Lgbt Rights In America Research Paper

Lawrence v. Texas: The Justification for the Decision and its Significance for the LGBTQ+ Community

Houston falls under two categories of Dr. Elzar’s three political subcultures, which are individualistic and traditionalistic. Being that Houston is a city with many businesses, one can conclude that the political subculture in the city is individualistic. For instance, when Annise Parker, who is openly gay in the conservative state of Texas, was running for mayor of Houston, she spoke about her experience with the city’s finances and how that experience will allow her to help the city in the financial crisis it was going through (). Annise Parker won the election regardless of her sexuality. The assumption that one can make is that the fact that Annise Parker has good financial experience, motivated business owners, and entrepreneurs to vote for her on behalf of their own self-interest, which is to have a successful business.

Judge Rosenthal, sanctioning the preservation of LGBTQ liberties as citizens of the United States, went beyond the federal ordinance of the initial intentions of the bill, becoming the first federal judge in Texas to ban discrimination against the LGBTQ population (Bollinger, 2018, Muraco).

For centuries same sex marriage has been a dispute, especially in Texas because of how powerfully Texas believes in the bible and how extremely “old fashioned” it is. The debate has been over LGBT equality, just like the black civil rights movement and the women’s movement in the 1960’s. Due to the traditional and common law, Texas does not allow same sex marriage. Actually, the state banned same sex marriage a decade ago or more. The issue was during the 2004 presidential election when Missouri and Louisiana voters approved same sex marriage and eleven states placed amendments. Everyone held their word and continued to protect the laws of Texas. The constitutional amendments that banned same sex marriage well-defined marriage as a union between

The history of LGBTQIA+ rights in the United States is long and complicated. The identities within the LGBTQIA+ community that are accepted have shifted over the years as the majority of the population comes to understand some identities to be commonplace and struggles to understand others. However, the gaining of rights and acceptance by the LGBTQIA+ community has nearly always been tied to legal recognition. Lawrence v. Texas questions whether or not a Texas statute that bans homosexual sodomy is constitutional. Although LGBTQIA+ rights issues are controversial, the statute that convicted John Lawrence and Tyson Garner for having private, consensual gay sex as well as the means of conviction are clearly unconstitutional on several grounds,

Lawrence v Texas was the inspiration of changing the gay rights, and if wasn’t for this case gay rights wouldn’t be where it is today . In the case Lawrence v. Texas, which was the United States Supreme Court case the criminal prohibition of the homosexual consent was invalidated in Texas. John Lawrence and Tyron Garner were arrested for having an illegal type of sex. However this law was only enforced in the state of Texas. Lawrence and Garner's appeal was that what they had been doing was protected the Fourteenth Amendment, which, “prohibits state and local government officials from depriving persons of life, liberty, or property without legislative authorization.” The court's final decision was 6-3 in favor of Lawrence.

In order to be on the same page as other major cities across the United States, motions were made over a year ago in Houston to pass an equal rights, anti-discrimination ordinance known as the Houston Equal Rights Ordinance (HERO). At last a decision was made, and on November 3rd, 2015, HERO was struck down by 61 percent of the voters by referendum (Fernandez). The premise of the anti-discrimination ordinance is similar to those of other cities across the nation; to prevent discrimination on the bases of 15 different classes including race, age, gender identity, and sexual orientation. Houston’s mayor Annise Parker, who identifies as gay herself, was a strong supporter of the proposition for equal rights, and as all supporters in the Houston area agreed, it would put Houston on the map of inclusive and tolerant cities (Fernandez). On the other side of the argument is the conservative population of Houston. With the majority of political opinion in the Houston area being that of highly conservative leaning, HERO proved to be a controversial ordinance for many of these individuals. In an effort to increase support for opposing HERO, conservative politicians in the Houston area therefore took advantage of conservative ideals to promote a counter-position to the anti-discrimination laws (Ura).

Although the ordinance protects several classes of people within five separate categories, the ordinance became the policy in favor of men in women’s bathrooms. With a lot of attention on transgender people within the last year alone, the media was able to manipulate public perception by focusing on one aspect of the ordinance. Many Houstonians, still weary of the LGBTQ community and ill-informed, were fully against the ordinance, claiming to defend their women and children against predators. Voters believed the ordinance created an open door for sex crime to increase in the city. Consequently, the ordinance failed to pass with a 60% opposing vote. The ordinance for equality should have passed, however, Houstonians focused only on their false perceptions and myths of sexual predators, such as strangers and queers.

Immediately opponents who didn’t agree with the protections it offered to the gay and transgender residents of Houston fought back, a petition that would force a repeal referendum of the ordinance (Donchey, 2015). In April 2015 a judge siding with the city during the HERO trial, he stated that there were not enough valid signatures to repeal the ordinance. In July 24 the Texas Supreme Court suspended the Houston Equal Rights Ordinance, the ruling stated that the ordinance either be repealed or put to voters. The court required the Houston City Council has thirty days to repeal the ordinance or the issue will be placed on the November ballot (Donchey, 2015). Mayor Annise Parker released a statement that read, “Obviously, I am disappointed and believe the court is in error with this eleventh hour ruling in a case that had already been decided by a judge and jury of citizens. Nonetheless, we will proceed with the steps necessary for City Council to consider the issue. At the same time, we are consulting with our outside counsel on any possible available legal actions. Houston's Equal Rights Ordinance is similar to measures passed by every other major city in the country and by most local corporations. No matter the color of your skin, your age, gender, physical limitations, or sexual orientation, every Houstonian deserves the right to be treated equally. To do otherwise, hurts Houston’s well-known image as a city

In as much freedom for expression and belief I essential for every citizen within a state, it is critical to ensure that the general conduct of the citizens is right and also very ethical. Homosexual behavior is not proper, and it affects the morals and conducts of a nation. It destroys the rapport of the society. This is a destruction of the law of nature that is even against the religious beliefs and the general culture of any nation (Hermann, 2016). It is essential to give the citizens the right that they deserve. However, it is important to ensure that freedom never exploited to the extent that it corrupts morals and good conduct. I support the Texas ruling that demands it unlawful for two people of the same sex to engage in the intimate sexual conduct. It is right to say that individuals make offense when engaging in sexual intercourse with an individual of the same sex. The prohibition of gay and lesbianism is not a denial of liberty for the citizens (Goldberg

From miniscule protest to continental approval the LGBT community made a mark and changed america forever. In “ A glimpse into 1970’s Gay Activism” Rosen says “Edward Koch, then serving in congress became one of the first elected officials to publicly lobby on behalf of homosexuals of Greenwich Village”. This shows that the LGBT people were making a great impact to get one of their own in a congressional office position. They also presented great change when it came to discrimination. In the article “ Gay Rights Shaping Up Miami” Clarke writes“ On March 27, 1977 Dade County, Florida, passed an ordinance banning the discrimination of gay people in instances such as employment and housing”.

The bill clearly states in Chapter 17, article 1, sec. 17-1, “It is the policy of the city that all of its residents and persons subject to its jurisdiction shall not be subject to discrimination based on an individual's sex, race, color, ethnicity, national origin, age, familial status, marital status, military status, religion, disability, sexual orientation, genetic information, gender identity or pregnancy.” Fighting for equal rights on the terms of city employment and city services, contracts "between the city and any person for the provision of any works, goods, or services"(Houston), public accommodation, private employment, and fair housing. This bill coming into play will change the lives of many Houstonians, such as my own uncle who is a veteran of the U.S. Navy and my disabled grandmother when it comes to various accounts of discrimination that they could face. The bill does not have much to say about transgender rights on sharing bathrooms besides implying the notion of non-discriminative utilities in Article IV sec. 17-51. H.E.R.O is a proposition that has been put forth in simple terms as a way to gain equal rights across the board, as well as, making Houston an environment free of discrimination and

Being queer isn't an insult! Many people of the LGBTQ ( lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer) community feel attacked by people who are homophobic towards them. People should be informed about the LGBTQ community, and how they are not bad people for being queer. Mainly because there is a big stigma associated with being part of the LGBTQ community.

Looking back throughout history at the rights of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender individuals, it isn’t hard to see that we have made the majority of our strides in the past 10 years. As a society we have decided the time is now to put an end to the lack of rights for people of different sexual orientations. Accepting LGBT individuals and providing them the same rights and protections as all other Americans makes us a more united, respectable Country. Everyone deserves equal treatment and opportunities regardless of what their sexual orientation may be.

Imagine if you were to be judged for who you were, or what you did, or even your gender type. In the world there are a lot of social injustices going on even to this very day. One of the most common and heard of social injustice would probably be the one of people being lesbian, gay, bisexual, and/or transgender. This issue has been going on for quite a long time now. Some people do not agree with Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender projects. A lot of people suffer because of this injustice, and it also affects their whole lives. A lot of the people that go through this most likely end up fighting back for what they believe is right, which in their