ThinkProgress Logo

LGBT

Election

Islamic Inscriptions On Obama’s Wedding Ring, And Other Things I Learned At A Romney Debate Watch Party

Scene at the Las Vegas debate watch party

LAS VEGAS, Nevada — If I learned anything from watching last night’s presidential debate in a room full of Mitt Romney supporters, it’s that President Obama cannot speak English, wanted Americans in Benghazi to die, hopes America will be taken over by the Islamic world, carries a literal Communist Party card, and should be sent back to Mexico.

These were among the accusations flying at a Romney debate watch party Tuesday night in southeast Las Vegas, where approximately 75 Nevadans crowded into a small room to watch the debate and trade jabs at Obama.

Surprisingly, one gentleman I spoke with before the debate was less than sanguine about Romney’s prospects in the election. He didn’t cite the improving economy, or Obama’s foreign policy successes, but rather “all those people collecting welfare checks have a vested interest.”

Scattered boos were heard when Obama took the stage for the debate, but the murmurs grew to shouts as soon as he began. “He doesn’t speak English!” one woman in the audience yelled when Obama first responded to a question.

Nearly every time Obama spoke thereafter, jeers erupted. People groaned when he made debatable claims, like the cost of Romney’s tax plan. People groaned at undeniable facts, like when Obama mentioned that “Osama bin Laden is dead” and that immigrants “start companies like Intel.” People groaned at inexplicable moments, like when the president said “we need to create jobs here” and after he mentioned that he “was raised by a single mom.” (One onlooker even took issue with Obama making as banal a statement as his mother “worked hard.” “No she didn’t!” the woman responded.)

At times, their anger turned to the audience, who supposedly contained “Democratic plants”, and to the host, CNN’s Candy Crowley. “Boy, she’s really gotten on,” one man said of Crowley in the middle of the debate. “Oh, she’s gotten ugly,” another agreed.

As the debate entered its final third and it became increasingly clear that this debate would not be a repeat of Denver’s, debate watchers became even more brazen in their taunts. “Let’s cook Big Bird!” one man yelled after Obama said that Romney hadn’t “mentioned any specifics except Big Bird.” When the discussion turned to the four Americans who were recently killed in Benghazi, a man nearby said that Obama “wanted them dead.” “They were ordered not to have loaded weapons,” he said, parroting a widely debunked claim.

Finally, when Obama and Romney discussed the Assault Weapons Ban — described by multiple people sitting nearby as “socialism” — one audience member scoffed when the president proclaimed his respect for the 2nd Amendment. “Tomorrow we run to the gun store,” he said, worried that firearms would soon be banned. When Romney brought up the Fast & Furious operation, one woman couldn’t help herself: “send him to Mexico!” she yelled, referring to the president.

It wasn’t until after the debate ended that the room hit peak-conspiracy theory.

“Did you notice the Muslim Islamic marriage inscription on Obama’s wedding ring?” a woman nearby asked me. I said I hadn’t. “He’s got an Islamic wedding ring that he got when he turned 16 from the head of the Islamic church,” she explained. “Michelle doesn’t have that because she’s not Muslim but he is.”

Why does he hide his supposed-faith, I asked. “He wants America to go broke, because he doesn’t want America to succeed. He wants America to be taken over by the Islamic world,” she told me.

The conversation then turned to Obama’s family. “Did you know his grandmother, his mother, Michelle, and him are all card-carrying members of the Communist Party?” she asked. “We’ve got copies of their cards and the numbers,” offering to email a scanned copy when I expressed skepticism.

“You haven’t done much research on Obama,” the woman told me. I asked what websites I could visit to learn more; she recommend WND.com, a birther-haven whose editor-in-chief has blamed natural disasters on the growing acceptance of homosexuality.

Justice

Why Romney Doesn’t Support Equal Pay For Women, In One Picture

Mitt Romney’s campaign just can’t figure out whether he supports equal pay for women or not. When asked last April about Romney’s view on the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which restored equal pay rights the Roberts Court cut back in 2007, Romney’s campaign responded with an awkward six second silence followed by a promise to “get back” with an answer to the question. The campaign never answered whether Romney supports the law, merely stating that he is “not looking to change current law.” That is, of course, until last night, when Romney’s senior adviser Ed Gillespie said that Romney “was opposed to it at the time” and would not have signed the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. And that admission lasted all of a few hours. Gillespie now claims that Romney “never weighed in on it.”

The truth, however, is that we do not have to wonder about what Romney’s view on equal pay for women is. We do not even have to wait for his campaign to reveal Romney’s unspoken view on this issue, because the question can be answered in just one picture. This one:

That’s Justice Samuel Alito, the author of the Ledbetter opinion stripping many women of their right to equal pay for equal work. When asked how he would select his Supreme Court appointments if elected president, Romney named Alito, along with Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Scalia and Thomas, as his models. All four of Romney’s model justices voted against Lilly Ledbetter and against equal pay for women.

Romney’s promise to place more Alitos on the Supreme Court matters much more than his claim that he is not currently interested in enacting anti-woman legislation. Indeed, it would matter even more than if Romney affirmatively promised to sign pro-woman legislation if elected president. Here is why:

Federal law requires many employees who face pay discrimination to meet a very brief deadline—often as short as six months—or else they lose their ability to challenge their employer’s unlawful actions. The flip side of this, however, is that this clock starts anew every time an employee receives a lower paycheck than her or his coworkers due to unlawful discrimination. As a unanimous Supreme Court explained in its 1986 decision in Bazemore v. Friday, “[e]ach week’s paycheck that delivers less to [an African-American] than to a similarly situated white is a wrong actionable” under federal law. Because gender discrimination is banned by the same law that prohibits race discrimination, Bazemore’s holding also benefited women.

Or, at least, it did until Justice Alito got his hands on it. Alito’s majority opinion in Ledbetter established that, if a woman’s employer makes a decision early in her career that undermines her earning power for decades, the woman must challenge that decision almost immediately or her rights are lost—and they are lost even if she did not discover she was a victim of pay discrimination until years later. Notably, in reaching this decision, the 5-4 majority relied heavily on a 1989 decision, Lorance v. AT&T Technologies, even though Lorance was overruled by an Act of Congress in 1991.

So Justice Alito’s Ledbetter opinion did not simply reject a woman’s claim that could enforce her right to equal pay, it thumbed its nose at a unanimous Supreme Court precedent and relied, at least in part, upon a precedent that had been overruled by an Act of Congress. The sort of justice that would do this does not care whether Congress enacted a law protecting equal pay for women, and Romney wants to put even more of them on the Supreme Court.

So Romney can say what he wants to say about equal pay. He can even outright endorse the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act and promise to never, ever sign a law repealing it. Until he takes back his promise to give America more Sam Alitos, anything else he says about equality is empty words.

Maryland To Collect LGBT Data As Part Of Health Reform

What do LGBT people experience when they’re trying to access health insurance or health care? Does it matter? If so, how do we collect information about these experiences?

LGBT data do matter, because the future of health care is built on data. Data create our understandings of how healthy Americans are. They are the points on the map showing us where health gaps exist between different population groups, such as the health disparities affecting LGBT Americans. And they are the building blocks that create the foundation for effective efforts to close these gaps and achieve better health for all.

Maryland is one of the states leading the way in advancing LGBT data collection efforts. The Maryland Health Care Commission, which protects the interests of consumers in Maryland’s health system, is driving an effort to incorporate LGBT consumer input into quality of care and consumer satisfaction evaluations by adding questions about sexual orientation, gender identity, and relationship status (including options for identifying a same-sex partner or spouse) to its evaluation of the state’s patient-centered medical home program.

Maryland’s patient-centered medical home program is a groundbreaking statewide effort to coordinate better care for predominantly lower-income, high-need individuals while lowering costs. Evaluating the experiences of LGBT people in this program — which requires high patient trust in providers and good patient-provider interactions — is an ideal opportunity for the state to develop the tools it needs to extend LGBT-inclusive data collection efforts into other areas of its health system.

One such area will be the state’s oversight of health plans sold through its health insurance exchange. The exchanges, which are new state-based marketplaces where individuals and small businesses will be able to shop for affordable health insurance starting in 2014, have the potential to be new sources of vital data on the health needs and experiences of people across the country.

As CAP explains in a new FAQ on collecting sexual orientation and gender identity data, the exchanges offer a key opportunity to collect information that will help LGBT people benefit from health reform.

In particular, the exchanges must have the capacity to connect a diverse applicant population with appropriate health insurance coverage. To assess how effectively exchange outreach and enrollment programs are connecting with underserved groups of people seeking coverage, exchanges should collect voluntary information from enrollees on a range of demographic factors associated with health disparities, including race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender identity, and primary language.

Exchanges must also certify participating insurance plans and oversee their activities. To monitor how well participating plans are serving different groups of consumers, exchanges should require plans to have the capacity to collect and report the same range of demographic information. To ensure this information is not misused, federal regulations governing the exchanges in every state already prohibit discrimination on any of these bases by exchange employees, contractors, and qualified health plans.

Collecting better and more comprehensive data is a fundamental component of effective health reform. Any efforts to ensure that all Americans have access to insurance and the care they need must include LGBT Americans – and the first step in crafting these initiatives is collecting LGBT data.

Minnesota Children’s Hospital President Defends Same-Sex Parents

Dr. Alan Goldbloom

Minnesota faces a constitutional amendment next month banning same-sex marriage, but the president and CEO of Children’s Hospitals and Clinics of Minnesota, Dr. Alan Goldbloom, explained in an op-ed this week that the amendment would harm children:

During my four decades of involvement in children’s health care, I have seen my share of issues that harm children. However, from this time I can’t cite a single case in which the presence of loving, committed parents, heterosexual or homosexual, has negatively affected a child. In fact, all the evidence points to the opposite. Children are far more likely to thrive when they are in a stable family with loving parents, or in many cases, a loving single parent. [...]

Based on firsthand experience, I can say that the best medicine and technology in the world will never equal the power of making a child feel safe, loved and supported. I’ve seen children and families walk through unthinkable tragedy and amazing triumph — in either case, children are in the best position when they are supported by loving people and when they are empowered to love themselves for exactly who they are.

Goldbloom encourages Minnesotans to vote no on the measure, because “ultimately, this amendment isn’t about law or politics, it’s about people.”

NEWS FLASH

Newlywed Anne Hathaway Supports Marriage Equality Efforts | Anne Hathaway married her longtime partner Adam Shulman in September, and now she is doing her part to help same-sex couples do the same. She announced this week that she will donate proceeds from selling her wedding photos to marriage equality groups like Freedom to Marry. Hathaway has previously spoken out for marriage equality, particularly on behalf of her brother, who is gay. HRC awarded her with its Ally Award in 2008.

Illinois Hate Group Attacks School’s New Transgender-Inclusive Policies

East Aurora School Board

The East Aurora, Illinois School District passed a new policy Monday affirming transgender students, guaranteeing that they can use the bathroom and chosen name that match the gender with which they identify. The Illinois Family Institute (IFI), which has been identified as an anti-LGBT hate group, published an outraged response rife with offensive condemnations of transgender people. Here’s a sampling:

Apparently, all that’s needed for school personnel to be compelled to participate in a fiction is for a student to pretend “consistently” at school that he or she is the opposite sex.

The school board is now imposing non-objective, “progressive” moral, philosophical, and political beliefs—not facts—about gender confusion on the entire school. This feckless school board has made a decision to accommodate, not the needs of gender-confused teens, but their disordered desires and the desires of gender/sexuality anarchists who exploit public education for their perverse ends.

I wonder how many of these board members have thought or read deeply on the issue of gender confusion or Gender Identity Disorder. And I wonder how many of them have read deeply the writing of not just “progressive” scholars but conservative scholars as well.

IFI does not have the most basic understanding of transgender identities. First, it’s important to note that in the new version of the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Orders (DSM-V), set to print in May 2013, trans identities are no longer classified as mental illness under “Gender Identity Disorder.” Instead, they will be replaced with a non-disordered classification of “gender dysphoria.”

Regardless of how gender dysphoria has been classified, the treatment is the same: affirmation. The goal is not to somehow fix gender “confusion” (IFI’s word, not the scientific community’s), but to nurture mental health through a harm reduction model. The APA released new position statements for supporting transgender care in August, which not only include eliminating public and private discrimination — as East Aurora has done in an admirable way — but also declaring that “no burden of proof of such judgment, capacity, or reliability shall be placed upon these individuals greater than that imposed on any other persons.” IFI’s reaction is in direct opposition to the young people who may benefit from the school’s new inclusive policy. By attacking trans and gender-questioning students as “perverse,” the group proves it has no interest in the well-being of children.

IFI concludes that the decision must be repealed and the entire school board replaced so that anti-trans discrimination can be implemented into policy. It’s not hard to see how the group earned that “hate group” label.

NEWS FLASH

STUDY: Minority Gays And Lesbians More Likely To Attend Non-Affirming Churches | Based on new analysis of data collected in 2004-2005, it seems that Latino and Black lesbian, gay, and bisexual people tend to be more religious than their white counterparts, and were also more likely to attend services in non-affirming settings. As a result, they tended to have higher levels of internalized homophobia than Whites. Also of note is that although LGB Americans tend to be less religious than heterosexuals, those in this study reported higher levels of spirituality. It’s unclear how outspoken support of LGBT equality by prominent leaders in Black and Latino religious communities in the years since these data were collected has shifted the dynamics.

NEWS FLASH

Memphis Approves LGBT Nondiscrimination Protections | The Memphis City Council voted 9 to 4 yesterday to approve a measure that would create employment nondiscrimination protections based on sexual orientation and gender identity. One conservative councilman, Reid Hedgepeth, voted in favor after previously opposing the ordinance, attributing his change of heart to negative robo-calls and harassment he received from the opposition, including an email that said, “I hope you and your family burn in hell together.” It’s unclear if the law is enforceable, however, because of a state law passed last year prohibiting municipal nondiscrimination protections from extending beyond what Tennessee already has in place.

The Morning Pride: October 17, 2012

Welcome to The Morning Pride, ThinkProgress LGBT’s daily round-up of the latest in LGBT policy, politics, and some culture too! Here’s what we’re reading this morning, but please let us know what stories you’re following as well. Follow us all day on Twitter at @TPEquality.

- Why Mitt Romney’s binders full of women just don’t stack up.

- House Speaker John Boehner has already maxed out the $1.5 million set aside to defend the Defense of Marriage Act in court.

- Ken Mehlman lays out a conservative case for marriage equality.

- Is there a better way to learn how to be an LGBT ally than spending a year pretending to be gay?

- Marriage Equality USA wants you to meet seven same-sex couples and learn their stories.

- A new infographic from the Dallas Voice details why employment discrimination is an important issue for LGBT Texans.

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up