TEP Supports Dignity for All Students Act

All students deserve to be treated
with dignity in Tennessee.

On Jan 31, Senator Jim Kyle of Shelby County filed a bill that would strengthen current anti-bullying policy by clearly identifying common factors that become the focus of bullying in schools:

"Harassment, intimidation, or bullying” also includes any written, verbal, or physical conduct that substantially interferes with a student's educational benefits, opportunities, or performance, and that is based, all or in part, on the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, ancestry, ethnicity, academic achievement, sexual orientation, disability, gender, gender identity, gender expression, or physical appearance of either the student or a person with whom the student has an actual or perceived association. 

SB1124 also empowers school administrators, teachers and other school staff by defining the important role they play in preventing harassment, intimidation and bullying of students.

Lastly, local education authorities (LEAs), are encouraged to review anti-bullying policies at least once every three years and to share updates with the Commissioner of Education.

By expanding the definition of bullying, the Dignity for All Students Act will provide clear guidance to educators on prohibited forms of bullying. The proposed law will empower educators to define acceptable conduct, promote a safer environment for students at school and promote academic achievement.

We give thanks to bill sponsor Senator Jim Kyle for introducing this legislation. This model legislation provides an important contrast to previous bills proposed in the Tennessee legislature (License to Bully and Don't Say Gay) which sought to marginalize and ostracize certain students. We urge all Tennesseans to contact their lawmakers and urge their support of the Dignity for All Students Act.

- Jonathan Cole

Upper Cumberland Pride brings celebratory end to the 107th Tennessee General Assembly

"Your eyes don't deceive you. That's a pride celebration in Cookeville, TN with lots of people." said  Nashville Committee Chair Chris Sanders who reposted this picture on Facebook on Saturday. At least one observer from Cookeville beleieved that as many as 1000 people attended the event over the course of the day. 

The Upper Cumberland Committee provided an absolutely amazing LGBT Pride celebration in Cookeville, Tennessee on Saturday - a perfect end to a week of victories and positive news for LGBT people, their families and their allies in Tennessee. Upper Cumberland Pride which was sponsored by TEP Foundation also brought an inspiring end to the legislative session. Traveling back and forth on the road to Cookeville from my home in Memphis gave me some time to reflect on Tennessee Equality Project's efforts to advance and protect the rights of LGBT people and their families in state government. I'm pleased to share that with few exceptions we've done well for Tennessee during the last 5 months of the legislative session

Several members of the 107th Tennessee General Assembly promoted legislation with a far-right social agenda that attacked LGBT people and contradicted conservative ideals of smaller government. Much of that legislation focused "below the belt."

Police the Potty Bill Flushed!

The session began with the "Police the Potty" bill (HB2279) which would have criminalized the use of public restrooms and dressing rooms by transgender people. Rep. Richard Floyd threatened to "stomp a mudhole" through any transgender person he found in a restroom. Public pressure compelled the Senate sponsor to withdraw his version of the bill (SB2282). I can’t remember a lawmaker having this much concern about what’s happening in the stall next to him since Idaho Senator Larry Craig’s infamous troubles in a Minneapolis Airport men’s room. Tennessee Equality Project quickly responded against this bill along with Tennessee Transgender Political Coalition and other allies. No other Senator was willing to file a companion bill, so the legislation could not advance. The death of this bill was our first victory of the session but other lawmakers continued to obsess over what happens below the belt until the end of the session.

It's Still Okay to Say GAY! in Tennessee

Two bills with a rather prurient interest in sex education in public schools advanced this session, but only one passed both houses of the legislature. The "No Hand Holding" bill (HB3621/SB3310) which prohibited the teaching of something called "gateway sexual activity" in public education sought to leave Tennessee's youth with no information about how to protect themselves from unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases should they become sexually active. By shifting the emphasis of sex education to "abstinence only," students and parents will now have to go outside public schools for accurate information about vital, life-saving strategies for good health. Tennessee parents deserve more sex education options to choose from in public schools for their children. While the "No Hand Holding" bill became law, other efforts to redefine sex education failed. 

Stacey Campfield's "Don't Say Gay" bill (HB0229/SB0049) passed in the Senate last year and re-appeared on the agenda in the State House this year. In its amended form, the bill would have banned "classroom instruction, course materials or other informational resources that are inconsistent with natural human reproduction" in grades K-8. Tennessee Equality Project fought hard against this bill with a multi-pronged approach that included professional lobbying, mass media, and YouTube videos made by students, parents and educators, visits with lawmakers, attendance at House committee hearings, phone calls, emails, and letters. Our lobbying strategy significantly reduced lawmakers' desire to vote on this bill. But they were also affected, as we all were, by the news of two gay students in Tennessee who completed suicided after enduring anti-gay bullying in school. Many conservative lawmakers began to realize that marginalizing LGBT students with anti-gay and anti-trans legislation would only increase the incidence of bullying in public schools. 

Despite opposition from Governor Bill Haslam, House Speaker Beth Harwell and other House leadership, Rep. Joey Hensley (HB0229's sponsor) continued to push his bill forward in the House. HB0229 advanced with close margins in the House Education Subcommittee and House Education Committee before landing in the House Calendar and Rules Committee. Lawmakers who wanted no part in voting on this legislation never scheduled HB0229 for a floor vote before the House of Representatives adjourned for the year. This victory was hard to win and would not have been possible without the efforts of people like you.

Special Rights for Bullies Defeated!

Many of our supporters will recall the  "License to Bully" bill that appeared early in the session with the full backing of Family Action Council of Tennessee. David Fowler sought to write special protections into state law for students who harassed, intimidated or bullied fellow students based on their "expression of religious, philosophical, or political views." Early in the session, Tennessee Equality Project observed that lawmakers were attempting to place students in double jeopardy with the License to Bully and Don't Say Gay bills. "Students with an anti-gay bias would be free and encouraged to bully LGBTQ students, and teachers and other school staff would be prohibited from speaking about the issue."  The same TEP lobbying strategy used against the Don't Say Gay bill helped keep the License to Bully bill from advancing in the legislature.  Another victory for safe schools and equality in Tennessee!

Gay-Straight Alliances are Here to Stay in Tennessee

Tennessee Equality Project can also declare a victory in protecting the status of Gay-Straight Alliances in public schools throughout the state. In a past legislative session, Sen. Stacey Campfield targeted GSAs by introducing a bill requiring all students to obtain permission to participate in school clubs and activities. The bill would have placed many LGBT or questioning students at risk by forcing them to "come out" to their parents before participating in their school's Gay-Straight Alliance. Schools faced a potential nightmare in trying to manage all the permission slips for students participating in Spanish Club, the Thespian Society, the football team, cheer leading squad. etc. Tennessee Equality Project intervened by persuading the House sponsor to amend the language of the bill (HB2548/SB2488). Rather than require parents to "opt in" their children for school activities and clubs, the bill would give parents the opportunity to "opt out" their children from participating in school activities and clubs. The bill which passed into law essentially maintains the status quo by reinforcing the right of parents to balance their children's extracurricular activities with academic achievement.

Governor Bill Haslam Stands Up to Bullies in His Own Party

We can declare another victory with an education bill vetoed by Governor Bill Haslam. Your calls to the Governor helped give him the extra push he needed. The Governor announced last Wednesday that he would veto the "Anti-All Comers" bill that targeted Vanderbilt University's inclusive non-discrimination policy:

Although I disagree with Vanderbilt’s policy, as someone who strongly believes in limited government, I think it is inappropriate for government to mandate the policies of a private institution.

Supporters of the bill feared that Christian student organizations might elect someone into a leadership position who didn't hold the same beliefs as their group (e.g., LGBT people, Muslims, Jews, atheists, etc.). In reality, Haslam had to veto the amended form of HB3576/SB3597. Last year, he signed HB600/SB632 into law which forbade local governments from enacting laws which extended nondiscrimination provisions to private businesses that exceeded protections defined in state or federal law. The bill overturned a Nashville ordinance protecting LGBT employees of private contractors doing business with local government. Signing HB3576/SB3597 into law would have been a clear argument that Tennessee State Government was not concerned with preventing government interference in private business. Haslam really had no choice but to veto this bill in order to maintain the facade that the his party is the protector of private business' ability to make their own policies.

While Haslam can claim a consistent political philosophy, David Fowler and the Family Action Council of Tennessee cannot. Isn't it interesting that Family Action Council of Tennessee pushed the state legislature to enact HB600/SB632 with a pro-business argument, but pushed HB3576/SB3597 with a pro-religious arguments? With these two bills and the License to Bully bill (HB2548/SB2488), FACT tried to create special rights to discriminate against LGBT for people of faith. We can expect FACT to keep trying this "pro-business" approach in the 108th Tennessee General Assembly.

Knoxville Sends a Clear Message to Stacey Campfield

The prize for most inspiring good news last week goes to the City of Knoxville for enacting an ordinance protecting city employees from discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity, ethnicity or disability (characteristics missing from the previous law on the books). Senator Stacey Campfield can't get a break. His Don't Say Gay bill lost, he can't find a restaurant that will serve him in his home town, and he won't find anyone in Knoxville City Government who agrees with his bigotry toward LGBT people (The Knoxville City Council enacted the nondiscrimination ordinance with a unanimous vote). Time to take a hint Senator.

Tennesseans Value Equality, Diversity and Inclusion

The movement for equality and inclusion of LGBT people and their families is gaining ground in Tennessee. It's hard to realize sometimes when you consider the forces of opposition inside and outside our current government. I am persuaded that Tennesseans in the not-so-distant future will look back on the 107th General Assembly and shake their heads in wonderment. "What were they thinking?" they'll ask.

I am confident in my optimism after attending last Saturday's pride event in Cookeville.  Knowing the organizers of the Upper Cumberland Committee as I do, I fully expected to see a good turnout at Dogwood Park for Upper Cumberland Pride. What I encountered was a groundswell of people hungry for change in the rural Upper Cumberland Region of our state. Equality, diversity and inclusion aren't just big city values; they are Tennessee values that are here to stay.

- Jonathan Cole

Will Governor Haslam stand up to the bullies in his own party?

In this week's issue of the Memphis Flyer, Copy Editor Joe Brown calls Tennessee Governor Bill Haslam to task for whining about the media's coverage of embarassing legislation proposed by his party's government. Haslam recently complained that state and local media favor reporting on the bad bills moving through the Tennessee General Assembly over the "good" legislation supported by his administration. I urge you to read the entire column, but I'll quote some of the best passages.

First of all, the legislature is objectively embarrassing. There is no positive way to spin hate. The party mantra of "job creation" not only rings hollow but plainly stinks when compared to the slate of social laws that are pitched every session. What sort of jobs are you people after? Inquisitors?

A man of your privilege should know that educated people who can be depended upon to solve critical problems in medical research, logistics, and higher management don't respond well to xenophobia and witch-hunt politics. If you want the media to stop reporting this tomfoolery, then stand up for educated, well-mannered people who live here and who are horrified and ashamed by the backward and hateful agenda that apparently equates to success in our General Assembly.

The list of legislation with a conservative social agenda in the 107th Tennessee General Assembly is a long one. TEP has actively opposed a number of these bills that directly affect the lives of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people and their families in Tennessee: the "Special Access to Discriminate Act," the "Police the Potty" bill, the "License to Bully" bill, the Anti-GSA School Clubs bill, and the "Don't Say Gay" bill . . . . the list goes on.

Brown later illustrates in his column how anti-LGBT legislation will harm our state's employers:

Anyone who has worked in management in white-collar industry knows that women and gay people are indispensable. This was once made very real to me when I was starting a business here. The potential partner in the concern was an older man, Southern and brusque. He asked me one day in talks, "What do you think of the gays?" As an open-minded child of the New South, I stalled and stuttered wondering what on earth was coming next, when he added, "If I could hire only gays, that's what I would do. They are the best people I can find." He employed many Tennesseans.

Brown understands that businesses cannot afford for the State of Tennessee to create a hostile environment for women and LGBT people without losing valuable employees. The Tennessee General Assembly and Governor Haslam are providing no incentive for talented LGBT professionals or others who want to live in vibrant, diverse communities to remain in or move into the state. Shouldn't the goal of government be to make our state a more attractive place to live and work for all people?

Brown finally warns Governor Haslam of potential consequences if he fails to keep the legislature in check:

Until you stand up to it or openly acknowledge that your party's agenda has become that of seeking lobbying money and riling up hatred, I will fail to take you or your party seriously. I sure as hell won't become a Democrat, but I will hound superstition and political avarice at every turn, because educated people read this paper and others. Their voice deserves a place in our state. Tennessee is becoming a place where educated entrepreneurs and doctors of international renown would feel unwelcome.

The final outcome of the "Don't Say Gay" bill (HB229/SB049) in the House of Representative is still unknown at this writing. HB229 may represent the Governor's last chance during this legislative session to show some backbone as an executive prepared to lead his party and the State of Tennessee. I hope he is up to the task.

- Jonathan Cole

TEP responds to tragedy in Gordonsville

As TEP leaders, members and supporters grieve the loss of  Phillip Parker in Gordonsville, Tennessee Equality Project is taking steps to respond to the tragedy. Here's what we are doing:

TEP joins the family and friends of
Phillip Parker in grieving a senseless loss. 

1. TEP has contacted Smith County School Superintendent Roger Lewis and District Principals to advocate for more teacher training and revision of school anti-bullying policy.  We are offering TEP Foundation's LGBT diversity and cultural competency training.  We've asked the administration to work with their school board to  expand the list of differentiating characteristics in their anti-bullying policy to include sexual orientation and gender identity. We've shared research with the administration that demonstrates how taking these steps can lead to improving educational and health outcomes for all students. 
2. TEP is engaging the media to make sure the public is aware of the issue and the connection to bad state legislation such as the "License to Bully" bill and the "Don't Say G_y" bill.  
3. TEP Upper Cumberland Committee is holding a Candlelight Vigil in Cookeville on Thursday at 8 PM in solidarity with gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender youth.  
4. TEP is actively fighting negative state legislation through professional lobbying strategy, generating thousands of email contacts with state legislators and the Governor, and putting together events at the Legislature to show that Tennesseans don't want discriminatory bills.  

You too can take positive steps to raise awareness about the importance of providing safe schools in your community. Here are some concrete actions you can take:

1. Write a letter to the editor of your local newspaper outlining the hazards of the "License to Bully" bill and the "Don't Say G_y" bill.
2. Make a Youtube video with your webcam or flipcam that shows your support for LGBTQ students in Tennessee. Share that video with Tennessee lawmakers and members of you local school board.  Post it on Tennessee Equality Project's Facebook Fan Page to reach a wider audience.
3. Mark your calendar for the 8th Annual Advancing Equality Day on the Hill on March 13, 2012 and plan to talk with your State Senator and Representative in Nashville about the need to confront anti-LGBT bullying in Tennessee schools.

License to Bully and Don’t Say Gay bills place TN students in double jeopardy

Over the last week, Tennessee Equality Project has called attention to the dangers of the “License to Bully” bill (SB0760/HB1123) that religious conservatives have championed as a legislative priority.  This legislation creates a loophole in current education policy that gives students permission to intimidate, harass and bully their classmates when expressing “religious, philosophical, or political views.”

The Family Action Council of Tennessee wants to issue
a "License to Bully" to student in Tennessee.

This dangerous proposal would give license to students to fully express intolerant biases based on race, religious belief, sexual orientation and gender identity or expression. Making matters even worse, the “License to Bully” bill would prohibit schools from adding socioeconomic status, academic status, disability, physical appearance, sexual orientation and gender identity or expression to the list of enumerated protections in bullying policy. SB0760/HB1123 would also prohibit the formation of student-led, teacher-advised, and parent-supported Gay Straight Alliances in schools - a strategy with a proven record for reducing anti-LGBT bullying in schools.

Since the Tennessee General Assembly adjourned in the spring of 2011, TEP has highlighted the current inadequacies of school bullying policy. Students and parents at Sequoyah High School in Madisonville, TN tried to organize a Gay Straight Alliance (GSA) to confront the bullying of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or questioning students. School administrators and religious leaders in their community opposed this initiative and even led to charges of assault of a student leader of the proposed GSA by the school’s principal.

In December, Tennesseans learned of the tragic suicide of Jacob Rogers in Ashland City, a student who endured years of anti-gay bullying at Cheatham County Central High School. While many factors contributed to this incident, the absence of sexual orientation and gender identity or expression among the enumerated protections in the school’s bullying policy at the time was a contributing risk factor according to reports from friends and family.

While the push to enable bullying with policy loopholes in Tennessee is troubling enough, Tennessee Equality Project learned over the weekend that the House sponsor of last year’s “Don’t Say Gay” bill has requested that the house version of the bill be put on notice in the House General Subcommittee on Education (a version of the bill passed the Senate last year). As originally proposed, the HB0229/SB0049 states that “ no public elementary or middle school shall provide any instruction or material that discusses sexual orientation other than heterosexuality.”

Imagine this scenario if the “License to Bully” and “Don’t Say Gay” bills become law in Tennessee: A student expressing the teaching of his religion repeatedly tells a classmate perceived to be gay that he is a sodomite and that he faces hell and eternal damnation. Not only would such bullying be allowed by the “License to Bully” loophole, but the target of such attacks could not seek help from teachers forbidden from discussing the subject of gay people by the “Don’t Say Gay” proposal. Standing alone, these bills create an unsafe situation for students in schools. Together, these bills place students in double jeopardy. Students with an anti-gay bias would be free and encouraged to bully LGBTQ students, and teachers and other school staff would be prohibited from speaking about the issue.

The "Don't Say Gay" bill will violate free
speech protection in schools.

In an October 26, 2010 letter to school officials nationwide, the Office of Civil Rights for the U.S. Department of Education reminded that “Title IX also prohibits sexual harassment and gender‐based harassment of all students, regardless of the actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity of the harasser or target.” The “License to Bully” and “Don’t Say Gay” bills may promote the crossing of that line in Tennessee schools.

It's time for Tennesseans to stop using children as pawns in the pursuit of social, religious and political agendas. The time and effort of policymakers would be better focused on ways to ensure that Tennessee students receive an education free from bullying, harassment and intimidation. We need to increase protective factors and decrease risk factors for students in Tennessee schools. Parents, teachers, students and other advocates must contact their lawmakers in state government to voice their opposition to the “License to Bully” and “Don’t Say Gay” bills. The health and welfare of Tennessee children depend on it.

License to Bully Petition addressed to the House and Senate Education Committees:

http://www.change.org/petitions/tell-tn-lawmakers-vote-no-on-the-license-to-bully-bill

Don’t Say Gay Bill Petition to the House Subcommittee on Education:

http://www.change.org/petitions/tell-tennessee-lawmakers-to-vote-no-on-the-dont-say-gay-bill

For more information contact:

Jonathan Cole | Tennessee Equality Project | Jonathan@tnequalityproject.com | 615-669-8057

tnep.org | grand-divisions.blogspot.com | Facebook | Twitter: tnequality

Tennessee Equality Project advances and protects the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people and their families in Tennessee. 

State Representative claims objectivity on LGBT issues

In an earlier post about the "License to Bully" and "Don't Say Gay" bills, I shared disturbing correspondence from one of our State House Representatives, John Ragan (District 33 - Oak Ridge). In his correspondence, Ragan showed little concern about the anti-gay bullying of a teenager in Tennessee who later took his own life.

In May of 2011, Rep. Ragan shared his views with a constituent regarding the advance of the "Don't Say Gay" bill (SB0049/HB0229) in the State Senate at that time. In his response to a constituent he claims his view is objective and then compares lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people and their families with drug addicts, prostitutes, and criminals. Rep. Ragan's bias against LGBT people and their families is even more apparent than in his most recent message to TEP, but you be the judge. 

- Jonathan Cole

Email reply to constituent from Rep. John Ragan (May 25, 2011):

Dear [Name withheld by request],

Thank you for your input on the legislation recently passed in the Senate concerning education for Tennessee students.  It is obvious from the length of your communication that you feel passionately about its topic.  

However, it is good to remember that, sometimes, passion can cloud objectivity.

To begin an objective discussion, please read the bill (re-printed below) as amended:

BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF TENNESSEE: SECTION 1. Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 49-6-1005, is amended by adding the following as new subsection (c) and by relettering the existing subsection (c) accordingly:
(c)
(1) The general assembly recognizes the sensitivity of particular subjects that are best explained and discussed in the home. Human sexuality is a complex subject with societal, scientific, psychological, and historical implications; those implications are best understood by children with sufficient maturity to grasp their complexity.
(2) Notwithstanding any other law to the contrary, any instruction or materials made available or provided at or to a public elementary or middle school shall be limited exclusively to natural human reproduction science. The provisions of this subdivision shall also apply to a group or organization that provides instruction in natural human reproduction science in public elementary or middle schools.

As you can see, the bill is about education.  In particular, it is about elementary and middle school, public education.

Principally, in elementary school, education should be about mastering the most basic of academic disciplines such as reading, writing and mathematics.  Acquiring foundational skills during these crucial years of a child’s education is far more important than someone’s social or political agenda.  For example, numerous studies have shown that children who cannot read adequately by the end of the third grade are negatively impacted the remainder of their academic career, in deed, the rest of their lives.

Likewise, basic science education, at all academic levels, is about the systematic study of the fundamental principles of natural phenomena not social or political schema.  With the possible exceptions of medicine, psychology or sociology, which are not elementary or middle school, in-depth, study areas, science does not address “lifestyle choices.”  Consequently, it is certainly logical to limit the topic as specified in the bill for those grade levels in favor of devoting limited classroom time to more critical, curriculum areas.

I am especially appreciative of your recognition of the principles and values upon which our founders established our nation.  However, again, it is worth noting that passion for a particular issue may cause one to “filter” out relevant information that is contrary to a particular perspective.  For example, consider the following quotes from our founders concerning those principles you previously referenced. 

Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. –  John Adams
Arbitrary power is most easily established on the ruins of liberty abused to licentiousness. – George Washington
It is impossible to rightly govern a nation without God and the Bible. – George Washington
It is better to tolerate that rare instance of a parent’s refusing to let his child be educated, than to shock the common feelings by a forcible transportation and education of the infant against the will of his father.  – Thomas Jefferson

As to your objection concerning the labeling of homosexual behavior as “unnatural,” consider the following argument:

Darwinian selection, i.e., survival of the fittest:  Homosexual individuals are incapable of reproduction if they are exclusively homosexual. Any species or sub-species that does not reproduce tends to become extinct.  The conclusion of this line of reasoning is that the "natural" destiny for exclusively homosexual behavior practitioners over time is extinction.  It is "unnatural" for any species or sub-species to intentionally and knowingly try to become extinct.

If these individuals do not practice exclusively homosexual activity, then, by definition, they can choose not to be homosexual… and the issue is entirely defined as a voluntary, behavioral choice.

Therefore, any sanctions, legal restrictions, or societal disapproval accorded to homosexual behavior practitioners is completely a matter of choice on their part.  If the homosexual behavior practitioner chooses not to engage in that particular behavior, he or she avoids any sanctions, legal restrictions, or societal disapproval associated with it.  

Relative to your question:  “Shouldn't the discussion be more of when and in what way it is appropriate to teach homosexuality instead of how to ban discussion of homosexuality?”  

The bill to which you are objecting does exactly that.  By restricting classroom teaching and materials to scientific examination of normal human reproduction, the bill specifies the way that is appropriate is in the home by the parents, not in a classroom by a public school teacher.  By specifying elementary and middle school, the bill identifies the "when" as some point after that (as far as public schooling is concerned).

Relative to your comment:  "...that there is never a reason to discriminate, silently or loudly, against any group of people.” 

People legally and freely, even ethically, discriminate all of the time…  They discriminate on what city in which to live, what job to take, what friends to choose, what church to join, against people who engage in certain behaviors (crime), etc.  What you are objecting to is not discrimination, per sae, but to illegal discrimination. 

However, it is not illegal discrimination to disapprove of a group of people who engage in abuse of certain drugs.  One can easily discern the negative impacts of such behavior and refuse to allow these individuals certain privileges such as piloting an aircraft, etc. without bothering to examine, even, one, individually.  Similarly, one can legally choose to discriminate against felons or child abusers or allowing them to be school teachers without ever having met one. 

Relative to your comment:  “Should we show our children that America values the quality of life a person lives based upon the right of choice? And that nothing can keep a person from following their dreams - not race, religion, disability or sexuality?”  

None of the things you cited are based upon behavior, or “the right of choice” except religion.  Under the Fourtheenth Amendment and follow-on legislation such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964, it is illegal to discriminate on the basis of race, sex, national origin, religious creed, or color.  However, the definition of sex in these laws is based upon anatomy.

Relative to your paragraph:  “Homosexuality is … a choice… It is a freedom that should not be denied or silenced because some of the population disagree based on religion?”

As I posited in earlier paragraphs, you are absolutely correct that homosexual behavior is a choice.  However, so is prostitution.  Am I to infer from your espoused position that prostitution is also “…a freedom that should not be denied or silenced because some of the population disagree based on religion?”  What about extra marital, consensual sexual relations between a fourteen-year-old (with permission of a parent) and a thirty-year-old?  Is this also a choice?  Is this, also, “…a freedom that should not be denied or silenced…”?

Relative to your comment:  “Homosexuals are …asking that homosexuality not be silently labeled as unnatural, unclean or bad…”  

"Unnatural?"  Recall the extinction argument?  How could exclusively homosexual behavior be anything else but "unnatural?"  Is voluntarily and intentionally exposing yourself and your "partner(s)" to the following list of problems not “unclean and/or bad?”  

A partial list of the statistics documenting the negative impacts of the homosexual behavior under discussion:  U.S. health regulations currently prohibit men who have sex with men (homosexual practitioners - aka "gays") from donating blood.  Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Food and Drug Administration studies categorically confirm that if homosexual practitioners were permitted to give blood, the general population would be placed at risk.

According to the FDA: "[homosexual practitioner or 'gay' men] have an HIV prevalence 60 times higher than the general population, 800 times higher than first-time blood donors and 8,000 times higher than repeat blood donors."

The FDA further warns: "[homosexual practitioner or 'gay' men] also have an increased risk of having other infections that can be transmitted to others by blood transfusion. For example, infection with the Hepatitis B virus is about 5-6 times more common, and Hepatitis C virus infections are about 2 times more common in "homosexual practitioners than in the general population."

A 2007 CDC study found that, although "gay" men comprise only 1-to-2 percent of the population, they account for an epidemic 64 percent of all syphilis cases.

Relative to your comment:  "They are asking that the fact that they are a part of our society be recognized."  

This group is recognized.  However, the counter question is why should anyone be recognized for what is, or, ostensibly, should be, a private behavior that no one else need know about?  The second portion of any question concerning recognition is why should any acknowledgement be accorded out of proportion to their percentage of the population (approximately 2%)?  For example, 24 hours of TV programing times 2% is less than 1 hour.  How many “gay characters” as part of the story line are there in any given day of TV programing?  Before you answer that, consider that there are 2 entire networks on cable that are marketed as “gay” programing for the entire day.  It would appear that homosexual behavior practitioners are more than adequately recognized.

Relative to your comment:  “They are asking that the fact that their choices have an impact upon our society - positive or negative -just the same as a heterosexual persons choices have an impact in either a positive or negative way be recognized.”  

Their impact of their choices on our society was just cited, i.e., 64% of all syphilis cases, etc.  The assessment of that impact could be expanded to include their proportion of the suicides or of the pedophiles or any number of other impacts.  I invite you to look up these “impacts.”  I guarantee it will “water your eyes.” 

Relative to your comment:  “They are asking that children not be barred from being able to talk about their home life or their thoughts simply because they or their parents are gay.”  

Nothing in the bill you wrote about barred any child or children from talking about their home life.  Read the bill!  It is elementary and middle school teachers who are restricted from “teaching about it or distributing material about it.”  

However, I suspect that you seldom find children “bragging” about parents that are drug addicts or incarcerated, even formerly so.  Since both of the previously named conditions are the result of behavioral choices of the parents, how are these any different from the behavioral choice of homosexual conduct?  If children bring up any of these situations before their peers as conditions at home, the children will very likely suffer the same treatment from their peers.  Why is one any worse than any of the others?  If they are all equally bad in terms of impact on the child, then don’t single any of them out to be protected more than another.  

Relative to your comment:  “So will you choose to protect our rights from all groups, foreign or domestic, who dare try to take them away?”  

Madam, I spent 24 years defending the rights of American citizens.  That included more than 7 years overseas and time in 2 combat theaters.  I have carried the lifeless body of a comrade-in-arms on my shoulder on foreign soil, and when I was 25, walked the widow of my best friend and squadron mate to the cemetery.  

Consequently, I have earned the right to speak my mind regardless of what the mavens of political correctness may prefer.  Homosexual behavior has no more right to be taught in our schools than does prostitution, polygamy, pederasty, pedophilia or any number of other licentious activities into which George Washington warned us abused liberty could disintegrate. 

Regards,

John D. Ragan

State Representative

Constituent email message to State House Representatives (May 24, 2011):

Dear representatives of the State of Tennessee,

As you are well aware SB049 recently came to a vote and passed the Senate and is moving on to the House. If you supported this bill I urge you to think about the words that I am writing and reconsider your position over the next year as it truly is a poor reflection of the values that our wonderful government and nation are based upon.

First and foremost, our nation is a nation based upon the right to personal freedoms and the power of choice. We can choose our religion, our words and our beliefs. We can choose who we support, how we support them and how we announce that support. We can choose to agree to have differences or to actively express our common bonds. There are many things we can choose to do, all without the fear of government or the military knocking on our doors to remove us from our homes and our families because we dared to disagree with the policies of our government. 

The absolute conviction that each person has certain inalienable rights such life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are the very things that our troops valiantly fight to protect. And it should be these same things that our representatives fight to uphold. These attributes define the United States of America so much so that if a person is fighting to protect America, they are fighting to protect these rights.

If we become separated from this fact then what are we fighting for? What are we promoting? If we lose even one of these rights, how long before we lose more? 

When I see a debate such as this come up and see people who are on both sides openly stating their thoughts and feelings on the matter I am very proud to be an American. After all, that is freedom of speech at its finest. But when I see that a group of representatives of the law of this land is trying to build a wall around a group of people to prohibit others from noticing them except to notice that their chosen lifestyle is labelled as unnatural I am reminded of the scarlet letter that  Hester Prynne was forced to wear that branded her as unclean because she chose to do something that others considered wrong. When reading this story now do we not cringe at the short-sighted and small-minded views of these people? If SB49 passes the House and becomes a part of our history how much cringing will future generations do when they review this story?

Her child was ridiculed because of her choice from birth. Is this really what we want to happen to our youth? Should they be penalized because there are people in our nation who think that homosexuality is wrong? Or believe that homosexuality will stop being a part of our society if it is not spoken of in our schools? 

Homosexuality has been and will always be a part of our society. Kings, clergy, slaves, businessmen/women, home makers, tax payers, Caucasians, Hispanics, Blacks, Chinese, Japanese - all races from all nations have homosexual members.  

Homosexuality, much like sex, if not discussed at home and in the classroom will be discussed among their peers and we can see how that is working.  The difference is that if homosexuality is labeled unnatural by silent implication then when students discuss their feelings and thoughts with their peers we can not be certain what will happen. Will there be acceptance and understanding or will there be fear and violence?

Fear of word creates confusion and discord. Knowledge of a word enables clarity and understanding. Understanding of a word removes all fears and social stigmas so that tolerance and love are allowed to flow. 

Shouldn't the discussion be more of when and in what way it is appropriate to teach homosexuality instead of how to ban discussion of homosexuality? Teachers do not teach how heterosexuals actually have intercourse so why would people think that they would teach how homosexuals have intercourse? Shouldn't our children be taught that, at least in America, everyone is equal and has equal rights? 

At the age group this bill is geared toward shouldn't we be showing our children by example that there is never a reason to discriminate, silently or loudly, against any group of people? Shouldn't we show them that America values the quality of life a person lives based upon the right of choice? And that nothing can keep a person from following their dreams - not race, religion, disability or sexuality?

I say that if the fact that a person is homosexual influenced the choices they made and that those choices impacted the course of our history then it should be presented as such. Much like Harvey Milk - his personal lifestyle affected his political choices. The same as someone being a minority will affect their political choices. 

Should either one be ignored? I think not. 

Homosexuality is not a disease, it is not contagious, it does not make a person evil. Living a homosexual life style is a choice. Wether or not people are born gay or made a choice to be gay based on their experience with people of the opposite sex, actually living the lifestyle - having a partner or just having same sex relations is a choice. It is a freedom that should not be denied or silenced because some of the population disagree based on religion.

Homosexuals are not asking for teachers or anyone else to encourage children to be gay - they are asking that homosexuality not be silently labeled as unnatural, unclean or bad. They are asking that the fact that they are a part of our society be recognized. They are asking that the fact that their choices have an impact upon our society - positive or negative -just the same as a heterosexual persons choices have an impact in either a positive or negative way be recognized. They are asking that children not be barred from being able to talk about their home life or their thoughts simply because they or their parents are gay.

SB49 HB229, if passed, will impose fines or worse on educators who chose to notice the fact that homosexuality exists and impacts the lives of the students they teach. SB49 HB229 will effectively glue educators mouths shut on an issue that effects many of the students. This legislation will silently label homosexuality as abnormal and lend silent approval to anyone who wishes to treat it as such.

The vote you cast on this piece of legislation is not just a representation of the here and now but of the future also. It will set a precedent for other pieces of legislation that could strip more of our valuable rights. I encourage you to think about this especially as this legislation has grabbed the attention of not just America but other nations as well. The question now becomes, will Tennessee (and America) be viewed as the state (nation) that is known as the "do what I say, not do as I do" nation? Remember, we take up up arms against and go to war for other nations to help their citizens move toward enjoying the rights we enjoy.  So will you choose to protect our rights from all groups, foreign or domestic, who dare try to take them away?  

I hope so.

Sincerely,

Concerned Citizen [Name withheld by request]

Playing politics with no thought for the safety of children in Tennessee

There is a dangerous movement at work in Tennessee: a movement to make public schools less safe for our children.

In a recent email sent to supporters, the Family Action Council of Tennessee declared its support for the "License to Bully" bill (HB1153/SB0750):

We plan to press the legislature to amend our state’s school anti-bullying law to make sure it protects the religious liberty and free speech rights of students who want to express their views on homosexuality.  

Will State government create a "License to Bully" in Tennessee?

The religious liberty and free speech rights of students are already protected by the U.S. Constitution. This legislation would give special protections to students of a particular religious point of view. If made into law, FACT would give students a "license to bully" that allows them to hide their irrational biases behind an extreme religious belief. 

The last year has been difficult for students in Tennessee. Students at Sequoyah High School in Monroe County have faced community and school district intimidation in trying to confront examples of bullying and harrassment of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and questioning students. Students and parents have fought hard to win support for a Gay Straight Alliance - a student organization shown in many academic setting to promote understanding and respect for LGBTQ students in schools.

In December, we learned from family, friends and fellow students that Jacob Rogers experienced years of anti-gay bullying at Cheatham County Central High School in Ashland City prior to ending his life. 

Faced with such news, the Tennessee General Assembly ought to focus on increasing the number of protective factors that promote the safety of students in public schools. The "License to Bully" and "Don't Say Gay" (HB0229/SB0049) bills will only serve to increase risks to students. But some lawmakers don't seem to get it.

During the break in session, Tennessee Equality Project forwarded a link to Tennessee lawmakers of the recent column written by Gail Kerr of the Tennessean which outlined the perils of enacting the "Don't Say Gay" bill in relation to the reports of anti-gay bullying that preceded the suicide of Jacob Rogers in Ashland City. We wanted to make sure that lawmakers in the Tennessee understood the danger of enacting the "Don't Say Gay" bill into law. 

We received rather disturbing responses from two Tennessee Representatives (one of whom sits on the House Education Committee).  

From Rep. Joshua Evans (District 66 - Greenbrier):

If Gail's against it, that's reason enough for me to be for it.

Thanks,
Joshua

A simple "no comment" would have sufficed. From Rep. John Ragan (District 33 - Oak Ridge) who serves in the House Education Committee, we received this:

Dear Mr. Cole,

The article you forwarded by Gail Kerr, “Teen's suicide shows danger of 'don't say gay' bill” (Tennessean Dec. 18, 2011) is so slanted as to qualify as propaganda.   Ms. Kerr spends almost her entire column selectively citing anecdotal, discriminatorily inequitable support for her position.

It is mentioned, in passing, that the school had a policy against bullying.  However, the effectiveness of the policy is then dismissed peremptorily on the basis of a grandmother’s commentary.  That is certainly, an unbiased source, right?  Perhaps, the opinions of faculty or other students on the effectiveness of the policy could have been included.  Did the author not interview any of them?  Alternatively, did she elect to exclude such interviews because they disagreed with her implied point?

Oddly, while willing to include a close relative’s unsubstantiated opinion, she failed to include any facts potentially contradictory to her implied cause.  Could the presence of such facts cause a reasonable person to question her unprofessional implication of the cause of an unfortunate, self-inflicted demise of a young Tennessean?

For example, she could have pointed out that suicide is the third leading cause of death among teens in this country.  Additionally, she could have mentioned that U.S. Teenage boys were four times as likely as teenage girls to die by suicide.  Could the mere mention of such statistics possibly cause a reader to conclude that Ms. Kerr’s analysis was intentionally skewed?

She could have mentioned that it has been well known for a decade that suicide is attempted much more frequently in the homosexual community than in the heterosexual community (Mathy, Cochran, Olsen, & Mays, 2009).  This same source pointed out that, on average, suicide is approximately three times more likely among homosexuals than heterosexuals.  Could the inclusion of these facts in her column have possibly indicated to a reasonable reader that Ms. Kerr’s implications were erroneous?

Finally, there is the truly, most relevant question that Ms. Kerr studiously and meticulously avoided:  Could the high school senior’s suicide have had more to do with his own proclivities and behavior than anything to do with schoolmate bullies or a bill that was discussed, but not acted on, in a legislative committee?

In short, Mr. Cole, the column you forwarded qualifies as nothing but a politically distorted, intentionally poorly sourced, screed.  Anyone who is taken in by this agitprop is intellectually asleep, or has, obviously, never been exposed to, even, the most basic level of education in critical thinking.

It is not only incredibly poor taste, but, truly disgusting, that a columnist in a major, metropolitan newspaper would stoop to the level of using the tragic loss of family’s loved one to try to make a political point.  It is even worse that such a columnist would omit relevant facts and attempt to misrepresent circumstantial context for the sake of a fashionable, political correct perspective.

Good Day,

John D. Ragan
State Representative

As I read each response, I searched for concern or compassion for Jacob or students like him. But I came up short. Had Rep. Ragan really done his research, he would know that Cheatham County School District's bullying policy does not provide enumerated protections that include sexual orientation (or gender identity or expression). Additionally, school settings hostile to LGBQ students contribute to poor outcomes for LGBQ students. A recent study concluded that there is :

. . . an association between an objective measure of the social environment and suicide attempts among lesbian, gay, and bisexual youth. The social environment appears to confer risk for suicide attempts over and above individual-level risk factors. These results have important implications for the development of policies and interventions to reduce sexual orientation–related disparities in suicide attempts.*

It's time for Tennesseans to stop using children as pawns for social, religious and political agendas. We need to be focusing on ways to ensure that Tennessee students receive an education free from bullying, harassment and intimidation. We need to increase protective factors and decrease risk factors for students in Tennessee schools. I ask you to join us in that effort. We need parents, teachers, students and other advocates to step up conversations with their elected representatives in state government. The health and welfare of Tennessee children may depend on it.

- Jonathan Cole

*Hatzenbuehler, M.L. April 18, 2011. "The Social Environment and Suicide Attempts in Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Youth." Pediatrics.