The bipartisan Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) has been reintroduced in both houses of Congress this week, having been introduced in some form in almost every Congress since 1994. The bill, in its 2011 form, would make sexual orientation and gender identity protected classes in employment, such that LGBT Americans could not be discriminated against by employers (except religious organizations). Currently, individuals can legally be fired for being gay in 29 states and for being transgender in 38 states.

Because of the Republican majority in the House, there are no expectations for the bill to pass this session. House sponsor Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) called the reintroduction “an organizing tool.” Lawmakers and advocates should use opportunity to educate the public (and incumbents) about the importance of this legislation.

Tico Almeida, who previously served as ENDA’s lead counsel in the House, today echoed the importance of holding hearings and making sure transgender voices are included:

I vividly remember sitting in the counsel’s chair on the committee dais as Vandy Beth Glenn testified about being fired on the same day she told her employer that she planned to transition from male to female. I watched several members of Congress tear up and sadly shake their heads while listening to her speak.

By contrast, the lone Senate hearing during the same time period intentionally and controversially excluded the testimony of even a single transgender American. But that mistake by Senate staffers is in the past.

Individuals who identify as transgender are particularly vulnerable to employment discrimination. According to a recent study on transgender Americans, they are twice as likely to be unemployed and four times as likely to be living in poverty compared to the general public. Almost half the respondents (47 percent) reported being fired, not hired, or not promoted because they were trans, and 90 percent reported harassment or mistreatment on the job. With only 12 states offering protections (Hawaii will make 13), ENDA is crucial for improving the lives of transgender Americans.

The impact of personal stories cannot be underestimated. A 2007 survey found that 41 percent of Americans know a friend or family member who is gay, even though only about 3.5 percent of the population openly identify as LGB. Such individuals who know someone gay are more than twice as likely to support same-sex marriage as those who do not. A 2008 study confirms the same impact is true for employment discrimination and other matters of LGBT equality.

If the reintroduction of ENDA is used to effectively communicate and relate the challenges and struggle of LGBT Americans, it could ensure the bill finally sees the passage it deserves.

The Delaware state House is expected to pass civil unions legislation today, sending the bill to Gov. Jack Markell (D) for his signature. The bill passed in the Senate last week and advanced further through the House Administration Committee yesterday. Meanwhile, opponents of the bill, led by Delaware Family Policy Council, are bombarding the state with messages about the supposed harmful effects of recognizing same-sex relationships on children and are even promoting harmful “ex-gay” rhetoric on their Facebook page.

Via Good As You’s Jeremy Hooper:

So-called “ex-gay” reparative therapy has long been discredited by professional medical associations. As Equality Delaware’s Lisa Goodman said in a statement to ThinkProgress, “Equality Delaware believes in peer reviewed research. In 2007 a task force of the American Psychological Association reviewed the existing research on so-called ‘reparative therapy’ and found that the results of scientifically valid research refute the statements on [Delaware Family Council President] Nicole Theis’ website. The AMA, the American Psychiatric Association and the American Psychological Association oppose use of ‘reparative’ or ‘conversion’ therapy.”

A recent poll found that more than six out of 10 Delaware voters — 62% — “favor allowing same-sex couples to form civil unions, which is twice the number who oppose such a law (31%).”

As GLSEN (Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network) prepares to hold its 15th annual Day of Silence (DOS) tomorrow — through which hundreds of thousands of young people will raise awareness about anti-LGBT bullying — a broad coalition of religious conservative groups is engaged to make sure the message is countered or left unheard. Many of these groups have been identified by the Southern Poverty Law Center as “hate groups” specifically because of the kinds of messages they are currently promoting.

The largest coalition of DOS opponents are supporting a Day of Silence Walk Out, encouraging parents to pull their kids out of school Friday so they are not exposed to the anti-bullying messages. The Illinois Family Institute is spearheading the effort, but the walk out has also been endorsed by the American Family Association (AFA) and many of its state affiliates. These groups insist that it’s more important to call homosexuality immoral than to end bullying against anyone perceived to be LGBT (PDF):

One oft-repeated mantra is that the goal of DOS is to keep LGBTQ students safe. The problematic rhetoric of “safety,” however, substitutes speciously for the more accurate term of “comfort.” To suggest that in order for those who self-identify as homosexual or “transgender” to be “safe,” no one may disapprove of homosexual conduct is both absurd and dangerous. If this definition of “safety” were to be applied consistently, virtually all statements of disapproval would be prohibited.

Another group responding to the DOS is Focus on the Family, whose “Day of Dialogue” (to be held Monday) encourages young people to counter their peers’ anti-bullying messages with Christian messages about God’s plan for their sex and gender, even suggesting that “sissy, victim, gay, homosexual, sickly, [and] weak” are words that all go together. Focus partners with the Alliance Defense Fund in promoting a faux bullying policy (PDF) designed to erase important enumerated protections for LGBT youth in favor of a policy that schools never “infringe upon the First Amendment rights of students.” (An outlandish “Don’t Say Gay” bill proposed in Tennessee this week would limit visibility of LGBT issues even farther.)

Fringe group PFOX (Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays) is also encouraging distribution of its harmful materials, which have messages that one’s sexual orientation can and should be changed, though all major medical organizations have repudiated such myths. The prominent Family Research Council (FRC) promotes the same exact message (PDF), suggesting not only that LGBT issues should be made invisible, but also reinforcing beliefs that LGBT people are out to “recruit children,” may be pedophiles, and should not be allowed to teach or coach.

Many of these groups and their messages have strong ties to prospective GOP candidates. Newt Gingrich, Mike Huckabee, Tim Pawlenty, and others have appeared on the radio show hosted by AFA’s Director of Issues Analysis Bryan Fischer, who has called for the criminalization of homosexuality. Rick Santorum and Michele Bachmann also are tight with FRC, with Bachmann boasting to Tony Perkins just last week about working “hand-in-hand” with them.

None of these prospective candidates have spoken out against anti-LGBT bullying, in spite of any sympathies they may have extended in response to the very public youth suicides over the past year.

Last night, former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum (R) became the third Republican to announce that he was forming a presidential exploratory committee, a stepping stone towards officially jumping into the 2012 race. “[T]he test for me is whether we can raise the money that’s necessary,” Santorum told Fox News’ Greta Van Susteren last night. “So I’m going to set up a committee…which you can go to at Ricksantorum.com. And we’re going to determine over the next few weeks as to whether the resources are going to be there to do it.”

But in a sign of how messy Santorum’s candidacy may become, Van Susteren used the announcement to question the former Senator about his claim that abortions have undermined the solvency of Social Security, forcing Santorum to walk back his comments:

VAN SUSTEREN: [Y]ou said on a radio station in New Hampshire that the abortion culture is to blame for the Social Security program’s financial problems. Do you want a do-over on that one, or do you stand by that? [...]

SANTORUM: And of course, Social Security is based on, you know, having people working to support those who are in retirement. And one of the problems with Social Security is a demographic problem, which is people are living longer and collecting benefits on Social Security, and those — and we are — our birth rate is lower [...]

VAN SUSTEREN: It is weird, though, isn’t it? I mean, come on. You got to admit this is weird.

Indeed, Santorum has a long history of making “weird” or offensive statements about gay people, African Americans, women, and Muslims. Below is a short preview of his record:

GAYS:

1. “In every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality. That’s not to pick on homosexuality. It’s not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be….If the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything.” [4/2003]

2. “Is anyone saying same-sex couples can’t love each other? I love my children. I love my friends, my brother. Heck, I even love my mother-in-law. Should we call these relationships marriage, too?” [5/22/2008]

3. On repeal of DADT: “I’m worried when many people will stand up and say, ‘well whatever the Generals want.’ I’m not too sure that we haven’t indoctrinated the Officer Corps in this country that they can actually see straight to make the right decisions.” [2/20/2010]

RACE:

4. “I find it almost remarkable for a black man to say ‘now we are going to decide who are people and who are not people.” [1/19/2011]

5. “Marriage is an institution that’s a bridge too far for too many African-American woman and is not desirable among African-American males….I think [Obama] has to realize that flying to New York is…self-indulgent. Go down to the corner bar and have a drink, a shot and a beer.” [6/2/2009]

WOMEN:

6. In far too many families with young children, both parents are working, when, if they really took an honest look at the budget, they might find they don’t both need to….The radical feminists succeeded in undermining the traditional family and convincing women that professional accomplishments are the key to happiness. ['It Takes A Family,' 7/6/2005]

ISLAM:

7. Santorum responded to the Pentagon’s decision rescind its invitation to evangelist Franklin Graham to speak at the upcoming National Day over his statement that Islam is “evil” by saying that Graham’s comment was “a reasonable statement at the time.” [3/23/2010]

8. “I think the Democrats are actually worried [Obama] may go to Indonesia and bow to more Muslims.” [3/23/2010]

9. “The creeping Sharia throughout Europe and here in this country and in Canada. The Islamization of Europe that is already on the way and will visit these shores not too soon is a concern for us and something that we need to identify and we need to talk about and we need to fight with every ounce of our being. [2/28/2009]

10. “Now we have the Attorney General confirming to Osama bin Laden just bide your time and the effeminate and pampered Americans will cower away.” [2/28/2009]