National
Paul latest to surge as Iowa caucuses approach
Romney, Gingrich remain at top of national polls
The GOP presidential race continues to twist and turn two weeks before the Iowa caucuses as libertarian Rep. Ron Paul surges and hopes to win the first in the series of contests that will determine who will take on President Obama in 2012.
Paul, who’s represented Texas in the U.S. House since 1997, has risen to the top of the pack in the most recent polls asking Iowa Republicans which candidate they prefer as the caucuses approach on Jan. 3.
According to an InsiderAdvantage/Majority Opinion Research poll published Sunday, Paul has support from 23.9 percent among Iowa Republicans who say they’ll vote in the caucuses. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney comes in second with support from 18.2 percent, followed by Texas Gov. Rick Perry at 15.5 percent and former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich at 12.9 percent.
A victory for Paul in Iowa could complicate matters for other Republican presidential candidates who are enjoying support nationwide. According to a national CNN/ORC International poll published on Monday, Romney and Gingrich are tied for the lead at 28 percent, while Paul comes in third at 14 percent.
Paul’s record is distinctive among other Republicans in the race as being more pro-LGBT than others.
The lawmaker voted on two separate occasions in 2004 and 2006 against a Federal Marriage Amendment that would have banned same-sex marriage throughout the country. Paul was among the five Republicans who voted for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal on the House floor in May even before the Pentagon released its report in November 2010.
Paul has also been unique among his fellow GOP candidates on the issue of same-sex marriage by saying the federal government should get out of the business of regulating marriage — in keeping with his libertarian views. He is one of a few who hasn’t signed the National Organization for Marriage’s pledge to oppose same-sex marriage as president — much to the consternation of the organization.
According to the Boston Globe, Paul articulated his thoughts on marriage on Wednesday while speaking to students at Straight A Academy, a small non-traditional private school in Manchester, N.H., in response to a question from the audience.
“Why should the government be telling you what marriage is all about?” Paul was quoted as saying. “You might have one definition. I have another definition.”
Paul reportedly said he personally believes marriage is between one man and one woman, but said regulations involving marriage should be up to the states. He then advocated creating a secular agreement for relationship recognition in which, “you can go to court to resolve the differences and the arguments over it.” A Paul spokesperson later clarified no federal benefits would be conferred as a result of these contracts such as tax benefits.
But Paul has expressed support for the Defense of Marriage Act and has been been critical of the Obama administration’s decision to no longer defend the anti-gay law in court. Paul issued a statement condemning the announcement when it was made in February.
“Today’s announcement that the Obama administration will abandon its obligation to enforce DOMA is truly disappointing and shows a profound lack of respect for the Constitution and the Rule of Law,” Paul said in a statement at the time.
The lawmaker has also voted against hate crimes protections legislation. Paul didn’t vote on a version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act when it came to the House floor in 2007.
R. Clarke Cooper, executive director of the Log Cabin Republicans, said Paul’s positions on LGBT issues are “founded on his perspective of states’ rights.”
“For him, it’s more of the principle that people should be able to live their lives as they choose without the government impeding on that,” Cooper said.
But Jerame Davis, interim executive director of the National Stonewall Democrats, said Paul’s “constant refrain of states rights” is what is most troubling about his candidacy.
“States don’t have rights in and of themselves — they are just another division of government that derives their power from the people,” Davis said. “The states rights argument has been used to perpetrate some of the worst aspects of American history. It scares the hell out of me to hear someone running for president use this refrain, especially when you consider Ron Paul’s opposition to the Civil Rights Act was based, at least partially, on this notion.”
Anti-gay Iowa leader endorses Santorum
In related news, a leading anti-gay activist in Iowa threw his support behind Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum in an endorsement on Tuesday — a decision that may give the trailing candidate a boost in the polls.
Bob Vander Plaats, CEO of FAMiLY LEADER, said during a news conference that Santorum could be “the Huckabee in this race,” referring to the former Arkansas governor and social conservative favorite Mike Huckabee who won the Iowa caucuses in 2008.
“I saw him as a champion for the family in the U.S. House, I saw him as a champion for the family in the U.S. Senate. I saw him as a champion for the family on the campaign trail,” Vander Plaats said. “So today, I, as an individual, am going to endorse Rick Santorum. I’m going to mobilize whatever resources that I have at my disposal to advocate for him.”
Vander Plaats, who ran unsuccessfully for Iowa governor in 2010, has been working against marriage rights for same-sex couples in Iowa since the State Supreme Court ruled in favor of such rights in 2009. The activist led the successful effort to unseat three justices who ruled in favor of marriage equality during a 2010 referendum.
Chuck Hurley, who heads the FAMiLY LEADER’s Iowa Family Policy Center, also endorsed Santorum. These endorsements are personal and not on behalf of FAMiLY LEADER, they both have said. During the news conference, Vander Plaats said the board “reached unanimity” that the organization wouldn’t endorse any particular candidate during the Iowa caucuses.
Troy Price, executive director of the pro-LGBT group One Iowa, said Vander Plaats’ endorsement of Santorum “comes as no surprise” and demonstrates he’s “out of touch” with what voters want.
“Both Santorum and Vander Plaats have built their careers attacking loving and committed gay and lesbian couples, and the fact is that Vander Plaats caved to the extreme social conservative agenda,” Price said. “With poll numbers lagging, it is clear Rick Santorum does not have a chance against President Obama in November, and Vander Plaats has endorsed a losing candidate.”
According to the Des Moines Register, Santorum was eating a cinnamon roll in Pella, Iowa after a campaign stop when he found out about Vander Plaats’ and Hurley’s endorsement.
“There’s a lot of good people out here running, and I’m sure it was a tough decision. I think it shows that we’re the candidate right now that has the momentum, that has the message that’s resonating to the people of Iowa,” Santorum said.
Santorum has had a long history of anti-gay views and positions, even during the course of his time representing Pennsylvania in the Senate from 1995 to 2006. Santorum was one of the architects of the Federal Marriage Amendment. In an interview with the Associated Press, Santorum made notorious comments equating homosexuality to bestiality and pedophilia.
“In every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality,” Santorum was quoted as saying. “That’s not to pick on homosexuality. It’s not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be. It is one thing. And when you destroy that you have a dramatic impact on the quality.”
Following the remarks, Dan Savage, a Seattle-based gay activist, launched an effort to coin the word “santorum” as a sexual neologism. That definition remains the No. 1 result of “santorum” when the word in entered into Google.
Over the course of his campaign, Santorum has been emphasizing anti-gay views and his opposition to same-sex marriage perhaps more than any other presidential candidate. In addition to pledging to reinstate “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” Santorum said “our country will fail” as a result of same-sex marriage. He also raised eyebrows in August when he said same-sex marriage is like “saying this glass of water is a glass of beer.”
Santorum is also among the candidates who has signed a pledge from the National Organization for Marriage committing himself to, among other things, backing the Federal Marriage Amendment and defending the Defense of Marriage Act in court.
Despite Vander Plaat’s endorsement, Santorum trails the other candidates. The CNN/ORC International poll revealed Santorum has support from just 4 percent of Republicans nationwide. The candidate is one of only a few candidates in the Republican field who hasn’t experienced a surge sometime over the course of his campaign.
The polling results are similar in Iowa, despite the strong presence of evangelical voters in the state. The InsiderAdvantage/Majority Opinion Research found that Santorum has support from just 3.8 percent of registered Republicans who are set to vote in the caucuses.
Tennessee
Tenn. lawmakers pass transgender “watch list” bill
State Senate to consider measure on Wednesday
The Tennessee House of Representatives passed a bill last week to create a transgender “watch list” that also pushes detransition medical treatment. The state Senate will consider it on Wednesday.
House Bill 754/State Bill 676 has been deemed “ugly” by LGBTQ advocates and criticized by healthcare information litigators as a major privacy concern.
The bill would require “gender clinics accepting funds from this state to perform gender transition procedures to also perform detransition procedures; requires insurance entities providing coverage of gender transition procedures to also cover detransition procedures; requires certain gender clinics and insurance entities to report information regarding detransition procedures to the department of health.”
It would require that any gender-affirming care-providing clinics share the date, age, and sex of patients; any drugs prescribed (dosage, frequency, duration, and method administered); the state and county; the name, contact information, and medical specialty of the healthcare professional who prescribed the treatment; and any past medical history related to “neurological, behavioral, or mental health conditions.” It would also mandate additional information if surgical intervention is prescribed, including details on which healthcare professional made a referral and when.
HB 0754 would also require the state to produce a “comprehensive annual statistical report,” with all collected data shared with the heads of the legislature and the legislative librarian, and eventually published online for public access.
The bill also reframes detransitioning as a major focus of gender-affirming healthcare — despite studies showing that the number of trans people who detransition is statistically quite low, around 13 percent, and is often the result of external pressures (such as discrimination or family) rather than an issue with their gender identity.
This legislation stands in sharp contrast to federal protections restricting what healthcare information can be shared. In 1996, Congress passed the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, or HIPAA, requiring protections for all “individually identifiable health information,” including medical records, conversations, billing information, and other patient data.
Margaret Riley, professor of law, public health sciences, and public policy at the University of Virginia, has written about similar efforts at the federal level, noting the Trump-Vance administration’s push to subpoena multiple hospitals’ records of gender-affirming care for trans patients despite no claims — or proof — that a crime was committed.
It has “sown fear and concern, both among people whose information is sought and among the doctors and other providers who offer such care. Some health providers have reportedly decided to no longer provide gender-affirming care to minors as a result of the inquiries, even in states where that care is legal.” She wrote in an article on the Conversation, where she goes further, pointing out that the push, mostly from conservative members of the government, are pushing extracting this private information “while giving no inkling of any alleged crimes that may have been committed.”
State Rep. Jeremy Faison (R-Cosby), the bill’s sponsor, said in a press conference two weeks ago that he has met dozens of individuals who sought to transition genders and ultimately detransitioned. In committee, an individual testified in support of the bill, claiming that while insurance paid for gender-affirming care, detransition care was not covered.
“I believe that we as a society are going to look back on this time that really burst out in 2014 and think, ‘Dear God, What were we thinking? This was as dumb as frontal lobotomies,’” Faison said of gender-affirming care. “I think we’re going to look back on society one day and think that.”
Jennifer Levi, GLAD Law’s senior director of Transgender and Queer Rights, shared with PBS last year that legislation like this changes the entire concept of HIPAA rights for trans Americans in ways that are invasive and unnecessary.
“It turns doctor-patient confidentiality into government surveillance,” Levi said, later emphasizing this will cause fewer people to seek out the care that they need. “It’s chilling.”
The Washington Blade reached out to the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee, which shared this statement from Executive Director Miriam Nemeth:
“HB 754/SB 676 continues the ugly legacy of Tennessee legislators’ attacks on the lives of transgender Tennesseans. Most Tennesseans, regardless of political views, oppose government databases tracking medical decisions made between patients and their doctors. The same should be true here. The state does not threaten to end the livelihood of doctors and fine them $150,000 for safeguarding the sensitive information of people with diabetes, depression, cancer, or other conditions. Trans people and intersex people deserve the same safety, privacy, and equal treatment under the law as everyone else.”
National
Glisten’s 30th annual Day of Silence to take place April 10
Campaign began as student-led protests against anti-LGBTQ bullying, discrimination
Glisten’s 30th annual Day of Silence will take place on April 10.
The annual Day of Silence began as a student-led protest in response to bullying and discrimination that LGBTQ students face. It is now a national campaign for the LGBTQ community and their allies to come together for LGBTQ youth.
It takes place annually and has multiple ways for supporters to get involved in the movement.
Glisten, originally GLSEN, champions LGBTQ issues in schools, grades K-12. Glisten’s mission is to create more inclusive and accepting environments for LGBTQ students through curriculum, supportive measures, education campaigns, and engagement, such as the Day of Silence.
There are three main ways for the community to get involved in the Day of Silence.
Glisten has a Day of Silence frame, a series of pictures used as profile photos across social media that feature individuals holding signs. The signs allow for personalization, by providing a space to put the individual’s name, followed by filling in the prompt “ … and I am ENDING the silence by…”
Participants are encouraged to post the photo on social media and use it as a profile picture. The templates can be found on Google Drive through this link.
Using #DayOfSilence and #NSCS, as well as tagging Glisten’s official Page @glistencommunity, is another way to participate in the Day of Silence.
Glisten also encourages participants to tag creators, friends, family and use a call to action in their caption, to call attention to the facts and stories behind the Day of Silence.
“Today’s administration in the U.S. wants us to stay silent, submit to their biased and hurtful conformity, and stop fighting for our right to be authentically ourselves,” said Glisten CEO Melanie Willingham-Jaggers. “We urge supporters to use their social platforms and check in with local chapters to be boots on the ground to help LGBTQ+ students feel seen, heard, supported, and less alone. By participating in the ‘Day of Silence,’ you are showing solidarity with young people as they navigate identity, safety, and belonging. Our voices matter.”
South Carolina
Man faces first S.C. ‘hate intimidation’ charge
Timothy Truett allegedly shot at gay club in Myrtle Beach on April 1
A South Carolina man remains in custody on a more than $300,000 bond after he allegedly opened fire at a Myrtle Beach nightclub on April 1, according to WMBF.
Reports say 37-year-old Timothy James Truett Jr., of Clover, S.C., was detained by the Myrtle Beach Police Department after the April 1 incident outside Pulse Ultra Club. He was later arrested and charged with possession of a weapon during a violent crime, discharging a firearm into a dwelling, discharging a firearm within city limits, malicious injury to real property valued over $5,000, and assault or intimidation due to political opinions or the exercise of civil rights.
At 10:57 a.m. on April 1, officers responded to a call about a possible shooting at Pulse Ultra Club, located in the 2700 block of South Kings Highway.
In an affidavit released later, the club’s owner, Ken Phillips, said he was doing paperwork that morning when he heard “five or six” gunshots. He went outside and found a window and the windshield of his SUV shattered by bullets. An SUV with blue plastic covering one window was left at the scene.
Police later reviewed footage that showed a silver vehicle stopping in the middle of the road. The video appeared to capture muzzle flashes coming from the passenger-side window.
According to the affidavit, an officer later pulled over a vehicle driven by Truett and found spent shell casings in the back seat, along with a gun.
Documents do not detail why Truett was ultimately charged under the state law covering assault or intimidation tied to political opinions or the exercise of civil rights.
As of April 1, records show Truett is being held in Horry County on a combined bond of more than $312,000.
WMBF spoke with Phillips after the incident and asked whether there was any prior conflict that might have led to the shooting.
“I don’t know if it’s personal, I don’t know if it’s related to being gay, I don’t know if it’s related to the bar issues,” Phillips told WMBF. “Anybody with a mindset of pulling out a weapon in broad daylight is not right.”
“My primary concern has and always will be the safety of my community and my customers,” he added. “It’s given me great concern … as to how far people will go.”
WMBF also spoke with Adam Hayes, vice chair of Myrtle Beach’s Human Rights Coalition, who was involved in pushing for the ordinance. He said that while the incident itself is troubling, it shows the policy is being put to use.
The ordinance is intended to deter “crimes that are motivated by bias or hate towards any person or persons, in whole or in part, because of the actual or perceived” identity, in the absence of a statewide hate crime law.
“It’s nice to see that something we put into policy is not just a piece of paper, that it’s actually being used,” said Hayes.
He said the shooting underscores the need for a statewide hate crime law in South Carolina and added that the incident has left the local LGBTQ community shaken.
South Carolina and Wyoming are the only two states in the U.S. without a comprehensive statewide hate crime law.
Truett remains in jail as of publication.


