Rejection is hard for everyone, and we get it over and over. Statements made by legislative supporters of the laws, and in some cases the content of the laws themselves, moreover, make clear that they aim to push back against recent gains toward LGBT equality and to dilute the rights of LGBT people to secure protection from invidious discrimination.
In part, concerns about discrimination were motivated by past mistreatment that LGBT people had faced at the hands of service providers. These laws and bills vary in scope.
The lack of access can be particularly acute in rural areas. At the time, her daughter was already obtaining that treatment, had socially transitioned, and was seeing a therapist. Not only does the United States carry obligations under international law to respect these limits and safeguards, but more broadly the jurisprudence developed under international human rights law offers sound guidance to legislators seeking to strike a careful balance between rights that seem to stand in tension with one another.
While this message could be received from those who discriminated based on their faith generally, some interviewees indicated it was particularly injurious when it was endorsed by the state:. In this context, these laws function first and foremost as a license to discriminate, signaling that discrimination against LGBT people is acceptable in the state.
Rejection is hard for everyone, and we get it over and over.
Any volunteers? I have my own business so a brain is attached. Or, you know, we could just change the laws to be more inclusive of all families and have everyone agree to stop behaving like bigoted asshats. This bridge is the best place to get incredible views of the river and the mountain.
Dishes suck. September 5,
Typically, religious exemptions offer a narrow, defined exception to a generally applicable law. The assumption seems to be that the resulting harms to LGBT individuals, or to the core value of equality, are insubstantial.
This is especially important to minority religious groups, whose practices are all too easily trampled on by laws and policies enacted by majorities. In an interview with Human Rights Watch, one same-sex couple noted that they had been turned away from three different foster care agencies because of their sexual orientation.