(09/15/09) "Gay-rights bill passes Ohio House" (by Jim Siegel, The Columbus Dispatch)

[Spang]

Bad news for the haters. :cool:

After years of collecting dust in various legislative committees, a bill that prohibits employment or housing discrimination based on sexual orientation passed a divided Ohio House today.

"This is not special rights. These are rights all Ohioans are afforded," said Rep. Dan Stewart, D-Columbus, who jointly sponsored the bill with Rep. Ross McGregor, a Springfield Republican. Five Republicans joined all Democrats in attendance in backing the measure, 56-38. It now goes to the Senate.

Supporters say the bill would provide long-overdue protections to Ohioans who have been subjected to discrimination simply because they are gay, lesbian or transgender. Twenty states have taken similar steps, as have 443 Fortune 500 companies, 11 of Ohio's four-year public universities and 17 Ohio cities.

But the bill could hit a wall in the GOP-controlled Senate, where President Bill M. Harris, R-Ashland, has said repeatedly that although the measure will get a hearing, he doesn't see a need for the legislation and that there are already sufficient protections in place.

"Other people are getting that evidence and information (of discrimination), but I am not," Harris said. "I talk to business people all the time, and they're saying it's not an issue. If they had trouble with it, they'd be trying to get a law passed."

Harris undoubtedly has heard concerns similar to ones being raised by the National Federation of Independent Business/Ohio, which represents thousands of small business owners.

"We recognize the reality that this is going to mean, quite potentially, additional lawsuits against employers, many of which will not have committed discrimination and will not have been found as such but will still have to pay exorbitant legal bills," said Ty Pine, the group's legislative director.

Democrats blocked Republicans from offering an amendment backed by the NFIB/Ohio and Ohio Chamber of Commerce. The move angered some GOP bill supporters.

Lynne Bowman, executive director of Equality Ohio, a gay-rights advocacy group that has pushed the legislation for years, said studies in other states that have passed similar anti-discrimination laws show no significant increase in lawsuits.

"We believe we will see the same thing here in Ohio," she said, calling it a historic day in which, for the first time, a bill recognizing people based on sexual identity passed a chamber of the Ohio Legislature.

Stewart and others have introduced the bill three times over past legislative sessions, but it did not get a floor vote until Democrats reclaimed control of the Ohio House this year. In a speech to his colleagues, he recalled some of the stories he has heard from Ohioans who were fired from various professions once bosses found out that they were gay or lesbian.

"Injustice to one is injustice to all," Stewart said.

Some socially conservative groups, such as the Ohio Christian Alliance and the Cincinnati-based Citizens for Community Values have opposed the bill, arguing it creates special protections and is not addressing a major problem.

Some Republicans also said they were concerned that the bill does not contain a strong-enough exemption for churches, while others said they were not comfortable elevating sexual orientation to the same level of legal protection as race, gender and religion.

The bill is not about rights or protections, but rather "is about forcing acceptance of a lifestyle that many people disagree with," said Rep. Jeff Wagner, R-Sycamore.

Rep. Lynn R. Wachtmann, R-Napoleon, told bill supporters to "keep your immoral beliefs to yourself. You want to punish people who don't believe the way you do."

But Rep. Tyrone K. Yates, D-Cincinnati, spoke of the civil-rights movement and called the bill a "moment to continue on the path toward equality and understanding."

McGregor, a business owner, put it in economic development terms, arguing that regions accepting of diverse lifestyles tend also to attract high-tech jobs. "Creating an environment open to all is only going to help our economy in Ohio," he said.

McGregor also pointed out to his Republican colleagues that while they may oppose the bill, many of their young staffers have stopped by his office and told him it's the right thing to do. Younger people understand the need for diversity in Ohio, he said.

"Love thy neighbor. Simple, end of story," McGregor said. "People want nothing more than to have a good job, a place to live and not feel threatened."

Bowman said she is gearing up for a push in the Senate, which will include convincing Republicans that this is not a politically risky vote. However, she also realizes that, because a number of Senate Republicans are in safe seats where the only true challenge could come in a GOP primary, the bill may not see action until after the 2010 May primary.

"We've had preliminary conversations over the last few years, so we know where we need to do our work and where our opportunities are," Bowman said of the Senate.

Veteran Sen. Dale Miller, D-Cleveland, will take the lead on the bill in the Senate.

The Source (http://www.columbusdispatch.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2009/09/15/gay_discriminate.html?sid=101)

[smiledr]

Have any of the LGBT community on this forum had an experience of employment or housing discrimination and would you be willing to share?

[CGP]

Have any of the LGBT community on this forum had an experience of employment or housing discrimination and would you be willing to share?

Sometimes the problem is not actual discrimination but fear of it happening. There are countless numbers of gay people who are closeted at work simply out of fear of being discriminated against if they are open about their identity. I have always worked in gay-friendly environments so I haven't worried about it so much, but I am in the minority in that regard. My partner is 100% closeted at his place of employment for fear of being discriminated against.

And when large numbers of people fear being discriminated against, it's usually because the possibility of actually being discriminated against is very high.

[jlynne]

My 13 year old niece told me yesterday that one of her friends called her to tell her that his gay and asked her to tell all their friends. He didn't want to stay in the closet anymore, except with his parents and other family members. She asked me if all gay guys dressed well and were good at design. I told her that was the stereotype, yes, and that every gay man that I had ever met had fit that stereotypep; but I had no way of knowing if it was actually true or not. She didn't seem to have any issues with his sexuality which I thought that was a very positive sign. Because, I know when I was in high school it was very different. Some of the people in my class are still trying to come to terms with "the gay guy" twenty-something years later.

[CGP]

My 13 year old niece told me yesterday that one of her friends called her to tell her that his gay and asked her to tell all their friends. He didn't want to stay in the closet anymore, except with his parents and other family members. She asked me if all gay guys dressed well and were good at design. I told her that was the stereotype, yes, and that every gay man that I had ever met had fit that stereotypep; but I had no way of knowing if it was actually true or not. She didn't seem to have any issues with his sexuality which I thought that was a very positive sign. Because, I know when I was in high school it was very different. Some of the people in my class are still trying to come to terms with "the gay guy" twenty-something years later.

Interesting account, thanks for sharing it.

To clarify the stereotype that "all gay gays dress well and are good at design" - it's very inaccurate! There are many gay guys (just like there are many straight guys) who have absolutely no clue about dressing well and no design skills! So you can take it from me - it's not true!

[jlynne]

It's odd. I know I should have told her that gays and lesbians are no different than anyone else. But she seemed to have a positive image of gay men in her head and I didn't want to say anything to change that. So I let an inaccurate but "positive" stereotype stand.

[mavfin]

My 13 year old niece told me yesterday that one of her friends called her to tell her that his gay and asked her to tell all their friends. He didn't want to stay in the closet anymore, except with his parents and other family members. [snip] She didn't seem to have any issues with his sexuality which I thought that was a very positive sign. Because, I know when I was in high school it was very different. Some of the people in my class are still trying to come to terms with "the gay guy" twenty-something years later.

My 15-year-old daughter talks about the gay guy in her circle of friends. It's no big deal to her. She's never been brought up to go 'ewww' at gay people. There's the difference, really. Once people get past that, it's no big deal.

[CGP]

Once people get past that, it's no big deal.

Exactly.

[Ikasu]

I've only known one openly gay guy, a floormate in college. I should have more gay friends!

[mavfin]

Exactly.

Some people like to blame their backgrounds, but I have a few comments on that. I'm going to ramble a bit here, so if you don't want to read it, there's other threads. :D

Ok, I grew up outside a really small town (1000 people) in Missouri, on a farm. My parents weren't really rednecks, and looking back were, for their time, pretty tolerant people. I was a moderate Aspy growing up, so I knew what it was like to be 'different', and I wouldn't wish some of the crap I dealt with on anyone.

So, I didn't meet my first real, live black person till I was in 7th grade. We played Jr. High football versus a bigger town's team, and there were a couple black kids on the team, and we shook hands with them after we beat them. I noticed that they were kids just like we were.

In high school, of course people threw around derogatory terms about gay people. Hell, we didn't know, not one of us had ever met one, I'm sure. I didn't knowingly meet a gay person till I was 18, in college. After being around a couple gay people a bit, I realized that their sexual preference had zero impact on my life, and then I tried to figure out what the big deal was. I don't think I really ever have, if you know what I mean. I mean, sure I read what people write about it, but I have yet to see anything that makes sense to justify how some of those people think about homosexuality, and the same on race relations. How does one's skin color matter? How does what sex you prefer to date matter? How you were raised, or what you were taught, or how you treat people, now *those things matter.*

Interestingly enough, though, now that I'm older, I see a few same-sex couples that i knew all the time when I was growing up as what they are. Back then I would never have imagined them as gay partners, but they've been in that community for over fifty years living together, and no one even mentions the fact that they're gay couples living openly among us. They're productive members of the community, so no one seems to be too worried about how they live. Now, if they were on welfare and didn't work, then someone would make an issue of it, I'm sure. Small-town America can surprise you sometimes.

So, I'm from a small-town background, was not in a racially-mixed area, or in an area that welcomed gays, but I turned out pretty tolerant. Why is it that people can grow up in racially-mixed areas, with gays around, and still not get it?

[LadyLazarus]

Once people get past that, it's no big deal.

When you live in or near San Francisco for a large portion of your life, not only is it "no big deal," but you start to feel actually backward, prudish, or un-hip for not being gay.

In fact, once when I was interviewing for a position with a gay professor at my university, she asked, "You know, I've been meaning to ask you if you're gay." And I almost felt tempted to lie and say that I was because I actually felt like it would hurt me not to. But I didn't lie and everything was fine. But I still felt pressure to dissemble because my own sexual orientation can be seen in my area as hideously rear-garde.

And in academia, and particularly in my department, there are so many gay people in positions of power that some of my bi-sexual friends have started calling them the "gay mafia." Like these guys are the movers and shakers in the department; so you don't want to cross them.

[JBPoliticsJunkie]

When you live in or near San Francisco for a large portion of your life, not only is it "no big deal," but you start to feel actually backward, prudish, or un-hip for not being gay.


Lol! That's almost what it's like in L.A. :laughing:

[LadyLazarus]

Lol! That's almost what it's like in L.A.

Yep, I also lived in LA for five years and know exactly what you're talking about. :p

[VotingHillary]

In fact, once when I was interviewing for a position with a gay professor at my university, she asked, "You know, I've been meaning to ask you if you're gay." And I almost felt tempted to lie and say that I was because I actually felt like it would hurt me not to. But I didn't lie and everything was fine. But I still felt pressure to dissemble because my own sexual orientation can be seen in my area as hideously rear-garde.

What an incredibly STUPID, not to mention illegal, question to ask of you. And this woman is a professor? God help us.

[LadyLazarus]

What an incredibly STUPID, not to mention illegal, question to ask of you. And this woman is a professor? God help us.

She's actually one of the most important scholars in her field in the world, if you can believe that. But I don't think she meant it to be rude; I took it as a compliment because I think she was inferring that I was a power broker there; ergo I'm gay.

[VotingHillary]

She's actually one of the most important scholars in her field in the world, if you can believe that. But I don't think she meant it to be rude; I took it as a compliment because I think she was inferring that I was a power broker there; ergo I'm gay.

It's not a question of not "meaning to be rude." What she did was so wrong on so many levels. First, it is illegal to ask that kind of question during an interview. Much like a male can't ask the marital status of a female during an interview. Second, it was an intimidating question as you noted. Third, it was just plain WRONG, STUPID and foolish of her to ask such a thing considering her level of "importance." She should have known better than this.

[LadyLazarus]

What she did was so wrong on so many levels. First, it is illegal to ask that kind of question during an interview. Much like a male can't ask the marital status of a female during an interview. Second, it was an intimidating question as you noted. Third, it was just plain WRONG, STUPID and foolish of her to ask such a thing considering her level of "importance." She should have known better than this.

Well, um.. . I'm trying to figure out how to explain this. In a normal job interview, I think this would have been bad. But asking someone if they're gay in a discipline that has a whole area devoted to something called "queer theory" is like asking me what kind of work I do. Does that make sense?

[VotingHillary]

Well, um.. . I'm trying to figure out how to explain this. In a normal job interview, I think this would have been bad. But asking someone if they're gay in a discipline that has a whole area devoted to something called "queer theory" is like asking me what kind of work I do. Does that make sense?

Are you kidding me? :atwitsend:

What your sexuality is should have NOTHING to do with working in this area anymore than a qualified white-person shouldn't teach ethnic studies.

ughhhhh.

BTW, as a lesbian, I would like to smack her upside her head for such stupidity on her part.

[Lealy]

Well I live in O H I O. This state is so very split on just about every issue. I voted against the legislation that made this state male/female marrage only because of the wording of the law which at the time I felt left gays in a very bad position in many ways IE: hospitals not allowing partners access or decision making. On it's face I am against gay marrage but more the word and the feeling that (rightfully or wrongfully) impacts traditional marrage. If they changed the wording from marrage (for all) to civil unions through law and left marrage up to the church I would not only be fine with that I think it would be best. That said I think this law may be needed but find that being a smoker in this day and age is the only thing that seems to be ok to discriminate against bums me out. My BIL owns a number of rentals and reality company and he has told me of gay discrimination and I believe him and would therefore not want gays to have that protection. Just a bitter smoker, sorry if my bringing that in bothers some.

I have known a number of gays since my childhood even asked my dad (retired army) if my memories were correct that there were a number of gays in the military around me growing up. Yes. I asked him what he thought of DADT he said it was dumb. So since he was a hard core manly Master Sergent I will take his word on that. I have worked with gay many of whom I had no idea were gay but it did not matter either way to me. My oldest daughter says there are many gays in her high school who are out and accepted. In a very conservative area of Ohio. That being said we were just discussing this issue before I got on this thread and we do have a few hardliner friends who would not agree with this legislation. I just pointed out to one the other day how can we expect the govt. to stay out of our homes, our children's lives, our cars and our gun cabinets yet you want them to interfere in gays bedrooms, just so you know, I did get her to move just a tad she agreed to this point.

Ok I am going to sleep Jorden won Big Brother=D> and my son has surgery in the morning, 4 hours of sleep, yuk. So I hope I did not offend which I do on this subject around here.

In all no one should be allowed to discriminate on anything when it comes to housing except whether someone can pay. No one should be discriminated against for anything thing personal (including sex, weight and smoking) for work as I am concerned.

[CGP]

Well I live in O H I O. This state is so very split on just about every issue.

Has there been much coverage in OHIO of this story (http://www.commongroundpolitics.net/discussion/showthread.php?t=48989)?

[VotingHillary]

On it's face I am against gay marrage but more the word and the feeling that (rightfully or wrongfully) impacts traditional marrage. If they changed the wording from marrage (for all) to civil unions through law and left marrage up to the church I would not only be fine with that I think it would be best.

Lealy, marriage can't be left up to the churches since the "state" has stepped into the matter of marriage with "civil marriages" and all the tax/social benefits bestowed on marriage. No one can force any "church" to marry gays as that would be a violation of freedom of religion. However....

Why should children of gay couples not be afforded the same state rights as those of heterosexual couples?

The whole issue of "gay marriage" revolves around the state-sanctioned term of marriage. Not the religious one.

[Lealy]

Has there been much coverage in OHIO of this story (http://www.commongroundpolitics.net/discussion/showthread.php?t=48989)?

This is the first I have heard.

[Lealy]

Lealy, marriage can't be left up to the churches since the "state" has stepped into the matter of marriage with "civil marriages" and all the tax/social benefits bestowed on marriage. No one can force any "church" to marry gays as that would be a violation of freedom of religion. However....

Why should children of gay couples not be afforded the same state rights as those of heterosexual couples?

The whole issue of "gay marriage" revolves around the state-sanctioned term of marriage. Not the religious one.

I did not say I agreed with the state, I think they need to stay out. What I meant is that everyone hetero and homo both have only civil unions through the state as a matter of law instead of marrage. As far as children I agree with you and always have thus why I did not vote for male/female marrage law that passed without my help.

[VotingHillary]

I did not say I agreed with the state, I think they need to stay out. What I meant is that everyone hetero and homo both have only civil unions through the state as a matter of law instead of marrage. As far as children I agree with you and always have thus why I did not vote for male/female marrage law that passed without my help.

Thank you for that. But I do think there should be protection for married families...I just don't think it should apply only to heterosexual ones.

BTW, I too am sick of being dumped on because I am a smoker.

[foxyladi]

Has there been much coverage in OHIO of this story (http://www.commongroundpolitics.net/discussion/showthread.php?t=48989)?

not really we prefer the Wyoming news:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl: