Equity Act: A Response to Mitt Romney

There is currently a bill in Congress, H.R. 5, that is commonly referred to as the “Equality Act.” This bill is designed to add protections for LGBTQ people to the 1964 Civil Rights Bill. It’s description is “To prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex, gender identity, and sexual orientation, and for other purposes.” I’m not going to dwell on the content of the bill. Y’all can read it yourselves here.
What I am going to write about is the response that many conservative, religious folks are saying about the bill.
Well, actually, I’m not going to discuss so much THEIR responses as much as I am going to respond TO them.
In particular, I am going to single out Sen. Mitt Romney, (R-Utah), for his response.
Like so many others, Romney has seemed to be a voice of sanity among all of the craziness of conservative politics. But, under the veneer of moderation he is still far to the right of moderate.
The Equality Act was introduced into the House last week on the 18th. Later, a spokesperson for Sen. Romney released the following statement:
“Sen. Romney believes that strong religious liberty protections are essential to any legislation on this issue, and since those provisions are absent from this particular bill, he is not able to support it,” said Arielle Mueller, a Romney spokesperson, via email to the Washington Blade in response to an inquiry on the Equality Act.
For several years people have tried to cloak their personal biases and opinions under the mantle of “Sincerely held Religious beliefs.” This is pretty much what Romney said.
People who believe in various religious texts say that those texts prohibit them from agreeing to certain practices or beliefs of others. In this case, they cite a Biblical prohibition of homosexuality and “clear” statement that God created two distinct genders in all species. Ok, I’m not going to address the religious side of this. I could. And, I could present opposing views of the very same texts that they allude to. That’s the nature of Biblical interpretations. That’s what they are; Interpretations.
No, I want to go in a different direction.
I want to talk about what may be referred to as the “accidents of nature.” Or, perhaps, even as Acts of God.
I currently live in a middle-class American suburb. I have a house and a garden. I own a car and have time to write silly blog posts. I wasn’t born into a developing nation where houses are patchworks of whatever materials I can forage. Where such things as running water and sanitation services are non-existent, let alone computer or internet access.
I don’t think that anyone would argue that the above is an accurate account of an Accident of Nature. I had nothing to do with where I was born. Nor, did the individual in that other culture. We both have privileges and lacks in both. For those who like to explain things in terms of Divine Providence, I was Providentially born into the life that I now have.
Now, let me ask you.
Is the fact that some are born left-handed an Accident of Nature?
Of course they are. They had no say in the fact that they have a gift that is divergent with the majority.
How about people who may be born with a cleft palate?
Are these folks somehow responsible for this? Did they choose to be born this way?
Of course not! It’s obvious that somewhere in their development something happened that allowed them to develop this particular trait.
My wife is a nurse. She tells me stories about children who are born with any number of issues. Some have a hole in their heart that needs to be repaired surgically. Others have incomplete bowel development. All of them are what we could call Accidents of Nature.
There is another condition that doesn’t get a lot of press.
It is referred to as Intersexuality. This is a condition where a child is born with two sets of sexual organs. There may also be a difference in chromosome identity with the actual sexual organs present. A child born with female chromosomes who is born with apparent male genitalia would be an example. Some children are even born with both sets of genitalia. Many times at birth, the parents are asked to choose which gender the child should be. What if they make the wrong choice? What if their child with female chromosomes is surgically altered to give them a son?
Even in nature such things may occur.
Recently, I saw a news item about a cardinal that appeared to be half red and half white.
They reported that this was in fact a bird that was two genders!
I don’t share this because it gives credibility to Intersexuality in humans. It doesn’t.
But, it does show quite clearly that Accidents of Nature happen!
Let’s take this discussion a step further.
What if a child’s genetics are clearly male and there biological sex is also physically male. Now, let’s suggest that as this boy grows up his body produces hormones differently from other boys. This is all hypothetical, mind you. And, let’s say that these hormones, that would naturally cause this boy to find the female body attractive, are different. In his case they cause him to find pleasure in the male body. In fact, just as I am attracted to females, his attraction is to males. He desires another male in whom he can confide and grow with; another Person with whom he can bond and love.
That’s not a far-fetched idea.
In fact, for millions, it is the reality of their lives.
I share all of this to make the point that when people talk about LGBTQ issues, they are not talking about religion. There is nothing religious about an Accident of Nature. Unless, of course, you want to call it an Act of God.
No, this entire issue is about Civil Rights. It’s about the unalienable right guaranteed in our founding documents that are granted every citizen.
So, Mr. Romney, in framing the Equality Act in religious terms, you are making a horrible category error that threatens the lives and livelihoods of millions of your fellow citizens.
Many of whom are your co-religionists.
I urge you, and all other Senators to truly engage in these issues and set aside biases and bigotries that hurt rather than heal.