civil rights

Laws of Public Accommodation and the LDS Church Statement about “respect”

Lesbian Wedding Cake Topper

Laws of Public Accommodation state that you are not allow to discriminate in providing services to the public if you run a business that is open to serve the public. So if you bake cakes, or do wedding photography, or open a restaurant, you have to accommodate members of the public who come to you to pay for your services. If you are a pharmacist, or an emergency medical technician, or a doctor, or a police officer, you cannot turn people away from your service if they are in a wheelchair, or if they are a person of color, or if they are female, or if they fit into a number of other categories. There are no religious exemptions to public accommodations laws, so what you believe or where you worship is not a legally an excuse for turning people away from your public-facing business, according to current law.

The current U.S. law on the books regarding public accommodation is a part of a back of a larger block of civil rights laws that are grouped under this title – U.S. Code Title 42, Chapter 21 — Civil Rights.

Title 42, Chapter 21 of the U.S. Code prohibits discrimination against persons based on age, disability, gender, race, national origin, and religion (among other things) in a number of settings — including education, employment, access to businesses and buildings, federal services, and more. Chapter 21 is where a number of federal acts related to civil rights have been codified — including the Civil Rights Act of 1866, Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act.

Here is what the “public accommodation” section of that larger group of laws states – 42 U.S.C. § 2000a : US Code – Section 2000A: Prohibition against discrimination or segregation in places of public accommodation

(a) Equal access All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, as defined in this section, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin. (b) Establishments affecting interstate commerce or supported in their activities by State action as places of public accommodation; lodgings; facilities principally engaged in selling food for consumption on the premises; gasoline stations; places of exhibition or entertainment; other covered establishments Each of the following establishments which serves the public is a place of public accommodation within the meaning of this subchapter if its operations affect commerce, or if discrimination or segregation by it is supported by State action: (1) any inn, hotel, motel, or other establishment which provides lodging to transient guests, other than an establishment located within a building which contains not more than five rooms for rent or hire and which is actually occupied by the proprietor of such establishment as his residence; (2) any restaurant, cafeteria, lunchroom, lunch counter, soda fountain, or other facility principally engaged in selling food for consumption on the premises, including, but not limited to, any such facility located on the premises of any retail establishment; or any gasoline station; (3) any motion picture house, theater, concert hall, sports arena, stadium or other place of exhibition or entertainment; and (4) any establishment (A)(i) which is physically located within the premises of any establishment otherwise covered by this subsection, or (ii) within the premises of which is physically located any such covered establishment, and (B) which holds itself out as serving patrons of such covered establishment. (c) Operations affecting commerce; criteria; “commerce” defined The operations of an establishment affect commerce within the meaning of this subchapter if (1) it is one of the establishments described in paragraph (1) of subsection (b) of this section; (2) in the case of an establishment described in paragraph (2) of subsection (b) of this section, it serves or offers to serve interstate travelers of a substantial portion of the food which it serves, or gasoline or other products which it sells, has moved in commerce; (3) in the case of an establishment described in paragraph (3) of subsection (b) of this section, it customarily presents films, performances, athletic teams, exhibitions, or other sources of entertainment which move in commerce; and (4) in the case of an establishment described in paragraph (4) of subsection (b) of this section, it is physically located within the premises of, or there is physically located within its premises, an establishment the operations of which affect commerce within the meaning of this subsection. For purposes of this section, “commerce” means travel, trade, traffic, commerce, transportation, or communication among the several States, or between the District of Columbia and any State, or between any foreign country or any territory or possession and any State or the District of Columbia, or between points in the same State but through any other State or the District of Columbia or a foreign country. (d) Support by State action Discrimination or segregation by an establishment is supported by State action within the meaning of this subchapter if such discrimination or segregation (1) is carried on under color of any law, statute, ordinance, or regulation; or (2) is carried on under color of any custom or usage required or enforced by officials of the State or political subdivision thereof; or (3) is required by action of the State or political subdivision thereof. (e) Private establishments The provisions of this subchapter shall not apply to a private club or other establishment not in fact open to the public, except to the extent that the facilities of such establishment are made available to the customers or patrons of an establishment within the scope of subsection (b) of this section.

This morning, the Mormon Church held a press conference saying that they supported LGBT rights – up to a point. They believe that LGBT people should not be denied housing or employment or basic civil rights. BUT – they asserted that they felt that LGBT people should not be added to U.S. Code Title 42, Chapter 21. They didn’t say it in so many terms; they talked about “respect” and how LGBT “activists” had done terrible things to “disrespect” the religious beliefs of LDS Church members.

Apparently pouring millions of dollars into Prop-8 and trying to deny LGBT people basic civil rights, causing LGBT people emotional & financial hardship and pain, is perfectly “respectable” but fighting back for your basic civil rights after being a marginalized group of people for centuries is not.

But their meaning is pretty clear based on the language they were using. This public press conference is a dogwhistle to their members urging them to pour money into a number of lawsuits that are currently moving through the courts where gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender individuals are seeing redress after being denied public accommodations by business owners citing “religious freedom” as their reason for discriminating against people seeking their services.

If we were just talking about wedding cakes and photographers, this might be an easy issue to dismiss – you can just get a different florist or cake baker, right? But we are not. There have been cases of LGBT people denied emergency medical care, medication that they needed for their health, and police protection because they are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender. LGBT people have been denied access to hotels and vacation spots, homeless shelters and domestic violence shelters based on the claims of “religious belief” of the owners or employees of those businesses or services. Some of the cases of denial of public accommodation are in serious, life-or-death situations. People have been irreparably harmed or killed because of this discrimination.

The LDS Church is attempting to frame the civil rights debate over public accommodation for LGBT people as one of “respect” – that LBGT people are being “disrespectful” of the church’s religious beliefs if they are seeking legal redress for being discriminated against. That legal and civil actions, including direct action that LGBT people might take in asserting their rights, are “disrespectful” and “attacks” and that the church is a victim if people challenge the discrimination against them on the basis of their religious beliefs.

It’s an interesting framing, and one that LDS members are anxious to push – I’ve already run across two sets of LDS church members anxious to cast themselves in the role of victim in the debate following this morning’s press conference. Unfortunately it’s also a framing that the average American is primed to accept as legitimate, given the complete lack of understanding of basic civil rights laws in the United States. Hopefully as these lawsuits move through the courts, the legal system won’t be as fooled by the manipulation of language as the average member of the public.

Continue ReadingLaws of Public Accommodation and the LDS Church Statement about “respect”

Air Force chief: Test weapons on testy U.S. mobs

Via my friend Ian at [Link deprecated: http://www.socialoracle.com/node/538] Social Oracle, this CNN article:

WASHINGTON (AP) — Nonlethal weapons such as high-power microwave devices should be used on American citizens in crowd-control situations before being used on the battlefield, the Air Force secretary said Tuesday.

The object is basically public relations. Domestic use would make it easier to avoid questions from others about possible safety considerations, said Secretary Michael Wynne.
…

The Air Force has paid for research into nonlethal weapons, but he said the service is unlikely to spend more money on development until injury problems are reviewed by medical experts and resolved. They should not be issues like how people claim for compensation for slip and fall injury .If you are injured in any accident, it is advised to first contact a reputed injury claims law firm serving in Canada to claim compensation for the injury caused and give you legal representation. If you’re interested in helping car accident victims, then you can check for attorneys here! If you are from another country and are finding it difficult to communicate with native lawyers, you may contact expert traffic injury lawyers for Chinese speakers or other languages to help you out legally.

Nonlethal weapons generally can weaken people if they are hit with the beam. Some of the weapons can emit short, intense energy pulses that also can be effective in disabling some electronic devices.

And… Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne is getting fired when?

Wait, wait, what country are we in again? I keep forgetting and thinking we have the right to public assembly. Silly f*%&ing me. Yes, let’s microwave people!

[Link deprecated: http://www.socialoracle.com/node/538] As Ian says:

What’s the setting for this “non-lethal” weapon, defrost?

I’m basically at a loss on the definition of a mob, so I consulted a dictionary which says:

1 : a large or disorderly crowd; especially : one bent on riotous or destructive action
2 : the lower classes of a community : MASSES, RABBLE
3 chiefly Australian : a flock, drove, or herd of animals
4 : a criminal set : GANG; especially often capitalized : MAFIA 1
5 chiefly British : a group of people : CROWD

I’m not entirely comfortable with 2,3 and 5. Number 2 would be the ’70’s version of a pale grey meal not entirely appealing or cooked thoroughly.

Given that the police have a proven tendency to not be respectful of people at people public demonstrations (see the raging controversy about the police laughing about shooting a woman in the face with rubber bullets) I don’t think I want the police to have the ability to MICROWAVE ME.

Continue ReadingAir Force chief: Test weapons on testy U.S. mobs

Journalist under criminal charges for filming Katrina evacuees

A journalist and a TV producer working on a piece about Katrina refugees have been charged with the crime of videotaping a “critical national security structure” in Louisiana… Palast Charged with Journalism in the First Degree:

On August 22, for LinkTV and Democracy Now! we videotaped the thousands of Katrina evacuees still held behind a barbed wire in a trailer park encampment a hundred miles from New Orleans. It’s been a year since the hurricane and 73,000 POW’s (Prisoners of W) are still in this aluminum ghetto in the middle of nowhere. One resident, Pamela Lewis said, “It is a prison set-up” — except there are no home furloughs for these inmates because they no longer have homes.
To give a sense of the full flavor and smell of the place, we wanted to show that this human parking lot, with kids and elderly, is nearly adjacent to the Exxon Oil refinery, the nation’s second largest, a chemical-belching behemoth.
So we filmed it. Without Big Brother’s authorization. Uh, oh. Apparently, the broadcast of these stinking smokestacks tipped off Osama that, if his assassins pose as poor Black folk, they can get a cramped Airstream right next to a “critical infrastructure” asset.
So now Matt and I have a “criminal complaint” lodged against us with the feds.
…
Dectective Pananepinto, in justifying our impending bust, said, “If you remember, a lot of people were killed on 9/11.”
Yes, Detective, I remember that very well: my office was in the World Trade Center. Lucky for me, I was out of town that day. It was not a lucky day for 3,000 others.
Yes, I remember “a lot” of people were killed. So I have this suggestion, Detective — and you can pass it on to Mr. Bush: Go and find the people who killed them.

Continue ReadingJournalist under criminal charges for filming Katrina evacuees

Photos of the Black Civil Rights Movement

The Birmingham News discovers in its archives dozens of old, previously unpublished photographs from the black civil rights movement. Very cool. Check out the pictures of the freedom riders, and also see the protests at Birmingham high schools when black students enrolled. This is the kind of stuff that people need to see to understand exactly how bad things really were.

Continue ReadingPhotos of the Black Civil Rights Movement

Corett Scott King Quotes

“I still hear people say that I should not be talking about the rights of lesbian and gay people and I should stick to the issue of racial justice,” she said. “But I hasten to remind them that Martin Luther King Jr. said, ‘Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.’ I appeal to everyone who believes in Martin Luther King Jr.’s dream to make room at the table of brother- and sisterhood for lesbian and gay people” – Coretta Scott King
“Homophobia is like racism and anti-Semitism and other forms of bigotry in that it seeks to dehumanize a large group of people, to deny their humanity, their dignity and personhood,” – Coretta Scott King

Continue ReadingCorett Scott King Quotes

Time on Two Crosses–The Collected Writings of Bayard Rustin

My friend Marti passed along this quote from Bayard Rustin, who was a friend of Martin Luther King’s, and who worked alongside him during the civil rights movement:

“Indeed, if you want to know whether today people believe in democracy, if you want to know whether they are true democrats, if you want to know whether they are human rights activists, the question to ask is, ‘What about gay people?’ Because that is now the litmus paper by which this democracy is to be judged.”
“There are four burdens, which gays, along with every other despised group, whether it is blacks following slavery and reconstruction, or Jews fearful of Germany, must address.
The first is to recognize that one must overcome fear.
The second is overcoming self-hate.
The third is overcoming self-denial.
The fourth burden is more political. It is to recognize that the job of the gay community is not to deal with extremist who would castrate us or put us on an island and drop an H-bomb on us.
The fact of the matter is that there is a small percentage of people in America who understand the true nature of the homosexual community. There is another small percentage who will never understand us. Our job is not to get those people who dislike us to love us. Nor was our aim in the civil rights movement to get prejudiced white people to love us. Our aim was to try to create the kind of America, legislatively, morally, and psychologically, such that even though some whites continued to hate us, they could not openly mainifest that hate. That’s our job today: to control the extent to which people can publicly manifest antigay sentiment.”

There are a couple of significant differences in what gay and transgendered people face than other oppressed groups of people. One of them is that our families usually don’t prepare us for the hatred and discrimination that will be directed at us as we grow up, or to help us understand who we are and why we are before we face that hatred. Many time the people who discriminate against us are our own family members, which makes it doubly painful.
The other significant difference in the struggle that gay people face is that much of our history is completely lost to time. We know that gay people have been persecuted, oppressed, tortured and executed for centuries because we have seen the evidence of it in our history books, but only from the view of the persecutors, and very little of it survives from the point of view of gay people.
Other oppressed groups were able to pass history of their people through oral tradition through families and communities, and although that is a fragile method, it’s still significant.

Continue ReadingTime on Two Crosses–The Collected Writings of Bayard Rustin

Difference between civil rights and civil liberties

Author: Sheila Suess Kennedy

Quick — what’s the difference between civil liberties and civil rights?

If you aren’t quite certain, you have a lot of company. The distinction is lost on most of my students, and — far more troubling — on a good number of city and state legislators.

Civil liberties are rights that individuals have against government. Citizens of the new United States refused to ratify the Constitution unless a Bill of Rights was added, specifically protecting them against official infringements of their “inalienable rights.” Among our civil liberties are the right to free expression, the right to worship (or not) as we choose, and the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.

After the civil war, the 14th Amendment added the Equal Protection Clause, prohibiting government from treating equally situated citizens unequally. The 14th Amendment also applied the provisions of the Bill of Rights to all levels of government — not just the federal government, as was originally the case, but also to state and local government agencies.

Only the government can violate your civil liberties.

Civil rights took a lot longer and were a lot more controversial.

It was 1964 before Congress passed the Civil Rights Act. Civil rights laws protect people against private acts of discrimination — discrimination in employment, in housing or education. The original Civil Rights Act applied to businesses engaged in interstate commerce — businesses that held themselves out to be “public accommodations” but were, shall we say, “selective” about which segments of the public they were willing to accommodate.

State and local civil rights acts followed. Civil rights laws generally include a list of characteristics that cannot be used to favor some people over others: race, religion, gender and so forth.

There was a lot of resistance to civil rights laws, and there is still a widespread, if covert, attitude of “What business does government have telling me I can’t discriminate?” That resentment has redoubled as new groups have lobbied for protection.
The fiercest resistance has come from people opposed to extending civil rights to gays and lesbians. Those opponents have taken advantage of the widespread confusion of civil liberties with civil rights to argue that the 14th Amendment already protects gays, so amending Indiana’s civil rights law, or Marion County’s Human Relations Ordinance is unnecessary. (After all, that’s easier than taking a public position that “those people” don’t deserve equal civil rights.)

I remember the astonishment of one of my African-American students when she realized that, in Indiana, people can be fired just because they are gay.

“There is still a lot of discrimination against black people,” she said, “but at least there are laws on the books! They may not always work, but they’re something.”

A few months ago, the Indianapolis City-County Council failed to pass a measure that would have made discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation a violation of the city’s Human Relations Ordinance. Several of those voting against it said it was “unnecessary” because the 14th Amendment already protected gays.

They knew better.

Continue ReadingDifference between civil rights and civil liberties