Reality Check 101

It is difficult to comprehend the depth to which our nation’s leadership has sunk as the United States House of Representatives brazenly attempts to defy the First Amendment to our Constitution and tries to nullify existing federal law.  But that is where we find ourselves as the Left weaponizes the myths and falsehoods of sexual orientation, gender identity (SOGI) ideology.

On May 17th, H.R. 5, the Equality Act (EA), passed in the House and was sent to the Senate for consideration.  It has been a subtle operation, expertly minimized by lackluster coverage in print and broadcast media; especially given the radical changes it champions in intrusive civil rights law, the power of government-enforced ideology, and a forced transformation of cultural norms.

In case this all sounds alarmist, allow the provisions of EA to speak for themselves.

• Throughout the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (CRA) [to include Titles II, III, IV, VII, and IX], all uses of the word “sex” are now redefined and amended to mean “sex (including sexual orientation and gender identity)” [SOGI].  In addition, Section 1101 stipulates that sex also includes “a sex stereotype”.
• “Stadium” becomes “establishment that provides exhibition, recreation, exercise, amusement, public gathering, or public display”.
• Accommodations are opened wide to become “any establishment that provides a good, service, or program”.
• Under employment, Title VII’s use of “enterprise” is amended to “enterprise, if, in a situation in which sex is a bone fide occupation qualification [think women’s crisis centers, for example], individuals are recognized in accordance with their gender identification”.
• Gender Identity is applied throughout the CRA as “gender-related identity, appearance, mannerisms, regardless of the individual’s designated sex at birth”.
• Under Section 1101, the Act actually specifically stipulates “an individual shall not be denied access to…a restroom, a locker room, and a dressing room, that is in accordance with the individual’s gender identification” [remember the SOGI definition].
• Finally, most startling, “the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (42 U.S.C. 2000bb et seq.) shall not provide a claim…or provide[d] a basis for challenging the application or enforcement…” [exactly what RFRA is for].

In efforts to blunt some of the more radical provisions of the Act, Representatives Steube, Johnson, and Gohmert offered compromise amendments.  Tellingly, all three amendments were defeated.  The Left is obviously uninterested in rational responses anymore.  The gloves have come off in this battle.

There are some more important elements that need attention.  For one thing, the Supreme Court is scheduled to consider the applicability of redefining sex as used in the CRA later this year.  It would not be outside the realm of possibility that EA is a pre-emptive effort to get ahead of the Court.

The few findings used to justify the bill expose the error and prejudice that HR5 entails. 

Paragraph (2) claims that discrimination exists because of “the stereotype that marriage should only be between heterosexual couples”.  Think about that.  Generous numbers estimate that about 5% of America’s adult population is in the LGBTQ community.  Of that group, about 12% (another generous number) are in same-sex marriages [“Same-Sex Married Tax Filers After Windsor and Obergefell”, Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center] (TPC).  That means that 99.4% of married couples are living stereotypically, presumably, according to the sponsors of EA, falsely assuming normalcy.

Paragraph (3) makes the claim that discrimination is “commonly experience[d]” in “public accommodations”.  Of course, accommodations has been redefined outside of standing CRA standards to include any kind of health facility, shelter, or adoption/foster care provider – basically any place that has a front door and lets in the public.  The truth is that such experiences are common only in cases when private religiously affiliated services or small businesses have been asked to violate faith principles or their conscience rights by lending their names and reputations to public LGBTQ activities.  The real discrimination is in the opposite direction (“Anti-Discrimination Laws are Wielded against a Shelter for Batter Women”). Think Little Sisters of the Poor and Catholic Services.

Paragraph (7):  “Conversion Therapy is a form of discrimination.”  There is no doubt that in a free society made up of fallen members that abuses will occur.  But this claim paints with a broad brush which assumes that any effort to lead gay-life participants out of the lifestyle is evil.  Not only does this fly in the face of the science of sexual fluidity, but it discriminates against those who have sought help and been victorious.  Just this last May, 200 ex-LGBTQ men and women met in Washington D.C. to publicly proclaim their deliverance in Jesus Christ [“200 ex-LGBT men, women rally to show freedom they’ve found in following Jesus”].

Paragraph (17) “finds” that “LGBTQ people…are economically disadvantaged and at a higher risk of poverty”.  Para (17) is pure fantasy, if not overt propaganda.  According to 2015 figures compiled by the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center (TCP), the adjusted gross income (AGI) for heterosexual married households is about $115,210 while the AGI for same-sex married households is about $139,415 and male-male homes are at $165,960.

This radical effort to nullify Americans’ First Amendment guarantees of speech, assembly, and the practice of religious liberties is built on so-called “findings” in the Act.  The findings, Section 2(a) are, for the most part, based on unsubstantiated claims, ideological interpretations, and, in one case, pure fantasy.  The effort is to manufacture an application of fluid, perceptual, situational SOGI characteristics to the immutable, involuntary, inborn, innocuous, and Constitutionally protected conditions which undergird protected civil rights. If HR5 or any replacement of it is ever allowed to become law, this nation will suffer unbelievable consequences.  And that is far from hype.