Connect with us

News

ENDA latest non-marriage target for NOM

Email blast another sign anti-gay group expanding focus beyond marriage

Published

on

Brian Brown, National Organization for Marriage, gay news, gay politics dc

NOM President Brian Brown is calling ENDA a “trojan horse” bill (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key).

The anti-gay National Organization for Marriage is urging its supporters to stop passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act in the group’s latest involvement in an issue outside of marriage.

In an email blast sent to supporters Friday morning, Brian Brown, NOM’s president, calls for the defeat of ENDA, saying the legislation’s prohibition on anti-LGBT job bias is a “trojan horse” that would “attack the foundational institution of marriage between a man and a woman.”

“In the wake of Justice Kennedy’s misguided opinion in the DOMA case (Windsor v. U.S.) it is certain that this federal ENDA bill will become a fulcrum used by same-sex ‘marriage’ activists to try to foist a marriage redefinition regime on the entire country,” Brown writes.

Brown insists that with ENDA in place, courts will have rationale to “easy rationale” to overturn bans on same-sex marriages when confronted with legal challenges for these laws.

Michael Cole-Schwartz, a spokesperson for the Human Rights Campaign, said the latest efforts by NOM against ENDA demonstrate its true focus isn’t marriage, but something broader.

“NOM’s opposition to ENDA is yet further proof that their mantra of ‘protecting marriage’ is nothing more than anti-LGBT animus,” Cole-Schwartz said. “They oppose any level of protections for our community and represent a small and shrinking minority of people.”

Brown contends in the email individuals who oppose same-sex marriage would be subject to lawsuits under the proposed legislation by expressing their view in the workplace.

“Under the law, individuals holding the common-sense belief that marriage is about giving kids a mom and a dad would be subject to punishment,” Brown writes. “Expressions of support for true marriage in the workplace would no longer be a fundamental right, but discriminatory, bigoted and an actionable offense!”

Tico Almeida, president of Freedom to Work, insisted the argument that opponents of same-sex marriage would be punished under ENDA isn’t true.

“NOM’s argument is absurd and shows they know they’re losing this debate on the actual issues addressed in this legislation,” Almeida said. “After ENDA, employers like Chick-fil-A’s Dan Cathy will retain the right to say or tweet anything he wants about marriage and to donate all he wants to anti-gay organizations that oppose marriage equality. ENDA’s protections against workplace harassment will adopt Title VII’s high standard for a ‘hostile work environment’ requiring abusive comments and epithets that are frequent and severe before an employee can bring a valid claim.”

Listed within the email blast are the numbers of eight Republican senators that NOM identified as potential swing votes on ENDA: Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.), Rob Portman (R-Ohio), Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), Kelly Ayotte (R-N.J.), Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), Dean Heller (R-Nev.), Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) and John Barrasso (R-Wyo.). Brown urges supporters to call the office of these “to make sure these senators know where the majority of Americans stand on this dangerous bill.”

The mailing is the latest involvement from NOM in an issue that is relevant to the LGBT community, has not overtly related to marriage. The organization  previously joined efforts to overturn the California transgender student law, which enables transgender students in California to participate in programs and athletics consistent with their gender identity. According to Right Wing Watch, Brown has also travelled to Russia to urge passage of a law in the country prohibiting same-sex couples in other countries from adopting Russian children.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Tennessee

Ogles faces bipartisan backlash over anti-gay social media post

Tenn. congressman blamed the comment on staffer

Published

on

U.S. Rep. Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.) (Photo public domain)

U.S. Rep. Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.), who represents Tennessee’s 5th Congressional District, is facing backlash from LGBTQ advocates and fellow Republicans after a social media post declared that “homosexuality has no place in America.”

“Homosexuality has no place in America. Happy Nuclear Family Month,” the congressman wrote in a post on X that was later deleted.

According to the Williams Institute at UCLA School of Law, an estimated 6.3 percent of U.S. adults identify as LGBTQ.

Following widespread criticism, Ogles removed the post and blamed it on a staff member.

“The post was stupid, hurtful and a complete distraction from my America First focus. The employee has been reprimanded,” Ogles said in a statement.

The Washington Blade reached out to Ogles’s office for comment but did not receive a response by press time.

Among those condemning the message was U.S. Rep. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.), who called it “absolutely idiotic” in a social media post.

“Homosexuality exists. In America,” Lawler wrote on X. “In fact, Andy, you have family, friends, neighbors, colleagues, and constituents who are gay and lesbian. It doesn’t make them less than or somehow unworthy of being an American.”

U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) also criticized Ogles’s remarks.

“For all of recorded history, homosexuals have been a part of humanity,” Cruz told TMZ DC. “I think the behavior of consenting adults is their business.”

Chris Sanders, the executive director for the Tennessee Equality Project and Tennessee Equality Project Foundation provided a statement to the Blade about Ogles’s comment.

“The Tennessee Nuclear Family Month resolution has really backfired on conservatives by ensnaring Congressman Ogles in scandal. He used the resolution as a pretext to say that our community doesn’t belong in America, resulting in incredible backlash from across the partisan divide,” Sanders said. “It is a good opportunity for him to pause and reflect on whether it’s time for him to resign. Fighting one’s own constituents is not the purpose of serving in Congress.”

Human Rights Campaign Senior Press Secretary Jarred Keller provided a statement to the Blade regarding Ogles’s comments.

“LGBTQ+ people are woven into the fabric of America, and any politician who questions that is severely out of touch with reality. When so many people are worried about whether they can afford gas to get to work or groceries for their families, the last thing we need is right-wing Republicans targeting marginalized communities with hateful attacks,” Keller said. “Representative Ogles should spend less time attacking LGBTQ+ people and start addressing the issues that actually matter, because last I checked, our community isn’t the reason families are struggling to make ends meet.”

The controversy comes as Tennessee continues to advance legislation affecting LGBTQ residents. The state already has several laws on the books that LGBTQ advocates have criticized, including the Adult Entertainment Act, enacted in 2023, which restricts certain “adult cabaret performances.”

Lawmakers have also introduced additional measures this legislative session, including the “No Pride Flag or Month Act,” which would prohibit state employees, volunteers, and agents from displaying Pride flags or participating in Pride observances while acting in an official capacity.

Another proposal, the “Banning Bostock Act” would seek to limit the application of state anti-discrimination protections based on the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Bostock v. Clayton County. Tennessee lawmakers have also passed other measures restricting LGBTQ rights and access to gender-affirming health care.

Continue Reading

District of Columbia

D.C. Latinx Pride celebrates culture and heritage

Your guide to events throughout June

Published

on

Members and supporters of the Latinx History Project march in the Capital Pride Parade. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Organizers with the Latinx History Project have planned a host of events this Pride season with parties, poetry, drag and more.

The festivities begin with the DC Latinx Pride 2026 Kickoff at Crush Dance Bar (2007 14th Street, N.W.) on Friday, June 12 from 6-10 p.m. The party will include a coronation ceremony for the 2026 Royal Court: Ms. DC Latinx Pride Vida Rangel and Mx. DC Latinx Pride Steph Niaupari. RSVP at latinxhistoryproject.org. The event is free, though donations are accepted.

An outdoor event is planned for Sunday, June 14 from 11 a.m.-1 p.m. at Anacostia River Park (1500 Anacostia Dr., S.E.). Cultivating Queer Outdoor Joy is a “peaceful outdoor community event focused on grounding, connection, and queer joy in nature.” The event is free.

A panel discussion is planned for The Festival Center (1640 Columbia Rd., N.W., 2nd floor) on Monday, June 15 from 6-8 p.m. La Plática: The Future of 2 Spirits and Trans Natives will focus upon the “stories, leadership and vision of Two-Spirit, Indigiqueer and Trans Native people.” RSVP to the free event at latinxhistoryproject.org.

A sex-positive poetry workshop, “Hoetry: Writing Erotic Poetry,” is planned for Wednesday, June 17 from 6-8 p.m. at The Festival Center (1640 Columbia Road, N.W.). The event is free.

The workshop So You Wanna Do Drag? is planned for Thursday, June 18 from 5:30-8 p.m. at The Festival Center (1640 Columbia Road, N.W.).  Featured guests Ricky Rose and Mari Con Carne will hold a style showcase to discuss the basics of developing a drag persona. RSVP to the free event at latinxhistoryproject.org.

The Latinx History Project is collaborating with Rumba Queer DC to produce an official Latinx Pride Party: Sin Vergüenza. The event is at the multi-level venue, Transmission (1353 H Street, N.E.) on Thursday, June 18 from 7 p.m.-1 a.m. There are dance lessons, vendors and three different music experiences in the sprawling venue. There will also be a drag showcase from 10-11 p.m. The event is 21+ and tickets are available at shotgun.live/en/events/sin-verguenza. Tickets are $15 for entry into the party. Tickets to participate in the dance lesson are $29.98. Participants may choose between a bachata lesson or a salsa lesson from 7-8 p.m.

La Fiesta: Official DC Latinx Pride Party is planned for Friday, June 19 from 10 p.m. – 2 a.m. at Bunker (2001 14th Street, N.W.). Serena Morena from “Drag Race México” and “Drag Race UK vs The World” is slated to headline the 21+ event. Early tickets are available for $15 (plus $0.38 service fee) until June 16. The door cover charge without early tickets is $20. Attendees can also purchase a meet and greet experience with Serena Morena for $30. Tickets are available at latinxhistoryproject.org.

The Latinx History Project plans to march in the Capital Pride Parade on Saturday, June 20 and to have a table at the Capital Pride Festival on Sunday, June 21. Visit latinxhistoryproject.org to register to march alongside LGP in the parade or to staff the table at the festival.

The DC Latinx Pride 2026 Closing Event is scheduled for Friday, June 26 from 6:30-8:30 p.m. at the Mexican Cultural Institute (2829 16th Street, N.W.). The free event is a panel discussion “centering the experiences of immigrants who have lived in Latin America and now call the United States home.”

Visit latinxhistoryproject.org for more information.

Continue Reading

U.S. Military/Pentagon

Federal appeals court rules White House illegally banned trans troops

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth says Pentagon will appeal to SCOTUS

Published

on

The Pentagon (Photo by icholakov/Bigstock)

A panel of federal appeals court judges ruled that President Donald Trump’s policy banning transgender troops likely violates their constitutional rights.

The three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled 2-1 that Trump’s Executive Order 14183, also known as “Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness,” was created with the intent to exclude people from the military based on their gender identity.

The policy argues that trans people are inherently incapable of meeting the military’s “high standards of readiness, lethality, cohesion, honesty, humility, uniformity, and integrity,” citing a history of or signs of gender dysphoria as the cause. According to the Defense Department, this creates “medical, surgical, and mental health constraints on [an] individual.”

The policy states that, regardless of the physical or intellectual capabilities of each applicant, it views trans military applicants as a monolith, considering them less qualified than their cisgender peers.

Despite the panel’s majority opinion issued on Monday, the first day of Pride Month, the ban remains in effect. The U.S. Supreme Court allowed the Pentagon to enforce the policy last year and will continue to allow it to remain in place as litigation proceeds.

The panel’s new ruling will prevent the military from discharging current service members named in the lawsuit, but it does not allow new transrecruits to join.

The policy “appears to be driven by the bare desire to harm a politically unpopular group: persons who identify as transgender,” Judge Robert Wilkins, a Democratic appointee of President Barack Obama wrote for the majority.

Judge Justin Walker, the author of the dissenting opinion and a Republican Trump appointee, argued that the authority to determine military policy does not rest with the courts. Instead, he wrote, the Constitution grants that power to Congress through legislation and to the president as commander in chief of the armed forces.

“We have neither the expertise nor the authority to decide whether the military can exclude the plaintiffs from its ranks. The Constitution assigns that authority to Congress and the commander-in-chief,” Walker wrote.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth indicated that an appeal is in the works, posting, “See you at SCOTUS” on X on Monday in response to the ruling.

Jennifer Levi, senior director of transgender and queer rights at GLAD Law, which has led the litigation since last November, applauded the decision.

“Today’s decision is a powerful vindication of the plaintiffs’ extraordinary courage and unwavering commitment to their country,” Levi said.

The Washington Blade spoke with Second Lt. Nicolas (Nic) Talbott of the U.S. Army, the lead plaintiff in the case, and Levi from GLAD Law back in November.

While discussing the case and his experiences as a trans service member, Talbott said his identity is an asset rather than a hindrance, particularly when it comes to identifying problems and finding solutions, regardless of what others may think or say.

“Being transgender is not some sad thing that people go through,” Talbott told the Blade. “This is something that has taken years and years and years of dedication and discipline and research and ups and downs to get to the point where I am today … my ability to transition was essential to getting me to that point where I am today.”

He also discussed the impact of removing qualified and dedicated service members from the military, arguing that the consequences will be felt long after Trump leaves office.

“When we’re losing thousands of those qualified, experienced individuals … those are seats that are not just going to be able to be filled by anybody,” he said. “[That’s] military training that’s not going to be able to be replaced for years and years to come.”

“Every person who puts on the uniform is expected to make a tremendous amount of sacrifice,” Talbott said. “Who I am under this uniform should have no bearing on that … We shouldn’t be picking and choosing which veterans are worthy of our thanks on that day.”

Levi characterized the policy as overtly cruel and legally indefensible to the Blade.

“This policy and its rollout is even more cruel than the first in a number of ways,” Levi explained. “For one, the policy itself says that transgender people are dishonest, untrustworthy and undisciplined, which is deeply offensive and degrading and demeaning.”

She also argued that the administration’s cost justification is flawed, saying that removing and replacing trans service members is more expensive than retaining them.

“There’s no legitimate justification relating to cost … it is far more expensive to both purge the military of people who are serving and also to replace people … than to provide the minuscule amount of costs for medications other service members routinely get.”

Continue Reading

Popular