Susan's Place Transgender Resources

A bipartisan delegation in the U.S. House of Representatives plans to introduce a bill on Thursday that would add sexual orientation, gender identity, gender and disability to existing federal hate crimes legislation.

  www.planetout.com/news/article.html?date=2005/05/24/2 (http://www.planetout.com/news/article.html?date=2005/05/24/2)

I had to read it to have a clue.
An now that I do..
Ooo!!

;) Please pardon the (attempt at a) funny.

This does seem to be good news though, in more ways that one to be sure.

Given the current climate I'm a bit shocked they even acknowledge the existence of us.
I am pleasantly surprised.

all I must say it i sa good step in the right direction if not a bit late.

Nyssa

Quote from: Nyssa on May 25, 2005, 01:25:58 AM
all I must say it i sa good step in the right direction if not a bit late.

Nyssa

I agree with Nyssa. Yes, this is clearly a positive step for the GLBT community but why has it taken nearly four decades?

I am continually amazed at how our country boasts itself to be the 'land of the free.' How ironic to think that the those who identify as gay, lesbian, bi-sexual and/or transsexual aren't as "free" as those who identify as "heterosexual."

Interesting to note, the Constitution of The Netherlands states,

QuoteAll persons in the Netherlands shall be treated equally in equal circumstances. Discrimination on the grounds of religion, belief, political opinion, race, or sex or on any other grounds whatsoever shall not be permitted

I most certainly don't want to seem like a disgrunteled US Citizen (as this is not the case) but I do think we're long overdue for a long hard look at our human rights policies.

Quote from: Rose Dawson on May 25, 2005, 02:58:25 AM
I agree with Nyssa. Yes, this is clearly a positive step for the GLBT community but why has it taken nearly four decades?

I am continually amazed at how our country boasts itself to be the 'land of the free.' How ironic to think that the those who identify as gay, lesbian, bi-sexual and/or transsexual aren't as "free" as those who identify as "heterosexual."

Interesting to note, the Constitution of The Netherlands states,
I most certainly don't want to seem like a disgrunteled US Citizen (as this is not the case) but I do think we're long overdue for a long hard look at our human rights policies.

Before we lost the 2nd archive I posted that peopel get hung up on words.
Some peopel say that the intent was that everyone should live free, while others
argue that only those that are named should be priviliged. If it meant everyone then everyone would have been listed. 

As soon as it becomes defined, some people ignore the intent and champion those named as the intent. People back up their view with their baises and justify it however.

Nyssa

Do yu really think a Republican Congress will pass this and Bush will sign it? ???

About as likely I am to be a cantidate for F2M surgery!

that brought tears to my eyes that is wonderful that our country is recognizing and helping everyone now

 George W. Bush on Civil Rights   
)
Gay Rights
Constitutional amendment to protect marriage. (Feb 2005)
Don't know whether homosexuality is a choice. (Oct 2004)
We shouldn't change our views on the sanctity of marriage. (Oct 2004)
Protect marriage against activist judges. (Sep 2004)
Bush calls for constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. (Feb 2004)
Instinct on gay issues: do not touch them. (Jun 2003)
Offices on AIDS and race will remain open. (Feb 2001)
Bush claims gay tolerance but record differs. (Oct 2000)
Tolerance & equal rights, not gay marriage & special rights. (Oct 2000)
No gay adoptions; but listens to gay GOP group. (Apr 2000)
Against gay marriage, but leave it to the states. (Feb 2000)
No gays in Boy Scouts. (Aug 1999)
Hate-crime rules don't apply to gays. (Jul 1999)

For the exact words!

http://www.issues2000.org/2004/George_W__Bush_Civil_Rights.htm

Ya know......Everyone I have ever talked to says they didn't voted for Bush. Maybe it's the people I associate myself with and then again, maybe not. What confuses me is that I have never met a single person who says they've voted for Bush. So, how on Earth did he manage to get elected into office? ???

I saw this once on a bumper sticker: "Steal a loaf of bread, go to the big house. Steal an election, go to the White House!"

From what I understand a fair number around here did vote for him (again), I often hear something like so he can fix the mess or such like.

I suppose there is some merit to that logic.

edit:  i don't know what i was thinking when i posted this. it was a stupid  thing to say and i appologize.

Instinct on gay issues: do not touch them
Bush's instinct on gay-rights issues was clear and emphatic: Do not touch them. During the campaign he had refused to comment on Vermont's civil unions. They were, he said, a local issue for local officeholders. He refused to accept the support of the Log Cabin Republicans, an organization of gay Republicans-and then met with a dozen prominent homosexuals in Austin after he had clinched the nomination

I don't believe he knows what consistency is and more than he knows how to pronounce nuclr.

You notice he met afterwards!  No alienation of his religious constituents until he had it wrapped up.

If you don't meet with them than you are not acknowleging that they exist.  Hell we all know that there are no gay repubs.

L