The Houston Equal Rights Ordinance

The topic of queer community has always been a complicated and delicate subject to many conservatives in the state of Texas. In fact, a news article from 2009 discusses how a homosexual teacher in the outskirts of Dallas was ridiculed for assigning an essay to his students about the acceptance of all people, including Homosexuals (PR Newswire Association LLC). Ridiculous accusations started surfacing about the teacher such as him sodomizing one of his students, or he was having an affair with a well-known lawyer. Ivan brings in a quote from the woman she interviews about gay bashing in Midland Texas. The woman states that “there’s not a gay in Midland who would come out of the closet for fear people would think they’re a Democrat” (Ivan 784). People in Texas don’t want others to wrongfully stereotype them into something they are

However, opponents argue that the law’s intent was “never about the best interests of Texans or of children, but about forwarding a political agenda to codify the permission to discriminate against LGBTQ Texans into state law,” as GLAAD’s president Sarah Kate Ellis put it in a statement.

Lawrence v. Texas: The Justification for the Decision and its Significance for the LGBTQ+ Community

The history of LGBTQIA+ rights in the United States is long and complicated. The identities within the LGBTQIA+ community that are accepted have shifted over the years as the majority of the population comes to understand some identities to be commonplace and struggles to understand others. However, the gaining of rights and acceptance by the LGBTQIA+ community has nearly always been tied to legal recognition. Lawrence v. Texas questions whether or not a Texas statute that bans homosexual sodomy is constitutional. Although LGBTQIA+ rights issues are controversial, the statute that convicted John Lawrence and Tyson Garner for having private, consensual gay sex as well as the means of conviction are clearly unconstitutional on several grounds,

Houston falls under two categories of Dr. Elzar’s three political subcultures, which are individualistic and traditionalistic. Being that Houston is a city with many businesses, one can conclude that the political subculture in the city is individualistic. For instance, when Annise Parker, who is openly gay in the conservative state of Texas, was running for mayor of Houston, she spoke about her experience with the city’s finances and how that experience will allow her to help the city in the financial crisis it was going through (). Annise Parker won the election regardless of her sexuality. The assumption that one can make is that the fact that Annise Parker has good financial experience, motivated business owners, and entrepreneurs to vote for her on behalf of their own self-interest, which is to have a successful business.

HERO provides protection for everyone against discrimination in the City of Houston. This includes race, age, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, military status, familial status, marital status, religion, and pregnancy. This ordinance “prohibits discrimination on the basis of protected characteristics in city employment, city services, city contracting practices, housing, public accommodations, and private employment...” (City of Houston).The ordinance would apply “to businesses that serve the public, private employers, housing, city employment and city contracting. Religious institutions would be exempt” (Houston Hustle). This ordinance was introduced by Mayor Annise Parker. Mayor Annise Parker signed this ordinance into law in May of 2014 (City of Houston). The signing of HERO caused a huge controversy against those who were for it versus those who opposed the ordinance. The opposing side did not like what the mayor was really initiating in her ordinance. My pastor talked about this Equal Rights Ordinance during a church sermon on Sunday morning. It was said that most people opposed this ordinance, yet the mayor decided to press on anyways due to her own personal beliefs. The mayor’s personal lifestyle and beliefs conflicted too much with her job of doing what is best for the City of Houston. My pastor also revealed this ordinance yields specifically to gender orientation and identity, these are the only

Historically, the conservative values conveyed by many Texans have shown disapproval for change and differences. Amongst the list of social and political views conservatives have disapproved of in the past would be civil rights, women’s rights, and gay rights. All three are issues of which are still under conflict and disapproval. With this said, gay rights are the most recent issue that has shaken the traditionalist views upheld in Texas. To state the opposition of gay rights, conservatives in general do not support the relationships shared between homosexuals. They deem it as unnatural or immoral and therefore, it is seen as wrong in their eyes. In addition to the conservative claims as homosexuality being unnatural, the traditional culture does not take too kindly to change, which is exactly what began as soon as the Court’s ruling was made. In conclusion, it is the traditional political culture such as the conservative ideology shared by many and the opposition to change that has affected Texas in

The Equal Protection Clause derives from the Fourteenth Amendment, which specifies “no state shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws…” As a part of the Reconstruction Amendments, the aforementioned clause was meant to ensure racial equality in the Reconstruction Period and has been applied successfully against the affirmative action. Introduced in United States v. Carolene Products Co., the strict scrutiny has been applied to the cases, in which a fundamental constitutional rights have been infringed or a government action applies to a suspect classification (i.e. race, religion, national background). Specifically, in regards to Bakke v. Regents of University of California, the Supreme Court (“the Court”) concluded that, considering that the University of California, Davis received several Caucasian applicants for its special admission program in 1973 and 1974 and that none of the applicants received the admission to the program since the start, the program unfairly administered in favor of minority races and, therefore, violated the rights of the white applicants under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Furthermore, from Hopwood v. State of Texas, the Fifth Circuit Court ruled under strict scrutiny that, the affirmative action imposed by the University of Texas School of Law (“the law school”) violates the Fourteenth Amendment since neither the law school nor the University of Texas system has proved a proof of

On July 1, 2013, Texas Senator Wendy Davis made a speech at Texas’s State Capitol. She had an audience of about 5,000 people, as she spoke about Women’s Rights and Texan power. In “Stand with Texas Women”, Wendy Davis argues that Texas is all about fairness, so women deserve equal opportunity. Specifically, Davis states that Texas has pushed to be fair, but politicians have been selfish in their careers. Her point is that creating equal opportunity for women will help not only Texan families, but Texas as a whole. She also points out that Texas needs politicians who want what is best for the state and the people. Davis uses simple, but passionate language in her speech. She focuses on the pride she has of Texas,

Mississippi lawmakers on Tuesday called for the repeal of a controversial new law that allows businesses to refuse service to gay people based on religious objection. Ellen DeGeneres called it "the definition of discrimination," while singer Bryan Adams canceled his upcoming show in the state to show his opposition to the law.” (Reilly, 2016). Misguided people are being driven by the nose by tricky "Christian" pioneers and legislators who have a personal stake in the matter of ensuring that their assemblies and their constituents remain profoundly and honestly perplexed of the myth of the "gay person plan." Know this: If the LGBTQ people group has any sort of motivation of all, it is achieving the same essential human rights that other people appreciates. That is all. That is the plan. Try not to fall for some other clarification of it. Gay people are not after your children. They are not attempting to change over you or change you. They are not worried with being comprehended as much as they are worried with being dealt with like some other person has the privilege to be dealt with. On the off chance that you trust that any gathering

Ellen DeGeneres states, “I'm not an activist; I don't look for controversy. I'm not a political person, but I'm a person with compassion. I care passionately about equal rights. I care about human rights. I care about animal rights.”(“Ellen DeGeneres Quotes.”). Ellen is a popular television host that isn’t afraid to express her opinion to the public. She knows that people do not need to have a high education in equality to understand the every person deserves to be seen and treated equally. People can still take a stand and make a difference simply by supporting a cause. Imagine being discriminated against for something one cannot control, such as their sex. Many people had faced this, until someone decided to take charge. The Equal rights Amendment was supposed to protect oneself from this type of discrimination. A lot has had to happen just to get this amendment up and running to be introduced. The equal rights Amendment has a long history and can be linked to many famous writings, which makes it easily relatable to almost everyone.

The equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution was at first created to protect against racial discrimination, but the Supreme Court later expanded the clause to also providing equal treatment amongst different races. The clause says, “No state shall…deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws” (U.S. Constitution. Art./Amend. XIV, Sec. 1.) A person could not be discriminated upon solely because of his or her race and if the law treated a group of people differently, then a valid reason for the discrepancy of different treatment must exist. Racial minorities, but mainly women, have historically been subjected and made vulnerable to harsh restrictions on activities such as voting, attending college, and working as lawyers. These restrictions, based on stereotypes overlooked the actual capability and potential of each individual woman. For many cases dealing with discrimination of women, the Court looked to another important element of equal protection, which stated that unfair treatment couldn’t be based on immutable distinctions, such as race and gender, because those fixed distinctions are uncontrollable and unrelated to ability. In the case of Frontiero v. Richardson, 411 U.S. 677 (1973), the Supreme Court was just one vote short of adopting gender as a suspect classification. In United States v. Virginia, 518 U.S. 515 (1996), women rights supporters were very pleased with the Supreme Court’s ruling and remain

Gender equality is a pressing issue in the United States. The definition of gender, and the rights that accompany them, is constantly being updated and adjusted. The LBGT community is fighting for equality after being repressed for many years. Because of this sudden movement, social issues are sparking outrage and debate on whether a certain law or right for LBGT people is to be initiated. In many instances, these issues dominate the media, and cause for chaos on both sides of the spectrum. The bathroom controversy exemplifies this. The LBGT community argues that anyone should be able to use whichever bathroom that matches with their identified gender. Members of the LBGT community should not be able to use whatever bathroom they please.

There are civil rights and civil liberties but they do not mean the same, a civil right is those rights protecting us from discrimination (14th Amendment in US Constitution) & Section 3 & 3a in Texas Constitution whereas a civil liberty is those rights protecting us from government (Bill of Rights in US Constitution) & most of Texas Bill of Rights. One of the Texas Constitutions states that in Sec. 3a. EQUALITY UNDER THE LAW. Equality under the law shall not be denied or abridged because of sex, race, color, creed, or national origin. This amendment is self-operative (Added Nov. 7, 1972.). This is a civil right because sex, race, color, creed, or national origin can all be discriminated, for example not long ago innocent men were shot based

The Equal rights Amendment was proposed to set equality for every citizen no matter the sex. The amendment has three sections. The first one states “equality of rights under the law should not be denied by the U.S on the account of one's sex.” Section two says that “congress has the power to enforce this law.” Last but not least, section three says the amendment will take effect two years after ratification.