Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by MissTake 733 days ago
“and the whole LGBTQIA+ alphabet was a protected class”

Blatantly false.

Given the huge number of recent anti LGBTQ+ laws that have been created in the last few years, it is quite apparent that the exact opposite is true.

There are some parts which have been hard won, but one just has to look at how many people feel they have the right to not deal with LGBTQ+ people, even when it’s their public duty to do so (e.g. the Kim Davis debacle).

So even when protection is finally achieved there will still be large numbers of people who’ll ignore it - which is why we still have widespread racism here in the USA.
2 comments
PolygonSheep 733 days ago
> Kim Davis debacle

One Kentucky county clerk refused same sex marriages to people ten years ago, was then jailed for it, forced to do it anyway and this is evidence that many people feel they have the right not to deal with LGBTQ+ people in all the years since?

link
MissTake 733 days ago
You not knowing other instances isn’t the same as it not going on.

https://www.texastribune.org/2023/10/25/texas-judge-gay-wedd...

https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-politics-and-policy/new-...

link
aprilthird2021 732 days ago
> Given the huge number of recent anti LGBTQ+ laws that have been created in the last few years, it is quite apparent that the exact opposite is true.

Something about this type of framing always gives me pause. Because lumping in the current slate of gender-assigned-at-sex-is-your-gender laws with laws about not teaching sexuality-related topics in schools with laws about who can access financial and legal marriage benefits feels disingenuous to me.

They are different topics with different consequences and which say different things about our society. Each is not simply a matter of pro or anti LGBTQ+.

And it feels like an attempt to dissuade us from really discussing the issues at the core of each to frame them all as such.

link
zzo38computer 732 days ago
> They are different topics with different consequences and which say different things about our society. Each is not simply a matter of pro or anti LGBTQ+.

I believe that.

> And it feels like an attempt to dissuade us from really discussing the issues at the core of each to frame them all as such.

Unfortunately, yes, they do seem to be that. I don't know if that is what is the intention, but it can become the result of it.

link