsh to challenge their truthfulness? Factually, the article had errors and to the well-informed, there were some very obvious misrepresentations of facts (what some might call, half-truths).
Good journalism requires factual errors be corrected. If the ISJ disagreed with the facts, they could have countered them. Instead ISJ engaged in censorship. The commenting feature is the public's opportunity to weigh in, challenge the accuracy of articles, put forward opposing arguments and share available facts. It is the public's opportunity to make arguments, review the arguments and make their own decision. The ISJ didn't allow that debate. They infringed upon SUP's freedom of speech and censored the comments.
As of the writing of this post, the ISJ has not updated the story since 825 a.m., Monday, 04/07/14. It is highly doubtful they will.
If you are concerned about the censorship of free speech and about the accuracy of reporting, please consider calling or emailing the Journal and let them know you do not approve of censorship and you value factual journalism. If you are so inclined, you might also ask them why they would not correct an article with factual errors when these errors were brought to their attention.
ISJ 232-4161.
Email: ifennell@journalnet.com
It is important that others are made aware of this censorship, so please share this information.
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=581603305268485&id=402750889820395&stream_ref=10
IF this is important to you, please share this information with others. We all need to help educate the public and fill in for the many lapses in our media. Thank you!
The referendum to overturn the Nondiscrimination Ordinance has always been about protecting ALL Pocatello citizens from discriminatory, oppressive law. Pocatello’s so-called “non-discrimination ordinance” legalizes and promotes discrimination and bigotry against Pocatello citizens who just want to work hard, earn a decent living and raise their families. Should your friends and neighbors in Pocatello be forced to choose between living free or making a living?
It is UNFAIR; these laws are being used across America to force private citizens to participate and/or facilitate same-sex wedding and/or commitment ceremonies and celebrations in contradiction to their beliefs when an abundance of other businesses are readily available.
It is UNFAIR; Pocatello business owners who regularly service the LGBT population without exception could face jail time and/or fines for abiding by their convictions in limited situations in which their business overlaps into the marriage industry.
It is UNFAIR; that the privacy rights of our girls and women are put into jeopardy to be abused by criminals who will exploit the law.
It is UNFAIR; that people of varying faith backgrounds are being targeted by extreme activists who are using these laws, not to protect our LGBT community, but to legalize discrimination and bigotry against people of faith who disagree with their views.
It is UNREALISTIC to expect Pocatello will not have faith based business owners, like those of Elane Photography in New Mexico, Sweet Cakes by Melissa in Oregon and Arlene’s Flowers in Washington State, and other artists, musicians, printers, counselors, etc. who will be targeted in the future.
It is DISHONEST that the proponents of these laws don’t readily admit it is their intention to not only overturn Idaho’s marriage amendment, but to also enact state level protections, so that they may codify their view of morality and incorporate it into our public schools.
The people who ultimately will be harmed directly or indirectly by this law will be our Pocatello friends, family, neighbors and coworkers. These same people, who hold traditional beliefs, have no objections to providing jobs, housing or services to those of the LGBT community and they do not condone blatant discrimination, nor are they hateful and bigoted. Pocatello MUST REPEAL the ordinance to protect our community from the hatred, bigotry and discrimination of the extremists who want to ridicule, stigmatize and criminalize people of traditional beliefs. Join our efforts and Vote YES on Prop. 1 and REPEAL Ordinance # 2921 on May 20th.
(continued from first post)
6.
ARTICLE: “Rosky said national data shows the problem is real and discrimination does take place when it comes to employment and housing. He said in the 21 states where gender identity and sƏxual orientation have been added to civil rights protections, the average number of cases filed per 10,000 gay or transgender residents is less than five per year.”
FACT 1: Mr. Rosky is quoting 2008 data from the Williams Institute, a pro-gay think tank at UCLA, but either he grossly misquoted it or the ISJ misquoted Mr. Rosky. The data represents COMPLAINTS filed, not CASES that result from complaints, there’s a big difference.
(Link available at SUP FB page).
FACT 2: To the best of our knowledge and according to various articles, there has never been a substantiated complaint with “cause” filed in all of Utah in the nearly five years the laws have existed in Utah. And, in the 7 cities within Idaho, not one timely, substantiated complaint has been filed in the up to two years that Ordinances have existed in Idaho.
6.
ARTICLE:
“As far as the argument that the laws violate a person’s right to exercise personal religious views, Rosky said, “These laws regulate the conduct of businesses, not individuals.”
FACT: Under our Constitution, all people are created equal and all people are afforded First Amendment Rights. Individuals should not lose their personal freedoms and constitutional protections because they engage in the public marketplace. It is true corporations aren’t real people, but, that’s irrelevant. Corporations are formed by INDIVIDUALS exercising their constitutionally protected rights.
7.
ARTICLE: "Rosky told the group at the Pond Student Union that protections against discrimination based on race, religion, gender or handicap would simply be expanded to protect the LGBT community as well."
FACT 1: The employment protections in the Pocatello's Ordinance based on race, religion, gender or disability extend well beyond those in the federal and state laws. In Federal law, an “Employer” means a person, wherever situated, who hires fifteen (15) or more employees for each working day in each of twenty (20) or more calendar weeks in the current or preceding calendar year whose services are to be partially or wholly performed in the state of Idaho, except for domestic servants hired to work in and about the person's household.
In Idaho State law, “Employer” means a person, wherever situated, who hires five (5) or more employees for each working day in each of twenty (20) or more calendar weeks in the current or preceding calendar year whose services are to be partially or wholly performed in the state of Idaho, except for domestic servants hired to work in and about the person's household.
In the Pocatello law, employer is not defined, therefore, the law applies to ALL employers. This represents a large expansion of protections for sexual orientation and gender identity that the other special classes such as race, sƏx, religion, national origin, color, disability, and age DO NOT have. The protections are NOT EQUAL.
(Link available on the SUP FB page to Idaho employment law chart).
Media misinformation is not unexpected in this debate, but it gets old. What is so difficult about reporting with some modicum of accuracy and truthfulness?
1.
ARTICLE: "Twenty cities and counties in Utah have adopted anti-discrimination ordinances that outlaw discrimination when it comes to employment, housing and public accommodations against members of the lesbian, gay, bisƏxual and transƏxual community. The laws are similar to the one passed by the Pocatello City Council in 2013, which will face a referendum vote May 20."
FACT 1: Not one single city or county in Utah has adopted an anti-discrimination ordinance that includes PUBLIC ACCOMMODATIONS. Their laws include only employment and housing.
FACT 2: The Utah laws are NOT similar to the one passed in Pocatello. The Utah ordinances have far more exemptions in Housing and/or Employment and they do not involve a CRIMINAL punishment of a misdemeanor. For example: Most if not all of the Utah ordinances do NOT apply to employers with less than fifteen employees.
You can read and compare the ordinances. The SUP FB page has links to all of them, but the ISJ filters won't allow links here.
2.
ARTICLE: “Rosky has worked closely with Equality Utah, a group pushing to add the words “sƏxual orientation and gender identity” to Utah’s state civil rights law.”
FACT: Rosky is the “C4 Chair" of the Equality Utah Board of Directors.
(Link won't post here - see equality utah org's Board members)
3.
ARTICLE: “Rosky said that in an Equality Utah survey conducted last year, 43 percent of lesbian, gay and bisƏxual Utahans and 67 percent of transgender Utahans reported that they had experienced discrimination in employment.”
FACT: The survey wasn’t conducted last year. It was conducted in 2010. The Equality Utah page states that.
NOTE: The survey wasn’t randomized.
The report features a nonrandom survey of 939 lesbian, gay, bisƏxual or transgender (LGBT) Utahns and new analysis of census data that helps paint a portrait of the LGBT community in Utah. (Links available on the SUP FB page).
4.
ARTICLE: About 20 people attended the event, which was sponsored by the American Civil Liberties Union.
FACT: ISJ failed to list all of the other organizations that co-sponsored the event.
“Several organizations are co-sponsoring the event along with the ACLU of Idaho:
SƏxuality and Gender Alliance (SAGA) of ISU
ACLU of Idaho ISU Chapter
The Portneuf Valley Interfaith Fellowship
The League of Women Voters, Pocatello
All Under One Roof
2great4hate”
(Link available on the SUP FB page). To be continued in 2nd post.
I believe the are the most important quotes from Dr. Rosky:
“If you pass the law, people stop discriminating,” Rosky said.
As far as the argument that the laws violate a person’s right to exercise personal religious views, Rosky said, “These laws regulate the conduct of businesses, not individuals.”
The Utah professor also rejected the argument that the laws give “special rights” to gay or transgender people.
“It’s the same rules for everyone,” he said. “Everyone has a sexual orientation.”
Make sure to exercise your right to vote on May 20th!
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In