 | Manuals
and Guides: Families, Gender, and Children
The
Busy Citizen's Discussion Guide
Civil
Rights for Gays and Lesbians
A
program of the Study Circles Resource Center, sponsored by Topsfield
Foundation, Inc. Copyright © 1993 Topsfield Foundation, Inc.
Contents
Introduction
Part
I - Sharing experiences, perceptions, and values
Part
II - Civil rights for gays and lesbians
Background
on the issue: The public debate over gay rights
Ground
rules for useful discussions
Introduction
This Busy Citizen's
Discussion Guide is brief because it's not just for reading—it's
for using. It's designed to help you have productive discussions
about an issue that has disturbed many Americans: How should our
society regard homosexuality, and specifically, what legal rights
should gay people have? (Homosexuals are often referred to as "gay
people," "gay men and lesbian women," or "gays and lesbians.")
We encourage
you to share this booklet and discuss this issue with friends,
family members, neighbors, and acquaintances; coworkers or classmates;
people in your church, synagogue, or religious group; and members
of other organizations to which you belong. You can use this booklet
either for an organized discussion group or in an informal setting
- for example, over lunch at work, during your commute, after
watching a news show with your family, or with a few friends who
have come over for coffee and conversation.
Why
talk about homosexuality and civil rights for gay people?
As a result
of ballot initiathes in Colorado, Oregon, and Portland, Maine in
1992, and the national debate over gays in the military in 1993,
civil rights for gays and lesbians has become a major national issue.
"Gay rights" has become the battleground for debates about family
values, the place of religion in politics, and other social issues.
Many people expect gay rights to be the "abortion issue of the '90s."
In the beginning of 1993 The Denver Post reported that " . . . activists
in at least 12 states have now signaled plans for . . . campaigns
against gay rights, confirming claims from both sides of the Colorado
controversy that a national movement has begun."
Though it
has gained prominence as an issue, many people find gay rights
a difficult subject for discussion. For some, it arouses intense
emotions. Some are uncomfortable because it touches on sexuality.
We taLk about sexuality—if at all—only with those we
are closest to and feel most comfortable with.
But there
can be significant personal rewards from a discussion about gay
rights. We can seek answers to our questions, learn more about
the issue, share our own opinions, and consider the views and
feelings of others. We may be exposed to some new ideas. Discussion
provides us with an opportunity to reevaluate and better understand
our own beliefs.
Our society
will also benefit from discussion of this issue. An absence of
dialogue has led to polarization and political battles that resolve
nothing. Though disagreements over this issue will continue, respectful
disagreement will make the public debate more constructive.
This booklet
frames the discussion as a civil rights issue, since the public
debate has focused on what legal protections gay people should
have. Specifically, should civil rights laws that outlaw discrimination
in housing and employment on the basis of race, creed, color,
national origin, gender, marital status, and disability be extended
to ban discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation? (Some
identify the term "civil rights" with the "civil rights movement,"
the struggle by blacks to gain equality. By using the term "civiil
rights" here, we do not intend to take a position on the issue
of whether civil rights for gays should be equated with civil
rights for blacks.)
Using
this guide
Parts I and
II of this booklet offer two approaches for your discussion. Part
I provides some ideas for sharing experiences, thoughts, values,
feelings, and questions in an open, non-adversarial way. Part II
focuses on the public policy question of civil rights for gays and
lesbians: What legal protections should our society provide? To
help you consider a range of views in your conversation, it offers
four alternative answers that span the political spectrum. The background
information starting on page 10 provides some facts and clarifies
some of the debates surrounding this issue.
A
final note
Everyone who
has an open mind can benefit from constructive dialogue. But there
are a few basic ingredients that make a discussion more likely to
be useful and enjoyable—respectful listening, an effort to
understand why others feel as they do, and a willingness to share
the experiences, beliefs and values that shape our own opinions.
Even if no agreement emerges, dialogue itself helps to resolve problems
by enabling people to better understand each other. (The section
beginning on page 15 of this guide further elaborates on ideas for
useful discussion.)
Back to top
Part
I - Sharing experiences, perceptions, and values
The first step
in learning from the views of others is to learn about their experiences,
beliefs, and values. Before talking about civil rights for gays,
we suggest that you spend some time discussing your perceptions
and thinking about homosexuality.
The level
of personal experiences you discuss will depend upon the level
of familiarity in your group. Please keep in mind that the discussion
is not a group therapy session, especially if you use this guide
in a structured discussion group. Nobody should be asked, or feel
compelled, to talk about their sexuality and sexual experiences.
The following
questions offer opportunities to communicate your thinking and
perceptions about gays and lesbians, and to share some of the
experiences through which you developed your ideas.
Questions
for discussion
- What experiences
have shaped your attitudes about homosexuality and gay people?
- Do your
attitudes toward gay people differ from your parents' or siblings'
attitudes? If so, why do you suppose you have different ideas
than the people you grew up with?
- How did
you first find out about homosexuals?
- Have your
feelings and ideas about gay people changed over time? If so,
how and why?
- Have your
religious traditions or beliefs contributed to your attitudes
about homosexuality? If so, how?
- Why do
many people find homosexuality an awkward and difficult topic
to discuss? What do you find most difficult in talking about
this subject?
- Have you
ever seen discrimination against or harassment of gay people?
If so, what occurred?
- Some commentators
say there is a difference in the way that people react to gay
men as opposed to lesbians. Do you agree? If so, what do you
think accounts for the different reactions?
- Aside
from their sexual preferences, how do you think gay women and
men differ from other people?
- What do
you think it's like to be gay in our society?
Back to top
Part
II - Civil rights for gays and lesbians:
What legal protections should we provide?
Below are four
viewpoints that reflect the opinions of citizens and leaders from
across the political spectrum. Some parts of the viewpoints may
overlap with one another, but each provides a distinctive way of
approaching the question of civil rights for gays and lesbians;
each viewpoint uses the strongest claims of its supporters.
We suggest
that you use the viewpoints as a discussion starter by putting
yourself in the place of a possible supporter of each viewpoint.
This will help to clarify your own views and to explore the differences
and similarities between your thinking and that of others.
Questions
for discussion
- What experiences,
beliefs, and values might lead people who think of themselves
as decent and caring to support each of these four viewpoints?
- What do
you find most persuasive about each view? What do you find most
disturbing?
- Are there
important viewpoints not represented here? What are they?
- What are
the points of agreement between your own view and the views
of others in your discussion?
View
1 - Gays deserve no legal protection from discrimination on the
basis of their sexual preference.
Supporters
of this view argue that society should do nothing to condone homosexual
behavior, since homosexuality is immoral, unnatural, and perverse.
Even though homosexuals, like anyone else in our society, deserve
protection from harassment and violence, we should not give them
special legal protection when they are discriminated against because
of their sexual preference. This is different from other kinds
of "discrimination," because our society should distinguish between
right and wrong. Civil rights laws should not protect people from
being discriminated against because of their own immoral behavior.
In fact, tolerance for homosexuality undermines the moral fabric
of our society and has contributed to the breakdown of family
life. Government should not interfere with individuals and institutions
who want to protect themselves from the influence of gays. Nobody
should be forced to hire or to rent an apartment to a gay person.
Children should be protected from the influence of homosexuals,
and schools should be able to fire or not hire gay or lesbian
teachers and coaches. Adoptions and foster care by gays should
not be permitted.
View
2 - Gays deserve protection from discrimination in housing and
in most employment situations. However, gays should not have full
civil rights. Individuals and organizations should have the right
to deny gays jobs in which they would work with children.
Supporters
of this viewpoint argue for some civil rights for gays, but express
disquiet about the impact that gay role models may have on children.
They believe that sexual preference is not biologically determined,
and that it can be affected by one's childhood experiences. They
argue that, in the interest of strengthening the family, society
should take steps to reduce the risk that children will become
homosexual. The family is the moral foundation and basic building-block
of society: a gay couple is not a solid base on which to build
a strong society. Therefore, we should not abolish all legal distinctions
between homosexuals and heterosexuals. In certain situations—such
as a job that involves working with children—institutions
and individuals should be allowed to deny gays employment. Supporters
of this view might disagree about where to draw the line—for
example, whether openly gay people should be allowed in the military.
But they agree with the principle that there are some jobs in
which it is justifiable to discriminate against a person on the
basis of his or her sexual preference.
View
3 - We should extend civil rights laws so that they fully protect
gay individuals from discrimination in any type of employment
and in housing. But gay couples in committed relationships should
not be granted the same rights that married, heterosexual couples
receive.
Advocates
of this view say it is unjust and it should be illegal to fire
gay individuals from their jobs, deny them promotions, or refuse
to rent to them simply because of their sexual orientation. This
is just as true for gay people who work with children since, supporters
say, gay role models do not make it more likely that a child will
become homosexual. There is increasing evidence that sexual orientation
is biologically determined. Furthermore, there is no correlation
between the sexual orientation of parents and that of their children:
the same percentage of children of heterosexual parents grow up
to be gay as do children of gay parents. However, supporters of
this view do not believe that homosexuality and heterosexuality
are morally equivalent. They believe that sexual relations with
a person of the same sex is wrong, and that gay couples are less
likely to form stable, healthy families. Therefore, gay and lesbian
couples, even those in committed relationships, should not have
the same rights in marriage and parenthood that married heterosexual
couples enjoy.
View
4 - Gay individuals should have full civil fights. Gay couples
in long-term, committed relationships should have the same fights
as married, heterosexual couples. They should be able to marry,
adopt children, and be foster parents.
Supporters
of this view say that gay rights is the last frontier in the 200
year-old civil-rights struggle in America. They believe that gays
and lesbians who demand their rights are following in the footsteps
of women, blacks, people with disabilities, and others who had
to fight to be treated as full citizens. For example, the same
arguments - almost word-for-word - that were used 45 years ago
against integrating blacks into the military have been used to
support the ban on gays. When people are discriminated against
because they belong to a specific group, there must be laws to
protect members of that group. Even though some people believe
that homosexuality is immoral, that is not a reason to treat gay
people as second-class citizens. Besides, advocates of this viewpoint
argue, there is nothing immoral or unnatural about homosexuality.
Consenting adults should enjoy the freedom to experience their
sexuality without legal penalties. Gay couples should have the
same opportunities to nurture healthy families as do heterosexual
couples. Since marriage, adoption, and foster care are primarily
legal and economic institutions in our society, not religious
ones, gays should have full rights in all of them.
Back to top
Background
on the issue:
The public debate over gay rights
Over the past
25 years, the gay rights movement has advanced the visibility and
status of gays and lesbians in our society. Many Americans have
become more accepting of homosexuality and have come to understand
that homosexuals, just like heterosexuals, should not be stereotyped—they
are a diverse group in terms of race, ethnicity, occupation, and
background. Two members of the U.S. Congress, Barney Frank and Gerry
Studds, have announced that they are gay, and there are growing
numbers of openly lesbian and gay politicians in state and local
governments. Other public figures ranging from artists to business
leaders have "come out of the closet."
However,
the vast majority of gay people do not reveal that they are gay.
Indeed, many keep it a secret, even from some friends and family
members. This is contrary to the perception of some that most
gays are "militant" and want everyone to know about their sexuality.
Many gays fear losing opportunities for promotion, or even their
jobs, as well as the respect of their peers and family members.
In some parts of the country, and in some institutions, gays face
harassment, open hostility, and even violence.
What
does the law say about discrimination against gays?
To understand
the concerns of gay people, it is helpful to realize that it is
legal to discriminate against a person or a group unless the law
specifically prohibits it. For example, it is legal to refuse to
rent an apartment to someone for many reasons—because they
have red, brown, or blonde hair; because they have a pet; because
they drink too much fruit juice, milk, or alcohol; or because you
just don't like the way they look. But it is illegal to refuse to
rent to someone because, for example, he or she is black or Jewish,
or uses a wheelchair. Federal laws ban discrimination in housing
on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, gender,
marital and family status, and disability. Some states have added
other categories.
The debate
over civil rights for gays and lesbians has focused on whether
homosexuals should be protected from discrimination along with
the groups mentioned above. In most states there are no laws which
protect gay people from discrimination because of their sexual
orientation. As of March 1993, seven states and more than 110
cities do have civil rights laws that protect gays from discrimination
in housing and employment. Churches, synagogues, and other religious
institutions are exempt from gay rights laws pertaining to employment.
In addition, many gay rights laws include exceptions for roommate
selection and for owners who live in one part of their two-family
house and are selecting renters for the other part.
The
political battle
Supporters of
gay rights have used the political process effectively. Their current
agenda includes passing more gay rights laws, ending the ban on
gays in the military, repealing state sodomy laws, and passing domestic
partnership legislation. (A number of cities have "domestic partner
laws," which extend economic benefits such as health insurance to
unmarried couples, whether gay or straight, who are in long-term,
committed relationships.)
In the past
few years, an organized opposition has pushed to prevent or repeal
laws that protect homosexuals from discrimination. During 1992,
civil rights for gays and lesbians moved to the center of the
national stage. The ballot questions in Colorado, Oregon, and
Portland, Maine produced bruising campaigns that received extensive
national media attention, and President-elect Clinton promised
to end the ban on gays in the military.
The Colorado
question was the only one to pass, partly because its language
was confusing, but also because supporters used the slogan, "No
special rights," and argued that gays were pushing for the same
"special rights and quotas" as "true minorities." The question
read: "Shall there be an amendment . . . to prohibit the state
of Colorado and any of its political subdivisions from adopting
or enforcing any law or policy which provides that homosexual,
lesbian, or bisexual orientation, conduct, or relationships constitutes
or entitles a person to claim any minority or protected status,
quota preference, or discrimination?"
The Oregon
initiative was bolder. The words, "homosexuality, pedophilia,
sadism, and masochism" were used three times. For example: "State,
regional, and local governments . . . including . . . the public
schools, shall assist in setting a standard for Oregon's youth
that recognizes homosexuality, pedophilia, sadism and masochism
as abnormal, wrong, unnatural, and perverse and that these behaviors
are to be discouraged and avoided."
The constitutionality
of anti-gay rights initiatives is at question. In January 1993,
a state judge in Denver blocked Colorado from enforcing the measure
that voters had approved until he could decide in a trial whether
the law violated the federal or state constitution.
President
Clinton's announcement that the ban on gays in the military would
be ended generated high-level resistance, both in the military
and in Congress. The debate on gay rights dominated the national
news for several weeks. Both sides' arguments received considerable
publicity, so we will not repeat them here. Since this is another
critical aspect of gay rights that will benefit from dialogue,
we urge you to think of productive ways to discuss it.
A
few prominent issues in the debate about gay rights
Are
people born gay or do they become gay?
This is central because of concern over gays as role models
for children. There is no definite answer to the question of what
causes sexual orientation. Though scientific research has found
evidence of a biological basis for sexual orientation, much disagreement
on interpretations of the research remains.
Are
gays more likely to sexually molest children than are heterosexuals?
Some organizations that oppose gay rights claim that homosexuals
are more likely to engage in sex with minors than are heterosexuals.
While it is difficult to gather credible evidence about this assertion,
the link between child molestation and homosexuality is frequently
raised because of well-publicized cases. The vast majority of
child molesters are heterosexual men; 97% of known sex offenders
against children are male, and 90% of the victims are female.
There is no conclusive evidence either way on the question of
whether homosexuality is linked to an increased likelihood of
child molestation.
What
percentage of the population is gay? We have seen many
different numbers, ranging from two to ten percent. Most studies
conclude that gays are between five and ten percent of the population.
Is
homosexuality an illness? Are gays unhappy? The American
Psychiatric Association does not consider homosexuality an illness.
Being gay has little effect on personality as measured by standardized
tests. Lesbian and gay adults who have come to terms with their
sexual orientation are no more psychologically disturbed than
are heterosexuals. However, many gay youth have a hard time, perhaps
because of peer pressure and the absence of visible, healthy role
models. Gay youth are two to three times more likely to attempt
suicide than other young people and comprise up to 30% of youth
suicides each year.
Religious
perspectives
There are many
religious perspectives on homosexuality. Some religious leaders
point to passages from the Bible such as, "And if a man lie with
mankind, as with womankind, both of them have committed abomination:
they shall surely be put to death" (Leviticus 20:12). In addition
to considering homosexuality wrong, some people believe that the
"gay lifestyle" undermines the moral strength of our society. This
may reflect a belief that gays are more likely to be promiscuous
and to engage in deviant sexual behaviors than are heterosexuals.
Taken together, these beliefs are often used to support the point
of view that homosexuals should not receive full civil rights.
On the other
hand, there are many religious organizations and leaders who actively
support civil rights for gays and lesbians. Some offer this support
because they believe there is nothing morally wrong with homosexuality,
arguing that the Bible should be interpreted in the context of
the culture of the time in which it was written. In fact, there
are denominations that openly embrace gay men and women as religious
leaders. Still other religious leaders offer support for civil
rights for gays not because they think homosexuality is moral
but because they don't see morality as the issue. They argue that
even though one may disapprove of homosexuality, it would be wrong
to limit gays' legal rights. They say our system separates church
and state for a good reason.
There are
also religious distinctions that are important to some people
for spiritual reasons but which may have no clear application
to a person's views on civil rights for gays. For example, the
Catholic Church distinguishes between homosexual orientation,
which it does not consider sinful because it is not freely chosen,
and homosexual behavior, which it does consider a sin, but only
because any sexual (genital) activity outside of marriage—homosexual
or heterosexual—is sinful.
Is
there any common ground?
From what we
see on the T.V. news or in the newspaper, we might think that most
Americans have strong and certain ideas about gay rights. We usually
hear only from advocates at opposite poles. Most Americans, however,
are somewhere in between. They are uncomfortable with homosexuality,
and have been so consistently. But they also overwhelmingly oppose
discrimination against gay people in employment and housing, at
least in principle. In specific situations—such as in schools—that
support weakens considerably.
Clearly
this is a complex issue that will continue to provoke debate in
our society. We hope that as you participate in discussion and
dialogue, and act in the public arena in support of your beliefs,
you will help make the public debate on this issue a more constructive
one.
Back to top
Ground
rules for useful discussions
This section
offers some brief suggestions for useful discussions about social
and political issues. Some people say that, in this age of television
and busy lives, our conversation skills leave something to be
desired. Still, the art of conversation can be revived with practice.
Whether
you are talking with close friends or casual acquaintances, effective
communication requires that you respect others and take their
ideas seriously - even when you think they are dead wrong.
Talk about
public issues can bring out strong emotions, because many of our
beliefs are a large part of how we identify ourselves. You can
respect another's feelings without necessarily agreeing with the
conclusions that person has come to.
There are
no sure-fire rules, but applying some basic principles will make
your conversations more productive, satisfying, and enjoyable.
Though many of these ground rules seem common-sensical, we all
know that in practice they are not so commonly applied!
- Listen
carefully to others. Try to really understand what they are
saying and respond to it, especially when their ideas differ
from your own. Try to avoid building your own arguments in your
head while others are talking.
- Think
together about what you want to get out of your conversation.
- Be open
to changing your mind; this will help you really listen to others'
views.
- When disagreement
occurs, keep talking. Explore the disagreement. Search for the
common concerns beneath the surface. Above all, be civil.
- Value
one another's experiences, and think about how they have contributed
to your thinking.
- Help to
develop one another's ideas. Listen carefully and ask clarifying
questions.
- Don't
waste time arguing about points of fact; for the time being,
you may need to agree to disagree and then move on. You might
want to check out the facts before your next conversation.
- Speak
your mind freely, but don't monopolize the conversation.
Back to top
For
More Information
The Busy
Citizen's Discussion Guide: Civil Rights for Gays and Lesbians
is designed to help you have more productive conversations about
a difficult issue that many believe will become more prominent
throughout the nineties. This booklet can be read quickly and
discussed whenever you have the opportunity to talk. It is balanced
in its presentation of ideas and helps people examine the public
policy debate in light of their personal beliefs.
The Study
Circles Resource Center (SCRC), producer of this Busy Citizen's
Discussion Guide, is a project of the Topsfield Foundation, Inc.,
a nonprofit, nonpartisan foundation dedicated to advancing deliberative
democracy and improving the quality of public life in the United
States. SCRC carries out this mission by promoting the use of
small-group, democratic, highly participatory discussions known
as study circles.
Publications
of SCRC include topical discussion programs; training material
for study circle organizers, leaders, and writers; a quarterly
newsletter; a clearinghouse list of study circle material developed
by a variety of organizations; and an annotated bibliography on
study circles, collaborative learning, and participatory democracy.
Many of these publications are available at no charge.
www.studycircles.org
Study Circles
Resource Center
PO Box 203, 697 Pomfret St.
Pomfret, CT 06258
(203) 928-2616
FAX (203) 928-3713
Back
to top
|
