Connect with us

BIGOTRY

New Top Candidate to Be Trump’s Chief of Staff is Anti-LGBT Extremist Who Pushed for Transgender Military Ban

Published

on

The man credited as a major force behind President Donald Trump‘s out-of-the blue, July 26, 2017 tweetstorm announcing he was banning all transgender people from the U.S. Armed Forces is now the leading candidate to replace outgoing White House Chief of Staff John Kelly.

That man is House Freedom Caucus Chairman Mark Meadows, a Tea Party Republican from North Carolina. The Freedom Caucus is the most far-right group among House Republicans.

“The President has a long list of qualified candidates and I know he’ll make the best selection for his administration and for the country,” U.S. Rep. Meadows told Politico on Monday, adding that being Trump’s Chief of Staff “would be an incredible honor.”

(There are, in fact, few viable candidates interested in becoming Chief of Staff.)

GLAAD describes Meadows as an “Anti-LGBTQ congressman who ran for office on his support for North Carolina’s marriage amendment, and who is credited as a key force in pressuring the Trump administration to enact its transgender military ban.”

Meadows is also among the 38 House Republicans who signed a letter last month urging President Trump to remove protections for LGBTQ workers from his new USMCA trade pact.

A trade pact “is no place for the adoption of social policy” on sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI),” the letter says.

As head of the Freedom Caucus, Meadows urged President Trump, even before he was sworn into office, to roll back or rescind a variety of President Barack Obama’s LGBT protections, including guidelines to help protect the rights of transgender students. The administration, via Secretary Betsy DeVos and then-Attorney General Jeff Session, complied.

The Freedom Caucus, under Meadows, also called for President Trump “to repeal the Department of Health and Human Services regulation that implemented the nondiscrimination provision of the Affordable Care Act,” as The Advocate reported at the time.

Meadows opposes same-sex marriage and supports protecting those who also oppose marriage equality, seeing it as a free-speech issue.

In 2013 Rep. Meadows claimed if the Supreme Court were to rule same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry it would create “a constitutional crisis.”

Finally, watch as Bloomberg reporter Kevin Cirilli, interviewing Meadows about the transgender ban minutes after Trump announced it, gets the last word in by calling the 15,000 active-duty transgender service members “heroes”:

 

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

BIGOTRY

Missouri Lawmaker Wants to Make It Easy for Parents to Sue Their Local School if Kids Are ‘Subjected To’ Anything LGBTQ

Published

on

A Missouri state lawmaker is pushing a bill that would make it easy for parents to sue schools if their children are “subjected to” anything LGBTQ.

Rep. Chuck Basye wants parents to have total control over what their children see in school, even if it’s not part of the curriculum. The bill is in response to a poster a GSA – gay-straight alliance club – put up without getting approval from all the students’ parents.

Basye says the purpose of his legislation “is to give this a little bit of teeth so parents can take action if they feel that they’re not being listened to or their child is subjected to something they don’t agree with,” MissouriNet reports.

“I think the parents have a right to know what is in front of their children in public schools,” Basye told MissouriNet.. “That’s the intent of the bill, nothing more, nothing less.”

The ACLU has weighed in, and says Basye’s bill, HB 1565, goes too far.

“This is not only way too far reaching, but absolutely censorship of essentially livelihoods and existence at all,” Jay-Marie Hill, with the American Civil Liberties Union of Missouri, told MissouriNet. Hill says if the bill becomes law teachers could be responsible, and even fired, if they have a guest speaker who says something parents might disagree with.

The bill is clearly framed to focus on “instruction on human sexuality and sexually transmitted diseases.”

And while it says information presented to students must be “medically and factually accurate,” it also mandates that “abstinence from sexual activity as the preferred choice of behavior in relation to all sexual activity for unmarried pupils.”

Abstinence only education has been proven to not work.

Some responses to Rep. Basye’s bill from social media:

UPDATE: 4:56 PM –
Rep. Basye’s Democratic challenger, Adrian Plank, calls Basye’s bill “one of the most obviously discriminatory pieces of legislation that I’ve ever seen in Missouri.

What I find inappropriate is a legislator that spends his time trying to pass bills that uses the power of the government to treat those most vulnerable like they are lesser human beings, or even worse, that they don’t exist. That they shouldn’t be considered worthy of attention. People have real problems that need solved, and this is how he chooses to spend his time.

 Image via Facebook

Continue Reading

BIGOTRY

Texas GOP Official Compares LGBTQ Republicans to ‘Murderers and Burglars’ in Unhinged Facebook Rant

Published

on

Early on Wednesday morning, a Texas Republican Party official took to Facebook to attack the “Log Cabin Republicans,” the GOP’s LGBTQ advocacy arm.

The diatribe, first flagged on Twitter by author and nonprofit director Jessica Shortall, was in reply to a post by former LCR Houston official Marco Antonio Roberts, who was responding to a threat from a member of the State Republican Executive Committee to deny the LCR credentials at the Texas GOP State Convention.

“As a group [LCR] is no longer about an individual participating, but it is an express advocacy group, and the LCR’s unique identity is homosexuality which is in conflict with the principles & platform of the Republican Party,” wrote Sue Evenwel. “The party would also not allow express advocacy groups for murders, burglars, adulterers or fornicators, yet there may be some among us dealing with those issues who are also Republicans working and voting for our candidates.”

Evenwel, the chairwoman of the Titus County Republican Party, is also a member of the State Republican Executive Committee, which is currently grappling with the future of the LCR’s status within the state party.

She is best known for being a lead plaintiff in the landmark Supreme Court case Evenwel v. Abbott, in which she argued that federal courts should force states to apportion legislative districts using the number of eligible voters, rather than the total population. Such a change would have invalidated nearly all state legislative lines in the country, and forced lawmakers to draw up districts that are overwhelmingly more rural, white, and conservative.

In 2016, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously against Evenwel, holding that states are not required to exclude nonvoters from redistricting — but they also did not explicitly prohibit it, potentially leaving the door open for conservative state legislatures to do so after this year’s census.

Image via Facebook

Continue Reading

BIGOTRY

Student With Two Moms Banned From Writing Paper ‘Taking a Stand’ in Favor of Same-Sex Marriage

Published

on

A family in Michigan is speaking out after their daughter, a high school junior, was banned from writing a paper in favor of same-sex marriage for an honors English class where the assignment was to “take a stand” on an issue of great cultural importance.

The teacher, whose name the school district will not release, first said the topic was too controversial and might offend some students. She then confessed she did not want to read or hear about marriage equality, according to MLive and The Advocate.

17-year-old Destiny McDermitt said she wanted to write her paper, which would also be read as a speech, on same-sex marriage because her mothers are married. Angela McDermitt-Jackson and Chris Jackson married in 2015 just months before the U.S. Supreme Court found same-sex couples have the same rights and responsibilities to marriage as their different-sex peers.

The assignment sounds bold, but the teacher made sure it could not be.

“For every generation in every country, every day, there are issues upon which an individual can take a stand,” the assignment description reportedly reads. “This assignment asks you to think about what concerns you in your community, your state, your country, or the world.”

Students were not allowed to choose “anything that is awkward or inappropriate for a school audience.” The topic of abortion was banned, but the school district’s guidance says controversial subjects can have a legitimate place in learning.

Several students wrote letters to school administrators to support their classmate, destiny, and to complain that the teacher said she did not want to read or grade a paper on same-sex marriage.

Destiny has opted to move to a different class with a different teacher.

Watch:

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2019 AlterNet Media.