"We Won!!!"
Thought you might like to see the text of the email blast sent out this morning by Ruth Jacobs, president of the Citizens for Responsible Government. This message was formatted with gigantic red and blue fonts, which I am not replicating here, this is just the text.
Greetings!
YOU DID IT!!!!
Congratulations! With your help, HB235, the Maryland gender identity bill, was recommitted to the Judicial Proceedings Committee at the second reading. The vote was 27 to 20 in favor of recommitting it.
What does this mean? It means that "gender identity" will NOT be added to the anti-discrimination code in Maryland!! The Maryland General Assembly session ended Monday at midnight, and the "gender identity" bill died in Committee.
THANK YOU SO MUCH for all of your calls, prayers and e-mails!!!!!
They were instrumental in defeating the bill this year.
Democrat Senators (301-970-5000) to thank are:
Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller (Calvert & Prince George's Co.)
thomas.v.mike.miller@senate.state.md.us
John C. Astle (Anne Arundel) john.astle@senate.state.md.us
Joanne Benson (Prince George's) joanne.benson@senate.state.md.us
Ulysses Currie (Prince George's) ulysses.currie@senate.state.md.us
James E. DeGrange (Anne Arundel) james.degrange@senate.state.md.us
Roy Dyson (Calvert, Charles and St. Mary's) roy.dyson@senate.state.md.us
Edward Kasemeyer (Baltimore and Howard Co.) edward.kasemeyer@senate.state.md.us
Katherine Klausmeier (Baltimore Co.) katherine.klausmeier@senate.state.md.us
James Mathias (Somerset, Wicomico and Worcester) james.mathias@senate.state.md.us
Nathaniel McFadden (Baltimore City) nathaniel.mcfadden@senate.state.md.us
Thomas Middleton (Charles) thomas.mclain.middleton@senate.state.md.us
C. Anthony Muse (Prince George's), anthony.muse@senate.state.md.us
Douglas Peters (Prince George's) douglas.peters@senate.state.md.us
James Robey (Howard) james.robey@senate.state.md.us
Norman Stone (Baltimore Co.) norman.stone@senate.state.md.us
Robert Zirkin (Baltimore Co.) bobby.zirkin@senate.state.md.us
Republican Senators (301-970-5000) to thank are:
David Brinkley, (Carroll & Frederick Co.) david.brinkley@senate.state.md.us
Richard Colburn,(Caroline, Dorch., Talbot & Wic.Co.) richard.colburn@senate.state.md.us
George Edwards, (Allegany& Garrett & parts of Wash.)george.edwards@senate.state.md.us
Joseph Getty, (Baltimore County & Carroll Co.) joseph.getty@senate.state.md.us
Barry Glassman, (Harford Co.) barry.glassman@senate.state.md.us
Nancy Jacobs (Cecil & Harford Co.) nancy.jacobs@senate.state.md.us
J. B. Jennings, (Baltimore & Harford Co.) jb.jennings@senate.state.md.us
E. J. Pipkin,(Caroline Cecil Kent & Queen Anne's Co) ej.pipkin@senate.state.md.us
Edward Reilly, (Anne Arundel Co.) edward.reilly@senate.state.md.us
Christopher Shank (Washington Co.) christopher.shank@senate.state.md.us
Bryan Simonaire (Anne Arundel Co.) bryan.simonaire@senate.state.md.us
Sen. Allan Kittleman (Carroll and Howard) was the ONLY Republican in the Senate who voted against sending the bill back to committee.
We know that this bill will probably be back next year. However, if need be, we are committed to working even harder next year, especially as we continue to find more and more information which uncovers the extreme and unexpected consequences of "gender identity" legislation.
For example, at the hearing, Senator Muse asked whether HB 235 would force the Boy Scouts to hire a transgender person. The answer was "YES" -- HB 235 would force Boy Scouts to hire a transgender person. As we have stated before, NO ONE has studied what this would do to the gender identity of these impressionable youth.
Below are two radical quotes and a New York Times article, dated April 10, 2011, about the confusion these activists want to impose on our society. This information is hot off the press:
"...gender is the new frontier: the place to rebel, to create new individuality and uniqueness, to defy old, tired, outdated social norms, and, occasionally drive their parents and sundry other authority figures crazy." Riki Wilchins in Genderqueer p. 13
"...gender is primarily a system of symbols and meanings - and the rules, privileges, and punishments pertaining to their use - for power and sexuality ... it will be about the rights of some of us not to be men or women." Genderqueer, p.14
NY TIMES
A Lawsuit's Unusual Question: Who Is a Man?
By RICHARD PÉREZ-PEÑA
Published: April 10, 2011
What is a man? For El'Jai Devoureau, this is not a rhetorical question.
Mr. Devoureau, who was born physically female, is a man at the Motor Vehicle Commission, at the Social Security office, at home, at job interviews. But what about at the urinal?
In a case with a truly unusual set of factors, Mr. Devoureau filed a discrimination lawsuit on Friday that could break new ground in New Jersey and across the country, turning on the question of who is or is not a man. An employer fired Mr. Devoureau because it said only a man was allowed to do his job: watching men urinate into plastic cups at a drug treatment center.
Mr. Devoureau, 39, says he has identified himself as a man all his life. In 2006, after he began taking male hormones and had sex-change surgery, he adopted the name El'Jai (pronounced like L. J.). A new birth certificate issued by the State of Georgia identifies him as male, as does his New Jersey driver's license, and the Social Security Administration made the change in its records.
"As long as I've been a person, I've lived as a man," he said in an interview. "At age 5, I did everything a boy did: I climbed trees, I played football, I played with trucks. Most of the people in my life, all they know is I'm male."
Last June, Urban Treatment Associates in Camden hired Mr. Devoureau as a part-time urine monitor; his job was to make sure that people recovering from addiction did not substitute someone else's urine for their own during regular drug testing. On his second day, he said, his boss said she had heard he was transgender.
"I said I was male, and she asked if I had any surgeries," he said. "I said that was private and I didn't have to answer, and I was fired."
Calls to Urban Treatment were not returned. But after Mr. Devoureau made a complaint to the state's Division on Civil Rights, the treatment center filed a response in January saying that Mr. Devoureau's dismissal "was not motivated by, nor related in any way to, any discriminatory intention."
Civil rights laws and court decisions allow limited cases of favoring one group over another, like giving preference to women for jobs as nurses in maternity wards. In its January filing, Urban Treatment said that firing Mr. Devoureau was legitimate, "since the sex of the employee engaged in that particular job position is a bona fide occupational qualification" - implying that Mr. Devoureau was not really a man.
Mr. Devoureau's suit, filed in Superior Court in Camden , is not the first job discrimination case brought by a transgender person, though those remain rare. But Michael D. Silverman, executive director of the Transgender Legal Defense and Education Fund , said it was the first employment case in the country to take on the question of a transgender person's sex.
Mr. Silverman's group and the law firm Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher are representing Mr. Devoureau.
New Jersey laws ban job discrimination based on a long list of criteria like age, religion, sex and race; in 2006, the state added "gender identity or expression" to that list. But five years later, Mr. Silverman said, no cases using the gender identity passage have been brought to a verdict, though others might have reached settlements.
New Jerseyis one of 12 states that ban discrimination based on transgender status; New York State does not, but New York City does.
Mr. Devoureau now has another part-time job, as a package handler for a shipping company. Although his $10-an-hour post at the treatment center would hardly strike most people as a dream job, he wants it back. He says he needs the additional income to support himself and his 18-year-old son, and in a weak economy, he will take what work he can find.
Mr. Devoureau guards his privacy, refusing to discuss precisely what changes have been made to his body, or to say what name he was originally given, and he knows that his case could force such things into the open.
"They were judging me for who I am, not for the job I was being asked to do, and that's wrong, and I was hurt," he said. "I'm doing this so everyone knows it's wrong, so it doesn't happen to anyone else."
posted by JimK at 8:11 AM
16 Comments:
It's a beautiful morning, rain and all. Thank you, God for the sun, the rain, the defeat of the bill, for it is Your will that matters.
If the right one don't get ya then the left one will.
It is interesting to note the Ruth didn’t bother to thank the trans and intersex people who fought against the bill. Despite their discomfort with being put in the same group as her, they wrote letters, made phone calls, and argued against the bill as well – obviously for different reasons though. The lack of language for public accommodations like hospitals, emergency rooms, restaurants, shopping centers, etc. was a big problem for many of them, and they’re not too happy that EQMD pushed forward a bill that didn’t include those.
In a year or two, Ruth may rue the day when she temporarily won this battle, because I don’t think the trans community will back down from including public accommodations in future bills. As time goes by, despite vociferous efforts by bona fide hate groups, acceptance of the GLBT community continues to grow, prominent anti-gay leaders self-immolate, and bills like this become slightly easier to pass.
See you next year, Ruth.
Have a nice day,
Cynthia
It is interesting to note the Ruth didn’t bother to thank the trans and intersex people who fought against the bill. Despite their discomfort with being put in the same group as her, they wrote letters, made phone calls, and argued against the bill as well – obviously for different reasons though. The lack of language for public accommodations like hospitals, emergency rooms, restaurants, shopping centers, etc. was a big problem for many of them, and they’re not too happy that EQMD pushed forward a bill that didn’t include those.
In a year or two, Ruth may rue the day when she temporarily won this battle, because I don’t think the trans community will back down from including public accommodations in future bills. As time goes by, despite vociferous efforts by bona fide hate groups, acceptance of the GLBT community continues to grow, prominent anti-gay leaders self-immolate, and bills like this become slightly easier to pass.
See you next year, Ruth.
Have a nice day,
Cynthia
"acceptance of the GLBT community continues to grow"
tolerance of the GLBT has no room for growth
they are already tolerated completely
this tolerance will not, however, lead to encouragement, enablement or special rights and protections
there is no justification for this
"Anonymous"
Espousing such hatred and bigotry is unseemly...especially for on who considers herself/himself a Christian.
You have lost your moral compass. By looks of your list of anti-bill voters, it would seem that you would be much more comfortable moving to and living in the Baltimore area or in one of the backwoods areas of the state.
You are beyond disgust and loathing when you express such hatred.
Perhaps your Christian God can forgive you. Pray vervently for Him to cleanse you of your sin.
"Espousing such hatred and bigotry is unseemly"
can you point out, with a quote, where hatred and bigotry were espoused?
just so everyone can see what you mean by that
WASHINGTON -- One of the biggest progressive groups is launching a new campaign against the president on Tuesday, this time targeting the president’s vaunted grassroots donor base.
One day before President Obama is slated to outline his blueprint for deficit reduction, the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC) put out a preemptive warning shot. In an email to its list, the group asks members to withhold money from the Obama re-election campaign should the president endorse cuts to Medicare and Medicaid.
It is sad that anyone should get such pleasure by depriving people of the right to be treated with fairness and dignity.
I think most people have been treated unfairly before
most don't seek to have the government redress every indignity that life affords
take responsibility for yourself and stop using government as a tool to build your version of utopia
history shows that whenever government tries to solve all of life's unfairnesses, the result is a disaster
the "solution" being worse than the problem
Do you find the laws created by Civil Rights Act to be worse than the discrimination and hardships faced by minorities before they were enacted?
We had a Civil War that cost us too many of our citizens on both sides of the divide before we finally expressly gave blacks equal rights through legislation. I think things were a lot worse before civil rights legislation was enacted, although things are still aren't 100% better yet as old hatreds die hard. But life for America's racial minorities is better today than it was before their civil rights were protected by law.
In this land of the free and the brave, all of us, minorities and majorities alike have equal rights and sometimes legislation is needed to clarify that fact to those who disagree.
"Do you find the laws created by Civil Rights Act to be worse than the discrimination and hardships faced by minorities before they were enacted?"
the circumstances of African Americans at the time bear absolutely no resemblance to that of transgenders today
discrimination laws should only be considered in extreme circumstances and as a last resort- and they shouldn't be permanent
"We had a Civil War that cost us too many of our citizens on both sides of the divide before we finally expressly gave blacks equal rights through legislation."
African Americans in the South before the Civil War did indeed have no rights
transgenders in Maryland in the twenty-first century, by contrast, have all the same rights as everyone else
"I think things were a lot worse before civil rights legislation was enacted, although things are still aren't 100% better yet as old hatreds die hard. But life for America's racial minorities is better today than it was before their civil rights were protected by law."
society was changing at the time
could be that the result would have been the same without the legislation
"although things are still aren't 100% better yet as old hatreds die hard"
the time to end discrimination laws is not when there is no hatred but when racial minorities have sufficient options available to ameliorate any previously insurmountable hardships caused by such hatred
now that we have elected an African American to be president, it's time to rethink the necessity for these laws
"In this land of the free and the brave, all of us, minorities and majorities alike have equal rights"
and all have the same access for the redress of grievances
there is no need for anti-discrimination laws
"and sometimes legislation is needed to clarify that fact to those who disagree."
the only legislation usually needed is the Constitution
"Did Vice President Joe Biden fall asleep while President Barack Obama delivered a speech on his administration's plans for tackling the national debt on Wednesday?
ABC News released video of Biden attending the event held at George Washington University early in the afternoon. In the clip, the vice president appears to doze off while the president is speaking on the financial issue."
"discrimination laws should only be considered in extreme circumstances and as a last resort- and they shouldn't be permanent"
When do you expect us to no longer need "religion" to be included in discrimination laws?
Anon opined:
“most don't seek to have the government redress every indignity that life affords
take responsibility for yourself and stop using government as a tool to build your version of utopia”
Someone should tell this to Ruth, maybe she would consider reducing her use of the MoCo court system in her personal vendetta against Dana Beyer.
Yeah right. Who am I really kidding here?
http://vigilance.teachthefacts.org/2011/04/shower-nuts-complain-about-ethics.html#comments
Cyn
"When do you expect us to no longer need "religion" to be included in discrimination laws?"
how about now?
truth is, religion is a right, guaranteed in the constitution
sexual deviance is not
of course, liberals, for the last half century have, bizarrely, used the fact that religion is a right as a way to try to exclude religion from our public life
so, for example, you regularly hear of schools trying to forbid students from praying or reading the Bible or singing religious songs or writing an essay with a religious viewpoint or announcing religious meetings
but these are not cases of discrimination but, instead, violations of constitutional rights
"Someone should tell this to Ruth, maybe she would consider reducing her use of the MoCo court system in her personal vendetta against Dana Beyer.
Yeah right. Who am I really kidding here?"
actually, the right to vote will remain for everyone and if government officials try to intefere with that right they should be accountable
whether Dana was technically in violation of any ethics rules or not, Dana's mere presence at sites to try to dissuade people from signing a petition against a law she was so involved in pushing through was highly inappropriate
flip the sides and you might be able to understand that
the question still remains that if TTFers are so convinced that MC voters are so supportive of the gay agenda and anyone against that agenda is out of the mainstream, why are they so afraid of demonstrating it at the ballot box?
Race is the only item that should be included in anti-discrimination laws. And even then, it shouldn't be abused, as it is today.
Post a Comment
<< Home