non-discrimination

she says i am not a feminist
i do not believe in feminism 
she spills out the words 
“i have the same rights and opportunities as the male counterpart in the united states" 
like it’s a sunday morning
and she just had breakfast in bed 
while in other parts of the world
women have organizations set up 
to fight for women to go to school
for women to take up industrial jobs
for women to take up jobs and protect their rights 
she says 
stop playing victim and seize opportunities 
but not every land is the land of freedom 
not every woman has opportunities knocking on their door
in so many parts of the world 
a 9 year old girl 
sits in her room 
and awaits her husband’s knock 
she then talks about 
how women want same rights as men 
when its convenient 
like as if 
women in the world 
want to cherry pick 
having equal job rights 
non discriminating pay laws 
and lesser women tax 
she says convenience and my blood boils a little 
she continues 
you can get a job 
no man is stopping you 
but society says 
marry a man 
not become a doctor 
society says 
you’re 35 
ambitious 
but no future partner
marrying is not only one stereotype 
but a man’s ego is so fragile 
women are accustomed to stay home after marriage
because leaving for a job means 
forsaking "home” values 
and you’re telling me nothing is stopping them 
but this is only one variable 
imagine the number of women 
unable to even get education 
because they’re females 
because that’s what society has imposed the gender to be 
but you then proceed to talk about slut shaming 
about how a woman who sleeps with 60 man 
is as much of a slut 
as is a man who sleeps with 60 women 
but girls out here get slut shamed 
even when their throats scream no 
even when they’re not sleeping around 
they become sexual objects 
like sex is not their right 
like a body is not of their owning 
the problem isn’t who you see as a slut 
the problem is women are being objectified as nothing but sexual object
that’s the problem 
i don’t understand why you would want to downplay both genders to get equality because if that what equality is to you 
i understand why you’re not a feminist 
she then goes again to say
america hires on job qualifications 
and i am happy 
you’re not one of many women 
who sit through degrading interview
get questioned cause they’re woman 
and still get asked whether they opt for the job
they still work 
cause food needs to be on the table 
despite their value being burnt in their office cubicles 
and you say 
okay but men can get falsely accused of rape as well,
that’s 5%
talk about the 95% you don’t see to care about
you don’t seem to care about your fellow sisters yet
so i see how you’re not a feminist 
when you overplay caring for one gender
and not both 
because feminism is about both genders
but if i have to talk about men 
to get your attention for feminism 
then it’s clearly not the point. 

you say all of this.
cause you’re american. 
you’re white. 
you walk the streets cause your privilege protects you. 
and this comes from an indian asian girl.
i have a roof over my head.
i have education.
and i am privileged as well.
but just because the sun shines where i live.
doesn’t mean it shines everywhere.

you have everything at your feet
so fellow women ancestors laugh
because you stand on their bones
and talk about rights
you don’t even know your other female friends have it hard 
so how are you gonna acknowledge
women of color struggles that continue 
and the bones that STILL pile up

you my friend
are gifted
in so many ways
ignorance is a bliss i guess 
in the saddest of ways

—  k, slam poetry in response to this tweet https://twitter.com/Lala_Sorrentino/status/615928978562531328

Urban Outfitters is proud to share a series of limited edition tees, with 100% of the sales directly donated to The Sylvia Rivera Law Project, a New York-based organization working to guarantee that all people are free to self-determine their gender identity and expression. Produced in collaboration with writer Kate Schatz and artist Miriam Klein Stahl, the tees are inspired by the stories and illustrations in Schatz and Stahl’s book, Rad American Women A-Z, which documents some of the country’s most influential and unsung heroines. Miriam Stahl created two exclusive papercut illustrations featuring the portraits of Sylvia Rivera and Marsha P. Johnson, two radically important voices in the LGBTQ movement.

Latina Civil Rights pioneer Sylvia Rivera (1951-2002) was a veteran of the 1969 Stonewall uprising and a tireless advocate for the rights of marginalized voices. Fighting hard against the exclusion of transgender people from the Sexual Orientation Non-Discrimination Act in New York, she was a loud and persistent voice for the rights of low-income queer, homeless youth, and trans people of color.

The Sylvia Rivera Law Project works to continue Sylvia’s work by centralizing issues of systemic poverty and racism, and prioritizing the struggles of queer and trans people who face the most severe and multi-faceted discrimination. They work to guarantee that all people are free to self-determine their gender identity and expression, regardless of income or race, and without facing harassment, discrimination, or violence. Click here to read an interview with Cherno Biko from the SRLP on the Urban Outfitters blog and to learn more about their ongoing work.

Marsha “Pay It No Mind” Johnson (1944-1992) was a revolutionary Black activist for gay and trans-liberation and a veteran of the Stonewall uprising. With Sylvia Rivera, she co-founded the Street Transvestite Action Revolutionaries (STAR) in the early 70s, and went on to act as an organizer of ACT UP, a direct action advocacy group working to impact the lives of people with AIDS.  

In collaboration with the SRLP, a portion of proceeds will also benefit the upcoming independent film “Happy Birthday Marsha!” The film shares more of Marsha and Sylvia’s stories as it follows Johnson’s life in the hours before the 1969 Stonewall Riots in New York City. Click here to see behind-the-scenes images from the film and read an interview with directors Reina Gossett and Sasha Wortzel.

From DarkMatter:

I love when the world makes things explicit: today when cisgender gays and lesbians and their allies will be celebrating gay marriage, a bunch of us will be on the streets for the Trans Day of Action march in NYC with Audre Lorde Project and the abolish the prison industrial complex party in the Bay Area with TGI Justice Project (TGIJP) protesting criminalization and murder of trans people. 

So many think pieces and neoliberal ‪#‎activists‬ will proclaim the end of the “gay movement,” but let’s get a few things straight:

1. Violence against queer and trans communities of color is steadily increasing. The majority of this violence is comes from the very state that allegedly supports our “equality” at the hands of the police, prisons, mental health institutions, and ICE. “Victories” like this Supreme Court ruling are often used to pinkwash the US government and make it seem"LGBT friendly" even though it’s one of the biggest arbiters of anti-queer and anti-trans violence at home and abroad.

2. Every time there is a symbolic ruling like this there is a significant backlash. This backlash looks like acts of physical and sexual violence against largely low-income gender non-conforming people of color who cannot afford privacy and safety. Policy change does not translate intochanging hearts and minds. Community organizing does. Stop discussing progress without understanding punishment.

3. What you call a “rainbow,” we call the racial wealth divide. It’s much easier to affirm “gay love,” then it is to call for reparations for colonialism, slavery, and exploitation of labor. As gay marriage gets legalized the majority of LGBT donors are pulling back their funds to support queer and trans work. This leaves those of us doing racial and economic justice work even more broke and less able to get people out of prisons and into stable housing and jobs. But who needs money for bread when you can eat wedding cake?

4.Marriage equality" is an oxymoron. The institution of marriage is an inherently unequal institution. Marriage is a racist and patriarchal system established to allocate basic rights to couples over other forms of relationships. The institution of marriage has and continues to exacerbatethe (racial) wealth divide in this country.

5. We aren’t fighting for more rights, we are fighting for abolition. This is a very different political strategy. We don’t want more freedoms, we want to be free from violence. We aren’t fighting for equality and love, we were fighting for economic justice and liberation. We aren’t fighting for representation, we are fighting for revolution.

Back to the streets.

2

Marching in the SF Pride Parade opened my eyes to many problematic aspects of the celebrations during the pride weekend. Pride has become a fuck show full of individuals who aren’t even there truly for the Queer and Trans communities. Instead they are there to get shit faced and rub their sweaty bodies on one another. The part that I had an issue with was the fact that everyone kept screaming “Love Wins.” Love hasn’t won. That doesn’t even make sense to me. People need to understand that marriage equality is a bread and circus, and the institution of marriage is a dominant ideology. Just because the supreme court ruled in favor of marriage equality, doesn’t mean that all the institutionalized oppression and discrimination that the Queer and Trans community face is automatically lifted. We as a whole have a long way to go when it comes to Queer and Trans justice. Equality isn’t enough. Equality means that we will all just have the same access to this broken system. This is way more than a marriage equality issue!

Urban Outfitters is proud to share a series of limited edition tees, with 100% of the sales directly donated to The Sylvia Rivera Law Project, a New York-based organization working to guarantee that all people are free to self-determine their gender identity and expression. Produced in collaboration with writer Kate Schatz and artist Miriam Klein Stahl, the tees are inspired by the stories and illustrations in Schatz and Stahl’s book, Rad American Women A-Z, which documents some of the country’s most influential and unsung heroines. Miriam Stahl created two exclusive papercut illustrations featuring the portraits of Sylvia Rivera and Marsha P. Johnson, two radically important voices in the LGBTQ movement.

Latina Civil Rights pioneer Sylvia Rivera (1951-2002) was a veteran of the 1969 Stonewall uprising and a tireless advocate for the rights of marginalized voices. Fighting hard against the exclusion of transgender people from the Sexual Orientation Non-Discrimination Act in New York, she was a loud and persistent voice for the rights of low-income queer, homeless youth, and trans people of color.

The Sylvia Rivera Law Project works to continue Sylvia’s work by centralizing issues of systemic poverty and racism, and prioritizing the struggles of queer and trans people who face the most severe and multi-faceted discrimination. They work to guarantee that all people are free to self-determine their gender identity and expression, regardless of income or race, and without facing harassment, discrimination, or violence. Click here to read an interview with Cherno Biko from the SRLP on the Urban Outfitters blog and to learn more about their ongoing work.

Marsha “Pay It No Mind” Johnson (1944-1992) was a revolutionary Black activist for gay and trans-liberation and a veteran of the Stonewall uprising. With Sylvia Rivera, she co-founded the Street Transvestite Action Revolutionaries (STAR) in the early 70s, and went on to act as an organizer of ACT UP, a direct action advocacy group working to impact the lives of people with AIDS.  

In collaboration with the SRLP, a portion of proceeds will also benefit the upcoming independent film “Happy Birthday Marsha!” The film shares more of Marsha and Sylvia’s stories as it follows Johnson’s life in the hours before the 1969 Stonewall Riots in New York City. Click here to see behind-the-scenes images from the film and read an interview with directors Reina Gossett and Sasha Wortzel.

Christian Leaders Proud To Oppose Repeal included the following words in their public letter: “Our faith traditions [as leaders] are not the same and we differ on many issues, including whether our churches should support the marriages of same gender couples. However, we all agree on the fundamental premise that every human being should be treated with dignity and respect. Ultimately, we have come to understand that despite our differences in beliefs and discomfort with this issue, we are not called to judge others. In judging one aspect of a person, we miss the whole person God created. We should follow the Golden Rule and do unto others as we would have them do unto us. When we do so, we are truly living our faith. We know that many who disagree with us will claim that this ordinance infringes on religious liberty. We disagree. In this vote, we are protecting all God’s children from discrimination while protecting our own religious freedom. This ordinance extends existing protections to gay and transgender people and protects the constitutional rights of churches and religious organizations. It is because of our faith, not despite it, that we will vote No on April 7th.”
Love these words.

LOVE WINS! Such an amazing day for America and the LGBT community. The fight is far from over in terms of true equality for all members of the community, but this was a giant step forward on the path to getting there. The overwhelming outpouring of positivity that I’ve seen on social media has made me so happy today. Happy that my father’s marriage to his husband is finally recognized across the entire country, and happy for my countless number of gay and lesbian friends who now have the same option and rights as any other person in terms of being able to marry the person they love. So so happy today.

Now let’s move forward on to passing nation wide non-discrimination laws so that no member of the LGBTQ community has to live in fear for their jobs or homes, and work on continuing to teach love and inclusion to the younger generation so that acceptance and respect can be the way of norm rather than bullying and violence. Onward!

advocate.com
Gay Chicano Artist of Twice-Defaced LGBT Latino Mural in San Francisco: 'We Exist'
San Francisco police are investigating as a possible hate crime the repeated vandalism of a gay cholo mural in the Mission District, while the artist is hoping to use the visibility to support a local
Verse of the Day for 1/12/13 Galatians 3:26-28

Galatians 3:26-28

———————————————————————–

New International Version

So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

————————————————————————-

Common English Bible

You are all God’s children through faith in Christ Jesus. All of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek; there is neither slave nor free; nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

————————————————————————-

New Living Translation

For you are all children of God through faith in Christ Jesus. And all who have been united with Christ in baptism have put on Christ, like putting on new clothes. There is no longer Jew or Gentile, slave or free, male and female. For you are all one in Christ Jesus.

————————————————————————-

Nueva Versión Internacional

[Hijos de Dios] Todos ustedes son hijos de Dios mediante la *fe en Cristo Jesús, porque todos los que han sido bautizados en Cristo se han revestido de Cristo. Ya no hay judío ni *griego, esclavo ni libre, hombre ni mujer, sino que todos ustedes son uno solo en Cristo Jesús.

——————————————————————————-

King James Version

For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

Ordinance would add protection for gay, transgender citizens in Springfield, MO

Recently I posted an LGBT protections ordinance was passed in Omaha, NE and is now also being introduced in Lincoln, NE. Today a friend on my facebook shared an article he was featured in regarding this same issue in Springfield, MO.

I’m happy to see other cities starting to look at this issue and recognize the need for employment and housing protections like Springfield is currently doing. 

When you read the article, the part that got my blood pressure raising was this “…who has pushed for a formal definition of who does and does not qualify as transgender. “(Employers) need to be able to figure out what standards they can set.”

In my opinion, no one should be able to "set standards” as to who will and who won’t “qualify” as transgender. That is just ridiculous. Like Joshua, the individual interviewed for the article said, all of this focus on dress codes and bathrooms is a waste of time. “A mountain out of a mole hill,” indeed.

Listening to an LGBTQ-advocacy group talk about how to prepare for a non-discrimination ordinance (NDO) and this is what keeps coming to mind…

The Holocaust.

Hitler had a vision of a new Germany populated by a “perfect race.” Because he was such a charismatic leader with a strong vision for the future, people latched on to his ideas- at first because it was a way to bring Germany out of its economic slump. By the time people really understood what was going on (mass murder of thousands of people), Hitler had built up such a mass of support that the movement had too much inertia and could not be stopped.

I see the same thing happening right now with LGBTQ rights. The way I see it, the roots of the anti-gay movement stem from a literal interpretation of the Bible (even though homosexual behaviors have been going on since biblical times). Religion has always been a strong advocate for the sanctity of marriage, and as a result, religious heterosexual people view homosexual people as going against God.

We are literally treating LGBTQ people like the Jews. We have arbitrarily decided that people who identify as LGBTQ are the “other” and do not deserve the same rights as the “perfect race” (aka straight people).

We may not be rounding up the gays abd gassing them by the millions, but psychologically, we are murdering them. By denying them basic rights- such as the right to LOVE and be with whomever they want- we are telling them that they are less than. We are showing them that they are not enough. Not good enough. Not worthy enough.

No wonder that gay and Transgender teens are frighteningly more likely to commit suicide than straight teens. We are killing them. By not giving them the space to be who they are and express themselves, we are suppressing their identity and asking them to change the core of their being.

I did not choose to be straight. I didn’t wake up one morning and think “hmmm… I think I will only pursue male partners from now on.” I am not persecuted for my non-decision to be straight, so why should my LGBTQ friends be persecuted for trying their best to live a life THEY DID NOT CHOOSE.

The millions of Jewish people who perished in the Holocaust didn’t choose to be Jewish. Their religion was part of their identity, just as sexual orientation and gender expression is a part of our identity.

Why do we keep justifying this sickening behavior? We have seen example after example throughout history of what happens as a result of systematic oppression and prejudice. Our country is stained with the blood of African Americans enslaved because of the color of their skin, and Native Americans who inhabited the land first… and we have not learned our lesson.

How long will it take for us to learn that there is no price on human life? How many more innocent lives must be tragically lost before we understand that we are all the same inside. You may not agree with someone’s ideas, beliefs, appearance, etc… but there is no denying that on a molecular level, we all share aome percentage of the same DNA. we are literally killing our brothers and sisters, and for what? The power that heterosexuals are “right” and homosexuals are “wrong?” Will your thirst for blood and conflict be sated when every last homosexual or queer person is DEAD? Because that is the direction that we are heading.

You might be thinking “now that’s really extreme, Barbara. I mqy not agree with gay marriage but I wouldn’t kill anyone because of that.” Okay, fine, but you are missing the point. By not allowing gays to marry right now, you are taking away their right to love whomever they want. Without love, our lives are empty and meaningless. Banning gay marriage and not passing NDOs may not seem on par with the Holocaust, but this is just the first step in dehumanizing our LGBTQ brothers and sisters.

Hitler first dehumanized the Jews (also the gypsies, Roma, mental ill and handicapped people, and anyone who spoke out against him) and once the Nazis saw them as not people, it was easy to stuff them into cattle cars, deport them to concentration camps, and murder them in gas chambers and crematoria.

We are slowly dehumanizing all people who do not identify as “straight.” I hope that in 70 years when I am looking over my grandchildren’s history books, I do not have to read about an LGBTQ holocaust.

Every person, regardless of orientation or gender, is deserving of love and the right to express their identity. When we take that right away from them, are we any better than Hitler and the Nazis?

thinkprogress.org
Here’s The Dark Future Conservatives Have Predicted Now That Marriage Equality Is Legal
Conservatives are quite concerned about the future of their ability to discriminate and disparage.

Anticipation of Friday’s Supreme Court’s marriage equality ruling inspired conservatives to engage in a lot of defensive posturing. Some have called for “civil disobedience” and warned that nationwide marriage equality will have consequences for religious liberty. Focus on the Family’s political arm, CitizenLink, posted a video last week citing the “fallout” that will supposedly now follow the decision, which serves as a potential road map to the hot spots where opponents might still put up a fight.

What’s telling about this litany of concerns is that they all boil down to attempts to reject or ignore the legal validity of same-sex marriages or somehow discriminate against same-sex couples. Here’s a look at CitizenLink’s list of marriage equality fears and what they actually mean by them.

“The tax-exempt status of non-profit ministries and organizations will be under attack nationwide.”

This refers to a question Justice Samuel Alito asked during the oral arguments in April in the Obergefell v. Hodges case. Would a school that opposes same-sex marriage meet the same fate as Bob Jones University, which lost its tax-exempt status for opposing interracial marriage or dating? As ThinkProgress has previously explained, the comparison is not accurate, because the issue in the Bob Jones case was not the school’s position on interracial relations, but its actual discrimination against students who engaged in them. Moreover, even a school that does engage in the same kind of discrimination against students in same-sex relationships might not be at risk because of the incomplete patchwork of nondiscrimination laws protecting sexual orientation. Either way, the tax-exempt status would only be at risk if actual discrimination is playing out.

“Parents will have no say in what their children are taught about relationships and marriage in public schools. No notice in advance. No chance to opt out.”

Conservatives regularly object to any content in schools that even acknowledges the existence of gay people, their relationships, or their families. They argue that homosexuality is all about sex and that parents should be able to teach their own kids what to believe about it — or simply protect them from hearing about it whatsoever. As the “princess” ad from the Prop 8 campaign in California demonstrated, this stems from the antiquated but not forgotten myth that children can somehow be recruited or persuaded to be gay simply by being exposed to information about gay people.

With marriage equality available nationwide, the number of same-sex families will surely increase. In turn, the likelihood of children having classmates with same-sex parents will also continue to climb. In many cases, schools won’t have to read a book like King & King for kids to learn about same-sex families, but they may still rely on such tools to help kids better understand the diversity of their classmates and combat bullying. If parents truly want to prevent their kids from learning about “relationships and marriage” in a same-sex-inclusive way, they may have to either opt their children out of school entirely or find a way to ostracize same-sex families from the school community.

“Teachers who express support for marriage may be fired.”

There has been no shortage of teachers who have been fired for being gay or for simply announcing intentions to marry their same-sex partner — mostly from Catholic schools. But CitizenLink is talking about teachers who get in trouble for opposing same-sex marriage. In a few cases, teachers have made remarks outside of the classroom that have caused their schools to be concerned about whether they are fit to work with students, but in most of those cases, the teachers have kept their jobs.

For example, in 2011, Florida high school teacher Jerry Buell posted on Facebook that he “almost threw up” watching a news story about same-sex marriage, urging, “Don’t insult a man and woman’s marriage by throwing it in the same cesspool as same-sex whatever!” He wassuspended for three days while the school investigated, then reinstated.

In a more recent example, Patricia Jannuzzi, a teacher at a Catholic school in New Jersey, was suspended after she posted an anti-marriage equality position on Facebook back in April. She wrote that marriage equality proponents “want to reengineer western civ into a slow extinction,” describing homosexuality as something chosen not comparable to race or disability. Jannuzzi, like Buell, got to keep her job.

Teachers’ free speech outside the classroom is still guaranteed. The problem is the increasing awareness that disparaging people for their sexuality is just as detestable as making comments that are racist or sexist. If schools feel that teachers’ comments are offensive or reflect too poorly on the school — particularly when made quite publicly on social media — it is the school’s prerogative to ensure a safe learning environment for all students.

In the meantime, it remains true that only gay teachers and their supporters have actually lost their jobs over the issue of same-sex marriage.

“Christian college accreditation will be attacked.”

So far, the only Christian university that has had its accreditation challenged was Gordon College in Massachusetts. Last year, after President Obama issued an executive order requiring all federal contractors not to discriminate against LGBT people, Gordon president D. Michael Lindsay joined other religious leaders in asking the White House for a religious exemption. The higher education commission of the New England Association of Schools and Colleges (NEASC) considered whether Gordon’s policy of forbidding “homosexual practice” ran afoul of its standards for accreditation.

This April, NEASC and Gordon issued a joint statement confirming that the college would retain its accreditation status, but Gordon did agree to some new initiatives to educate its communities about LGBT people. On its own website, Gordon College asserted, “Contrary to many media stories during the last few months, Gordon’s accreditation was not in jeopardy.”

If Gordon had actually lost its accreditation, it would only have been because of irreconcilable policies that discriminate against LGBT people, which was the commission’s primary concern.

“Government-backed student-loans at those colleges will go away.”

Student loans have never been threatened as such at any university, so this particular conservative fear is conjecture that builds upon the other fears. It seems likely that if the marriage equality decision would lead to a threat to educational funding, the IRS and state tax agencies would first have to make new policy decisions. That would be a long process and one that would likely allow for input from the potentially impacted schools.

Nevertheless, fear is a powerful force, and at least one school has already decided on its own to stop accepting federal aid. In April, Wyoming Catholic College announced it was joining a few other religious colleges in refusing to participate in federal student-aid programs. That means no federal loans, work-study money, or grants could be applied to students’ tuition costs. The young unaccredited school argues that the clean break is necessary to adhere to its religious values. Other schools that decline federal dollars include Christendom College in Virginia, Hillsdale College in Michiganm and New St. Andrews College in Idaho. In all cases, this was a choice made by the school, not one forced by the government.

“Faith-based adoption agencies will be forced out of business.”

There are a number of stories of faith-based adoption agencies — Catholic Charities in almost every case — shutting down after the arrival of marriage equality, but in none of those cases was an agency “forced out of business.”

In Massachusetts, Illinois, and D.C., Catholic Charities voluntarily shut down for political purposes. In no case did the law force them to shut down or force them to adopt to same-sex couples. What did happen is that the agency’s access to state funding was dependent upon not discriminating. They could have continued to operate in a discriminatory fashion without support from the taxpayers, or they could have stopped discriminating to continue functioning with the government subsidies. In all three cases, Catholic Charities just gave up on the charity of adoption entirely.

Catholic Charities’ political motives against the recognition of same-sex unions was most evident in Colorado. In 2012, Colorado lawmakers considered a civil unions bill that had broad exemptions for religious organization, including adoption agencies like Catholic Charities. Officials from the organization nevertheless testified that they would “discontinue our service in adoption and foster care” if the bill passed. There wasn’t even funding on the line — it would have been an act of pure protest. That legislation ultimately failed, and when a different civil unions bill passed a year later — over Catholic Charities’ same objections — it didn’t offer the same exemptions. Same-sex marriage has been legal in Colorado since October, and Catholic Charities is still functioning normally there.

If any adoption agency shuts down over marriage equality, it will be because the organization prioritizes discriminating against same-sex couples over finding families for children.

“Christian business owners, wedding photographers, cake bakers, florists, etc, will be sued for discrimination if they turn down business for a same-sex ceremony.”

It’s true that business owners have been sued for discrimination, and they have lost in every case. That’s because they violated states’ nondiscrimination ordinances. The New Mexico photographer, the Colorado baker, the Oregon bakers, the Washington florist, the Iowa art gallery, the Vermont inn, the New York farm, and the Hawaii bed and breakfast all refused to provide the same service to same-sex couples that they provide to different-sex couples, and they all did so in states that ban discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

Though these cases affected same-sex couples, it was not the legality of marriage equality that was responsible for them; it was laws guaranteeing equal access to goods and services.

“Churches [that] open up their buildings to outside groups will be sued if they turn down events such as a reception for a same-sex wedding.”

This concern is actually the same as the last. What matters is whether or not a church offers its property for use as a public accommodation. If a church wants to rent out its space for non-church functions, it may do so, but it cannot then pick and choose who it rents to based on religious reasons.

This fear reflects what played out with a beach-side pavilion owned by the Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association, a Methodist church organization in New Jersey. The property actually benefited from a Green Acres real-estate tax exemption, a state subsidy that supports conservation and recreation — not a religious tax exemption. When the Association refused to let a same-sex couple host a civil union ceremony there, it was found in violation of its agreement with the state to provide “equal access.” The Pavilion is now covered by a religious exemption and the Association no longer makes it available for public rental.

Churches would only face the treat of a lawsuit if they attempt to profit off of renting out their properties and then arbitrarily discriminate against same-sex couples.

“Faith-based charities and relief organizations that get money from the government will see those grants go away.”

There is no evidence that government funding of faith-based initiatives is in danger over the issue of same-sex marriage. As with adoption agencies, this would only become a concern if an organization accepted taxpayer money and then refused to serve all people equally.

“The freedom of Christian organizations to hire people who are in harmony with their beliefs will be attacked.”

This again reflects an intent to discriminate against people based on their sexuality. Conservative groups like the Alliance Defending Freedom have already outlined a strategy to pretend that all employees at a religious organization have a “ministerial” duty in hopes that will justify discriminatory hiring practices.

“Members of the military who disagree will be challenged.”

There have been a few incidents where members of the military claim they were punished because of their religious beliefs, but in the facts of their cases, it was their actions, not their beliefs, that caused them problems.

For example, Air Force Senior Master Sgt. Phillip Monk claimed that in 2013, he was relieved of duties because he refused to agree with a commanding officer on the issue of same-sex marriage. What actually happened is that she directed him to punish someone under his supervision who had inappropriately promoted his own anti-gay religious beliefs in a mandatory training. Monk refused to follow the order and was reassigned — to a new position commensurate with his rank and experience. He retired in 2014, receiving a prestigious award for his performance and conduct.

This past March, Lt. Cmdr. Wesley Modder was issued a “detachment for cause” letter because ofthe way he conducted himself as a Navy chaplain at the Naval Nuclear Power Training Command. He shamed female students for premarial sex and out-of-wedlock pregnancy and told several students that homosexuality was wrong and that he could “save” gay people. This violated his responsibility to serve the needs of all service members, not force his religious beliefs upon them. Chaplains must be willing “to function in a pluralistic environment” and “to support directly and indirectly the free exercise of religion” of all individuals they might minister to. Modder did not.

“People who work for city and county governments who express support for marriage may lose their jobs.”

This is the issue that has come up most immediately since Friday’s ruling. In Texas, for example, Attorney General Ken Paxton is encouraging county clerks not to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples if they believe doing so would violate their religious beliefs. As blogger Hemant Mehta frames it, “In short, if you have religious objections to doing the job you were hired to do, Paxton is letting you off the hook. If you get sued, well, they’ll do their best to protect you, but you’re on your own since you’ll probably lose.”

North Carolina lawmakers similarly passed a law this month guaranteeing that state magistrates do not have to issue marriage licenses, though it does not let them pick and choose which couples they’ll marry and which they won’t.

Perhaps more alarmingly, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott ® also said Friday that the state would not take action against any state officials who refuse to act because of their religious beliefs, including those responsible for granting benefits. Thus, a married same-sex couple could hypothetically be denied, or at least delayed, a benefit they are entitled to under law because of a single official’s religious beliefs.

The coming weeks will likely demonstrate to what extent government officials can refuse to recognize same-sex couples’ marriages in the course of their duties.

What’s evident from this long list of “religious liberty” fears is that conservatives are not actually afraid of same-sex marriage itself. After all, nobody is being forced to marry someone of the same sex, nor are any religious leaders being forced to officiate such marriages nor denominations being forced to welcome such marriages. It is anti-gay discrimination and disparagement that are at the root of conservatives’ fears.


h/t: Zack Ford at Think Progress LGBT