Threats To LGBTQ Rights

Mike Pence is perhaps one of the most anti-LGBTQ evangelical Christian political crusaders to serve in Congress and as governor of a state. Long before he signed the draconian anti-LGBTQ "religious liberty" law in Indiana last year, he supported "conversion therapy" as a member of Congress, and later as a columnist and radio host, he gave a speech in which he said that marriage equality would lead to "societal collapse," and called homosexuality "a choice." Stopping gays from marrying wasn't biased, he said, but was rather about compelling "God's idea."

Scary individuals and religious bigots have prominent positions in the Trump administration. Ben Carson, compared homosexuality to pedophilia and incest is vice chairman of the transition team. Newt Gingrich, attacked what he called "gay fascism" around LGBTQ rights. Ken Blackwell, formerly the Ohio secretary of state has been appointed to lead domestic policy on the transition team. Blackwell has compared homosexuality to arson and kleptomania, which he called "compulsions."

President Trump met with religious extremists, and made promises to them. He promised he would put justices on the Supreme Court who would overturn marriage equality which he has consistently opposed himself since 2000. He promised that he would sign the First Amendment Defense Act, which would all for discrimination against LGBT people by government employees and others.

It may or may not be difficult or unrealistic to overturn marriage equality over time, though the anti-equality National Organization for Marriage, which backed Trump in the election, has sent Trump a plan. But by passing bills like FADA--already introduced in the Republican controlled Senate and House--and others yet to come, gay marriage can be made into a kind of second-class marriage. Clerks like Kim Davis can be given exemptions from giving marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples. Federal employees would be able to decline interactions with gay and lesbian married couples. Businesses such as bakers and florists, who've become flash points in some states where they refused to serve gays, could be granted the ability to turn away gays under federal law and all that could lead to a much more conservative Supreme Court if challenged.

Mike Pence has already said that he and Trump plan to withdraw federal guidance to the states issued by the Obama administration protecting transgender students. If Trump is as hands-off on LGBTQ issues as president as he was at the Republican National Convention, letting people like Pence, possibly the most powerful vice president ever -- get his way, along with people like Carson, Blackwell, Gingrich and likely many others, you can bet the that assault on LGBTQ rights is already underway. It is only a matter of time before we know the full magnitude.

Gay Marriage and Obama

Three federal judges have now ruled that state bans on same-sex marriage violate the Constitution’s “equal protection” clause. President Barack Obama seems to disagree.

He has repeatedly stated that, while he personally supports same-sex marriage, the issue should be left to the states. In other words, the nation’s first black president holds a states-rights position on what has shaped up to be the civil-rights issue of this generation.

Most states ban same-sex marriage. And if they are left to work out the issue for themselves in the years and decades to come some will likely reverse their bans, but many won’t. The question will remain: Are same-sex marriages protected under the 14th Amendment?

It’s hard to imagine that Obama, a former constitutional law professor who has cited the 14th Amendment when discussing gay rights, believes that the equal-protection clause does not apply to gay and lesbian couples seeking a government-issued marriage license. More likely, he has taken a go-slow approach to avoid alienating constituencies—and inflaming the opposition.

His caution has been understandable perhaps even helpful in the short run. But it will become increasingly difficult for him to avoid taking a clear stand. Marriage equality is likely to come before the U.S. Supreme Court before the end of his term, possibly within the next year. At that time Obama will have to decide whether to support the plaintiffs.

He should, and he should not wait for the court to force his hand.

The presidential bully pulpit has been a powerful force in acceleration the evolution of freedom and equal rights in America, and the energy with which presidents have used their platform – or not—shapes their legacy.

In 1957, President Dwight Eisenhower declined to speak out in favor of civil rights, saying, “I don’t know what another speech would do about it right now.” In response, Martin Luther King Jr. and the Southern Negro Leaders Conference sent a telegram urging him to “use the weight of your great office to point out to the people the rights of all human beings.”

While a strong case can be made that history has so far under-appreciated Eisenhower’s record on civil rights, his unwillingness to make energetic use of his office is widely accepted as a failure.

President John F. Kennedy is still faulted for waiting two and a half years to fully embrace the cause of civil rights. When he finally did, in an Oval Office speech in June 1963, he cast the issue in terms of morality and American values. And while this may have angered opponents, it inspired more hope than hate. It became a turning point in the civil-rights movement and saved his presidency from history’s harsh judgment.

This Congress is hardly likely to pass a low prohibiting discrimination in the granting of marriage licenses. But that should not stop this president from addressing a controversial question. If Obama believes that the 14th Amendment protects same-sex marriage, he should explain why he has changed his own mind. It is an argument that Americans – who polls show favor legalizing same-sex marriage – are increasingly ready to accept. If he makes the case in a tone of respect toward opponents and if he tempers proponents’ optimism by acknowledging the lengthy nature of civil-rights movements, he can help soften the fallout from the eventual Supreme Court decision, whatever it may be.

For a president so stymied by an obstructive Congress, an Oval Office address on same-sex marriage could be a high point of his tenure. It would also be a fitting way for a barrier-breaking president to secure his place among leaders who have pushed to extend the full rights of the Constitution to all Americans.