…Rhode Island Gov. Don Carcieri vetoed a bill on Wednesday, which was designed to expand the state’s definition of a hate crime to include “gender identity” and “gender expression.”The governor – a strong advocate for the family – said the state’s existing law already addresses actions “motivated by racial, religious, sexual orientation, gender and disability prejudice;” therefore, the measure was not required.
So begins the Focus On The Family /CitizenLink article Rhode Island Governor Vetoes Expansion of Hate Crimes. Focus On The Family/CitizenLink‘s Catherine Snow wrote a piece praising Governor Don Carcieri for not expanding a hate crime statute to include trans people — praising how known victims of violence because of antitransgender hatred and prejudice won’t be added to the protected classes of RI’s preexistant hate crime statute. (The piece ends with a convoluted connection to marriage equality — which we’ll get to in a bit.)
Focus On The Family Research Analyst Caleb H. Price was quoted as saying this in the piece:
Those who struggle with gender confusion deserve our compassion and understanding – not laws that cement them into an identity which denies biological and objective reality.
Price appears quite willing to substitute his organizations’ interpretation of the Bible for good science, good healthcare, and good public policy yet again. In the past, Price has been quoted as stating:
Homosexual activists have long been strategically targeting corporate America to help bring about their radical agenda to re-engineer society and redefine the traditional and biblical understanding of family, sexuality and now gender.Sadly, as American corporate titans adopt ‘transgender’-affirming policies, the patently ridiculous notion that gender is somehow ‘fluid’ and that people can ignore biological reality and self-define their gender will become normalized in society.
Focus On The Family states about “gender confusion” and transsexuals this way, in their piece Hope in a World of Gender Confusion:
Most of us grew up with the traditional — biblical, biological and binary — view that there are two sexes: male and female. But many in the “transgendered” community, and their allies in areas such as academia, believe that there are multiple genders — even an infinite number of genders……”Transsexuals” are those who have “successfully” completed the “transition” from one gender to another through hormone treatment and sexual reassignment surgeries19 – ignoring the medical fact that surgery can not change underlying genetic biology. Indeed, every cell in a so-called transsexual’s body still retains the biological sex he or she was born with. While surgery and hormones may change the outward appearance, they cannot change underlying biological reality.
I don’t argue that gender is fluid for everyone. Such as, my gender is female. I’m not “gender confused” at all about my gender; I understand with clarity that my natal sex and my gender don’t match. I’m not unhappy — I’m at the most centered place in my life that I’ve ever been. Despite Focus On The Family/CitizenLink claims that I am experiencing Societal Confusion and/or Self Hatred and Envy, or that have I experienced a Disconnection from Same-Sex Parent and Same-Sex Models and/or Sexual Abuse and Trauma, or that I’m motivated by Eroticism — motivated more by the erotic feelings they obtain by dressing and acting as the opposite sex — well, I’m not.
What Price and Focus On The Family claim is true about trans people like me doesn’t fit me or my personal history, nor does it fit many transgender or transsexual people — as well as not fitting people who identify as both transgender and transsexual people — that I know. I know I don’t fit into the boxes Focus On The Family is attempting to fit me into. Just because Caleb H. Price, Focus On The Family, and other religious right Christians are trying to label trans people like me as “gender confused,” that doesn’t make the label a valid label that’s grounded in reality. As for Price himself, he’s given us What About Intersexuality? (as well as What About “Transgenderism”?). He no doubt has read Matthew 19:12, Galatians 3:28, Isaiah 56:3-5, Acts 8:25-40, and Judges 4, so he knows the Bible doesn’t completely support a binary of sex of gender. And hey, I don’t believe it’s very hard to figure out that What About Intersexuality? and What About “Transgenderism”? were apparently written in response to what I wrote in the piece The Scientific Problem With Sex And Gender Dichotomies. Price knows, or should know, that the science doesn’t support his conclusion that there is a “underlying biological reality” — a sex and gender dichotomy — based on genitalia, genetics, and brain science.
Well, Genesis 1:27 states this:
God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.
Caleb H. Price, and others at Focus On The Family (FOTF), significantly quote and/or reference Genesis 1:27 regarding God creating people as male and female. (Examples: here, here, here, here, and here). But, Price and his FOTF peers keeps acting as if this is the only biblical and scientific “reality” regarding sex and gender — their fundamentalist Christian interpretations of that verse.
But Christ himself, in Mathew 19:12, states:
For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother’s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it.
The Bible recognizes intersex and gender variant people exist. If for the sake of argument we make that mind-dizzying assumption that the story of Adam and Eve in Genesis is literal and factual, then God may have originally only created males and females, but there are obviously people now who don’t fit in the sex and gender binary. Caleb Price acknowledges this in his piece What About Intersexuality?, but then he discounts that “male and female He created them” doesn’t apply to everyone across the board. He even states this about intersex people:
From these passages we see that Christians are called to understand that God readily seeks to strengthen and encourage those who find themselves unable to marry and participate in genderedness and sexual expression as ordained in the created order. Practically speaking, this means that we – as the Hands and Feet of Christ – are called to help intersexuals carry this “heavy yoke” and steward their assigned gender in a manner that glorifies God and, to the degree possible, reflects His created intent for human sexuality and gender.…So how should we, as Christians, minister to those among us who deal with the unique and often traumatic circumstances associated with intersexuality? Perhaps Jesus’ own words, as recorded in Matthew 19, should serve as our guide…
What we have then would be a “traumatic circumstance” not created by intersex people themselves, but a “traumatic circumstance” placed on intersex people for not conforming to sex and gender norms of others in society. The do this by demanding to know if someone is male or female. And, they do this demanding that since Genesis 1:27 states that “male and female He created them” that all be confined in their rigid, religious right sex and gender boxes. Sanctimonious Christians like Price claim there is a “heavy yoke” on intersex people — yet it’s people like Price and his fundamentalist Christian allies are among those who help to create that “heavy yoke.” They create that “heavy yoke” through their dogmatic, dictative thinking on sex and gender — and then by their actions based on that rigid thinking on sex and gender.
So why do Focus On The Family and company care that Rhode Island not add gender identity and expression to their hate crime statute? Their argument has to do with marriage equality. Focus On The Family/CitizenLink‘s Catherine Snow quotes the executive director of the National Organization for Marriage – Rhode Island (NOM-R.I.) for how these two issues are connected:
Chris Plante, executive director for NOM-R.I., agrees with the governor about the definitions of “gender identity” and “gender expression” being ambiguous; thus, bad law.“All Rhode Islanders deserve to be protected to the fullest extent of the law,” said Plante. “There is no reason to carve out a special group, irrespective of motivation.”
Despite today’s victory, Plante expressed deep concerns that Rhode Islanders are slowly becoming desensitized to an incremental – and insidious – erosion of marriage.
“From NOM’s perspective, we were deeply concerned about this bill, because we have seen similar (hate crime) legislation- in places like Connecticut and Vermont – lead directly to the imposition of same-sex marriage.
“Laws like this are stepping stones to homosexual marriage,” said Plante. “They are an erosion of traditional family values.”
So let us, as a society, not enhance the punishments the people who kill transgender people due to antitransgender hate and prejudice. Let these hateful killers who terrorize transgender community do it with impunity; let us not hold these killers accountable for the terror that their hate crimes perpetuate. And, let us do this because we want to defend marriage against “gay marriage”.
And too, let us applaud Caleb H. Price, Focus On The Family, and NOM-R.I. when they express their sanctimonious hatred, just a half a step away from the spewing hatred recently expressed by the gang of four.
And in the meantime, let me react with disgust at what Price, FOTF, NOM-R.I. and the gang of four are stating and advocating.
.



12 Comments



Anyone who thinks trans rights are diff from gay rightsis seriously mistaken, because in the eyes of the bigots we “freaks” are all the same.
*blink.*Oh, my eyes.
This one may take some digesting, so disconnected from sense and reality it is that it’ll take some effort.
‘Gender confusion?’ Mr. Governor.
If anyone’s going to be gender-confused, it’s going to be you, after I get a perm, put on a Hillary pantsuit, look as normal as June Cleaver, smile up at you, and and show off all the male-celebrity impersonations I picked up in early life. :)
Nor Gods nor man can account for how these sounds come out of my body, but I assure you:
We have not yet begun to confuse.
Don’t make me open this. It’s kind of scary, actually. :)
I’ve opened itANd it’s not so bad on the other side.
They really sorta freak a bit, lol
YupIt’s an alliance born out of our enemies, but it’s an alliance nonetheless. Our struggle is one, is tied together so that we each support the other, because our enemies gladly see us as all having one neck. One which they would love to see hanged.
But. None of that bears on how these thin arguments make it OK to assault or murder transpeople in order to terrorize whole communities.
What this is really about is certain people claiming that a thin interpretation of their Bible entitles them to say it somehow ‘protects society from gays’ to say that terroristic crimes against transpeople are to be sanctioned, by treating them as no different from a bar scuffle.
As an excuse to marginalize people.
No, I’m not here to confuse people, Dys. It’s certainly not something I’m ‘confused’ about, myself, except inasmuch as governors are claiming that we deserve some ‘heavy yoke’ of hate crimes to suit what he calls piety.
No, you know we’re not ‘confused.’ We know exactly, and painfully who we are.
Some others are the confused ones. At this point, willfully, and insistently, promoting violence and calling it ‘holy’ just as they’ve ever done.
But this is America.
Waiting for NovemberWe will elect a new governor, likely someone who is more supportive of everyone’s rights.
Donald Carcieri has a conservative Catholic base and doesn’t look beyond it. He promised to help Rhode Island’s economy, and instead we are one of the worst hit in the nation. He cuts essential services to the people who can least afford it and has refused to meet with community groups to hear firsthand about the impact of his cuts.
I’m glad this eight years is almost over.
As Always…Autumn does a good job of discrediting the bigots even on their own biblical terms. However, the sad fact is that these people don’t really care for politics, law, or even religion when it comes to LGBT issues, they just hate. Only in this context is the connection between marriage and hate crimes is clear, they just want to harm us any way they can.
If tomorrow Obama declared that every household gets a tub of delicious ice cream of their choice, FOTF would lobby furiously spending millions of dollars to ensure gays do not get any.
Caleb Price is confused and deserves our supportbecause he somehow thinks that being a “research analyst” makes him a greater expert than those doing the research
Carcieri is an @ssWho can’t leave office soon enough. The man is an embarrassment to New England as a whole.
Yeah right!Or those of us who live as transgender each and every day of our lives!
But I guess our reality is inferior to their fantasy and their delusions, Maura!
I hope they discover a political scandal……that results in his in-carcier-ation. :-D
Sorry to preach to the choir yet again
Don’t you love that use of a singular noun to denote a collective entity? ”The” family – as if every family is alike? Or maybe they’re secretly referring to the Cosa Nostra (who, I was going to say, are on right about the same moral level as FotF – except then I realized I’d much rather find a horse’s head in my bed than I would Jim Daly!)
And as for the measure being “not required”? It would have served as a legislative clarification, thus reducing interpretive doubt for the judiciary. Instead, there will soon be a trans crime victim who will have to expend valuable legal time and effort convincing a judge that the gender-discrimination language does in fact cover gender-identity discrimination. And then we’ll see the slimeball defense argument that the transphobic perp was motivated not by his victim’s gender, but by the fact that the person had changed, was changing, or wanted to change their gender. Counsel would then trot out the old right-wing paranoiac liturgy: applying the existing law to this motive would read the law beyond its literal wording and would thus constitute “judicial legislation”. (Not to mention, Carcieri’s veto goes into the realm of legislative history, which is frequently applied in the course of interpreting a purportedly ambiguous law…)
In the ongoing fundamentalist linguistic dance to avoid employing the simple terms “gay”, “lesbian”, “bisexual”, or “transgender” in neutral, descriptive ways, the contortions have reached an almost epic intensity. A “gay-identified progressive” – would this mean that Adam Lambert was the first to figure out Mr. Fox’s political leanings? :-D
“Marriage” and “the family” somehow benefit from the fact that hate-spewing thugs won’t serve extra prison time for certain of their violent, felonious acts? ”Religious freedom” covers the act of whacking someone on the head with a crowbar – an act that NO ONE is legally free to commit somehow rises to the level of a constitutional right if it was motivated by anti-trans animus? Puh-LEEZE.
No one would have been “cemented” by this law. Those who transition (or take other action to bring things closer in line with their gender identity) do so of their own free will. Not to mention, the consequences of the law would have adhered only to trans people’s attackers – incarcerating them for longer periods for acts proven to have been underlain by transphobia. (And as long as we’re talking about “cementing” people, how about states that do not allow trans people to change the gender section on official documents – thus leading TSA screeners to freak out when they encounter, good heavens, BREASTS on a trans woman whose driver’s license proclaims her to be male?)
Gender identity: The gender an individual feels himself / herself / hirself to be. Hate-crime laws target criminals who are motivated by their victim’s membership in a protected class, and an attacker motivated by his victim’s trans-ness would, by definition, know that the victim has a gender identity which does not match their natal sex.
Gender expression: Elements of dress, behavior, and the like that 1) are societally assigned to the male or the female gender and 2) were, at the relevant time, engaged in or presented by the victim.
Not so ambiguous, really. (And if legal ambiguity is really the concern, why then did Carcieri insist [see above] that the state’s existing hate-crime legislation would be sufficient?)
This isn’t about carving out a special group. The criminal law already considers motive when assigning punishment, because motive may tell us something about the offender’s relative blameworthiness and overall danger to society. This is why a second-degree murder, driven by a sudden provocation or flame of passion, is punished much less severely than its first-degree counterpart – a person who is willing to terminate the life of another even while calm, cool, and collected is regarded as more dangerous and depraved than someone who simply let their emotions get the better of them. And hate-crime laws are about recognizing the enhanced danger presented by bias-motivated offenders, both to their chosen victim groups (members of whom are politically, and sometimes personally, more vulnerable as a result of their statistical minority status) and to the wider society. If someone’s “trigger” for violence is merely encountering a member of a group they dislike, that person is a dangerous nutcase who’s quite likely indeed to “go off” again while living in a diverse, pluralistic society – and as a greater danger, he must face a greater punishment for his wrongdoings.
Excuse me? Could you sketch out the logic for this one, please? For one, I don’t see how a hate-crime penalty enhancement has anything to do with marriage (other than that a society that has evolved to pass one is probably progressive enough to be within a few years of considering expanding marriage rights to same-sex couples – but that’s a matter of correlation, not of causation). And two, just what “traditional family value” are you referring to? Presumably the one about “being able to beat the holy hell out of someone and be guaranteed to get only ‘X’ years in the can for it, rather than X-plus-five”? Sounds real, uh, Christ-like to me. :-D