Understanding the American View on the LGBTQ+ Community

     Under the category of identities and rights is a question of American views on human and civil rights and how they compare with international opinions. Over the past century, America’s view on LGBTQ+ rights has evolved, but it has been a series of hills. Victories in the Supreme Court are often followed by losses and setbacks. For the first entry on the civic issues blog page, I will focus on how opinions have shifted as well as how the Supreme Court has influenced a cultural shift. 

     Recent studies have examined the opinions of Americans on homosexuality and the legalization of same-sex marriage. According to the Pew Research Center, 49 percent of Americans were against homosexuality in 1994. That number has been reduced to 24 percent of Americans in 2017. Additionally, public acceptance of homosexuality is up as high as 70 percent. In the same study, it was determined that 62 percent of Americans are now in support of same-sex marriages based on moral and legal principles. Less surveys tend to focus on transgender acceptance in society, however, the UCLA Law School concluded from two surveys that support for the transgender community increased by 40 percent from the years 2005 to 2011. Although it is often assumed that the primary reason for growing acceptance of the LGBTQ+ community is due to a change over in generations, that is not the case. Greater visibility accompanies a cultural shift as the main causes of expanding support of LGBTQ+ equality. 

     While acceptance in society is extremely important for members of the LGBTQ+ community, social support means nothing without the concrete protection provided by the government through court rulings and laws. Time magazine published a piece on some of the most important cases that have impacted the rights of LGBTQ+ individuals. In 1958, the Supreme Court heard their first case regarding LGBTQ+ topics. The court ruled in One Inc. v. Olesen that LGBTQ+ people have the right to publish media and that this media was not considered obscene. Fourteen years later, the high court was presented with the case of Baker v. Nelson which dealt with the idea of legal marriages between couples of the same sex. The court dismissed the case for not presenting a valid federal question. The lack of success in the Baker case would be the first of many setbacks on the road to full equality. Another blow was dealt to the LGBTQ+ community when the ruling in the 1986 case of Bowers v. Hardwick protected the right of states to create laws criminalizing sexual activities within same-sex couples. The case effectively labeled lesbian and gay individuals as criminals. A victory finally arrived in 1996. The Supreme Court ruled in Romer v. Evans that states cannot pass laws that target and restrict the rights of one particular group of people because it would be in violation of the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment. The Rehnquist court overturned Bowers v. Hardwick in the 2003 Lawrence v. Texas case making sodomy laws unconstitutional. Eight years ago, the Supreme Court decided a case that would eliminate the section of the Defense of Marriage Act that defines marriage as being between a man and a woman. This case in the Roberts court paved the way for the 2015 landmark case of Obergefell v. Hodges that effectively legalized same-sex marriages in the United States. In a 5-4 decision the Supreme Court stated that the Due Process Clause of the 14th amendment guarantees the right to marry and that right should be extended to same-sex couples. Shortly after this ruling, the Supreme Court faced arguments regarding religious views and the LGBTQ+ community. After a baker refused to make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple based on his personal religious beliefs, the couple took the bakery to court in Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission. In the end, the court upheld the rights of the baker to refuse service due to strong religious objections. 

     America has come a long way since the first case in 1958, but there is a lot left to accomplish. Members of the LGBTQ+ community face daily discrimination and challenges in finding access to healthcare, jobs, and other resources that they have every right to obtain. Since the start of the new year, fourteen states have introduced bills restricting the rights of the LGBTQ+ community. Much of the new legislation targets LGBTQ+ youth, especially transgender youth. In Alabama, the state legislature has brought forward a bill that would prohibit physicians from providing transgender teens with medications to affirm their gender identity. The Oklahoma state House of Representatives introduced a bill recently that would lift a state ban on conversion therapy. Out of all the new threats to LGBTQ+ rights, the state of Montana posses the biggest as their state house has already passed legislation restricting access to health care for transgender teenagers and banning them from participating on school sports teams that match their gender identity instead of their birth-assigned sex. For many conservatives, the question of whether to allow transgender children to participate in school sports is a hot topic. Since the inauguration of President Biden, his cabinet members have faced the scrutiny of congressional confirmation hearings. Senator Rand Paul repeatedly asked Secretary of Education nominee Miguel Cardona his thoughts on allowing trangender children to play sports. Senator Paul pressed him on the issue, but Secretary Cardona was firm in that he believes all children should be afforded the opportunity to participate in school activities including athletics. 

     Despite the fact that 70 percent of Americans are accepting of the LGBTQ+ community, there are still individuals, groups, and political officials who object to allowing for all Americans to be granted equal rights, liberties, protections, and opportunities. 

     In future blog posts, I will examine the rights and protections granted to the LGBTQ+ community in other countries across the world by researching legislation and court rulings. Understanding how and why other countries are further along in the process of protecting the LGBTQ+ community may help the United States to increase their efforts to secure protections. 

Sources:

1. https://cadehildreth.com/pride-flags/
2. https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/27/us/anti-lgbtq-bills-2021-trnd/index.html
3. https://time.com/5694518/lgbtq-supreme-court-cases/
4. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/publications/trends-pub-opinion-lgbt-rights-us/
5. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2017/10/05/5-homosexuality-gender-and-religion/