At Week's End; 616; Equal Sexual Rights

Two balls in total, low sleep. Stand by to low count down now.

10 plus 10.

Low count down. Stand by to делаетcycle High, and let's do this

waves. Stand by to lose it, losing in the box

Samara Fade Music, Fade Music, and Q-Raj.

Here in the 1993 session of the New Mexico Legislature,

some of the oldest issues in the world, sexual preferences,

God, human rights.

Join us for a discussion of SB 91, an amendment to the Human Rights Act,

a measure to bar discrimination against gays and lesbians in New Mexico.

We're here in the Senate Conservation Committee room with Senator Liz Defanix,

who is a Democrat from Santa Fe, Los Alamos, San Miguel, Torrance,

and a bit of Bernalio County. Welcome, Senator Defanix.

Thank you very much.

Tell me what SB 91 is, and I know you were a co-sponsor and a strong supporter.

Tell me why that bill should now pass the House.

The Senate Bill 91 amends our State Human Rights Act to protect sexual orientation

in terms of heterosexuality, homosexuality, and bisexuality in the areas of housing,

public accommodations, credit, and employment.

And it does not legislate morals, values, religious beliefs.

It basically addresses those particular issues.

I have a couple of different reasons why it's very important.

This particular bill affects me.

I'm an open lesbian. It affects my friends.

It affects my community.

But it's also an economic issue for our state.

And the economics is that we do not want more homeless New Mexicans.

We want people to be able to get housing.

We want people to be able to get credit so they can pay their bills

and that they can go out and become a consumer and then buy a house and so on.

And we want people being employed.

We don't want people on the unemployment lines or receiving public assistance.

So I see this as two pieces of legislation, really.

It's taking our Human Rights Act.

It's amending it. We already have it on the books.

But I see it as a Human and Civil Rights Act.

And I see it as an economic issue for our state.

Does it address real needs?

I think many in the heterosexual community think that there's no problem out there.

There's no discrimination against homosexuals, either female or male.

What sort of problem are we addressing?

Can you give us an example?

Well, I had the opportunity to testify before one of the Senate committees.

And when I moved to New Mexico 10 years ago was to teach at the University of New Mexico.

And at that time, I went through a situation with a supervisor of a department about three years after I was there

on the basis of perceived homosexuality.

And what he decided to do was to eliminate my position.

Well, I had to fight it through the administrative levels through my department

and then through my college and then through the university.

And they basically said, no, we need that position.

Liz is doing a fine job, she will stay.

But based upon perceived homosexuality, he wanted to eliminate the position.

And there was nothing in the state statutes to bar him from doing that.

You had to go through an administrative process at the university.

At the time, the University of New Mexico did not have any protection against this type of discrimination

and our state certainly did not either.

I also had some friends who lived here in Santa Fe, Tom Armor and Michael Beck.

And they're both deceased now, but they used to own the Nifty Cafe.

And when Tom became ill, Michael went out to try to find housing for the two of them.

And he went and he leased the house.

And when he went back and he told Tom, we have this house we're going to be moving to.

And they arrived the first day and Tom was in a wheelchair.

And here was Michael, pushing a wheelchair, a neighbor called the landlady and said,

there are two men moving into this house.

When is in a wheelchair? He must be sick. They must be gay.

The landlady canceled the lease and they were without a home.

And actually they became homeless for a little while until we could get them established into another home.

So this is the kind of discrimination that's been faced by racial minorities,

by ethnic minorities in America, by people who were different, regardless of the difference.

Exactly. And although we're talking in this bill about actual or perceived discrimination based upon sexual orientation,

we're not being put on the back of the buses, but we're treated like that in many situations.

Human and civil rights have taken a long time in this country to come about.

But we've been moving in many positive areas and steps in this and we need to keep moving in this direction also.

This past the Senate, the bill has passed the Senate of the Mexico.

Now it's in the house. Do you anticipate a tough fight, a close vote in the house?

Yes, I do. One thing we're trying to remind people is that, for example,

the democratic national platform encompasses non-discrimination based on the basis of sexual orientation.

So we're trying to remind people about that. We're trying to remind people that their friends, their neighbors,

are homosexuals or bisexuals, and we don't go into people's bedrooms to determine.

And that's an interesting concept. We really haven't talked much about it.

The whole bisexuality concept here in our society because people don't talk about it.

But there is a group here in our society that probably carries that particular label.

So we need to think about our friends. We need to think about our society.

We need to think about the future of our state.

The quality of life here in New Mexico is excellent.

We just need to maintain that in terms of this particular legislation.

Just a few seconds left. Is the religious right really coming down hard in the lobbies of this body?

Well, I would say both sides of the religious movement are coming down on this.

When in the Senate, when we are hearing the bill through different committees coming onto the Senate floor,

we got many, many calls and letters of opposition.

But we got many, many calls and letters of support.

And we received religious support and we received religious opposition.

So I would say that it's coming from both sides.

But it's going to be a close fight. Thank you very much, Senator Stefani.

Thank you very much.

I'm joined now by Representative Jerry Lee-All-One,

who is a Republican from Bernalillo County,

from the far east side, both sides of the mountain in Albuquerque District 22.

Representative All-One, you're opposed to Senate Bill 91,

which is now in the House.

Senator Stefanix just told us facing a tough fight there.

Tell us why you're opposed to this bill.

Well, I believe the recognition of a group of people that flaunt their sex in front of everyone else is immoral.

It's not right.

And they're trying to become a minority group.

Why don't we open it up to prostitutes?

Why don't we open it up to the guy that works at McDonald's from 12 to 8 at night,

and make him a minority class?

There's three things that qualify a person, Roger, for a minority class,

and they don't qualify in any one segment.

Number one, they're deprived educationally or they're deprived economically.

The average homosexual or gay person or person seeking these rights

makes four times the median average income of the person in New Mexico over $50,000 a year.

They're highly educated.

Over 60% of them have college degrees.

So on the first criteria, they fail.

The second criteria is that they're not a powerful political force,

or they have no political cloud, if you will.

And I'm telling you, they're shaking the foundation of this capital.

The brand new $35 million renovated capital is similar to the World Trade Center,

in the sense that the foundation is shaking,

and they do have a political cloud.

There's just a lot of reasons they don't qualify as a minority.

Have you ever seen a former Hispanic, a former black?

They don't have distinguishable characteristics, such as immutable type characteristics,

by gender, national origin, race.

So I'm saying there are over five million former homosexuals.

And that comprises two to two and a half percent of our population

that have been counseled out of this problem.

And I think a lot of them want to get counseled out of this problem.

When the former homosexuals speaking on the center floor of the other day,

I could just see the want in some of their faces to leave this lifestyle,

but they were scared, they would get peer pressure.

Or they were scared, they would be focused out amongst their own peer group.

But isn't this one more group in America that simply is different?

Well, however you define them,

and those may be valid definitions of income level or whatever,

one more group that's seeking to bar discrimination against it because of its difference.

Regardless of what of that sexual practice, or the color of their skin,

or whatever, why shouldn't there be these safeguards against discrimination?

What you're voicing is a sense of their difference.

Why shouldn't they be safeguarded against discrimination because of their difference?

How does one prove their homosexuality or that they are a lesbian?

They have distinguishable characteristics with the other minorities that I mentioned.

But to say two people are applying for the same job.

They have same educational requirements.

They have the same experience levels roughly.

They come across to the employer with the same enthusiasm,

with the same personality that they could handle that job situation correctly.

And one says, I'm a homosexual.

They get preference.

I don't believe that's right.

You think a legislation will introduce preference rather than safeguarding against discrimination?

It's going to open up a can of worms.

I think they might even become a larger class of people that are,

if you will, feel that they don't have their rights with this legislation,

then we'll help them.

You wrote a letter, I believe, to the legislature in Colorado congratulating them on their action against a bill like this.

Is there a religious basis for your opposition?

Are there utterances of Jesus Christ and the New Testament against homosexuality?

It's not just in the New Testament that's in the old as well.

But I mean, it starts in...

Are there specifically the New Testament?

Could you cite something that Jesus said?

No, I'm not a religious fanatic.

I just believe in the Lord and the Lord guides my life.

But there are several verses in the Bible and there are several chapters in the Bible.

There's nowhere in the Bible there's a condleness type of activity.

And God has made those people to be accepted in the lifestyle,

then why are they condemned throughout?

It starts in Genesis and Leviticus and Romans and on and on and on.

But that's not the basis of it.

I just don't want anybody to have special rights.

I want us all to have and continue to have the same equal rights.

I don't know that your home was sexual.

I don't know you don't know that I am.

But I will treat you with the same courtesy and kindness.

And I will treat them with the same courtesy and kindness.

But my concern is I'm not going to...

I'm not going to be...

It's going to open up all types of...

Let's look at the business angle.

The suits that are going to happen to businesses or to people renting.

You go to throw somebody out because they don't qualify financially.

Or they haven't paid their rent.

And they say, you're throwing me out because I'm a lesbian.

You know, you had no knowledge of that.

What they do behind their doors is their business and that's their privilege.

Are you saying really that there's no discrimination in society against gay people,

against gays and lesbians, either in housing or in the job place or anywhere else?

That discrimination is a fiction in America?

I'm even discriminated against in many instances.

But I'm talking about these groups.

Are they discriminated against or not?

We all have certain people that are certain groups that slant their views against us.

And I get slanted against us just because maybe I live in the heights in Albuquerque versus those that live in the valley.

And I can show you homes in the valley that have a huge asset value bigger than mine.

I can take you in places in my district.

But would you be barred from a job or from renting an apartment or from a promotion

because of your sexual preference?

And I'm assuming that you'd be.

You'd be a heterosexual.

You'd say that.

You have a family.

Would you be barred for those reasons?

We have a person coming up to testify.

That was fired because they were what they call a straight person in a homosexual business.

Own business.

Is this going to be a close vote representative all when do you think you've got the votes to defeat this major in the house?

I believe so in the vote.

I believe we do.

But there's some tremendous armed twisting going on in trades for other votes.

And I feel for people with vote they're conscious and they're backbone and the wishes of their ultimate maker.

This vote would have no chance in the house.

But if they're going to vote their financial pocketbook or their future of some political careers or whatever, they might be voting the other way.

Thank you representative Jerry Owen.

The business community is going to be saddled with four different costs that I can think of.

One is the cost to the individual.

The second is to the business through insurance costs.

The third is through the state placing and enforcing this legislation.

And then the fourth cost would be the cost of litigation.

There are no burdens to businesses that respect individual privacy.

And the record of the two states Massachusetts and Wisconsin that have had the longest record of having this legislation is that less than 2% of the charges filed are based on sexual orientation.

Without a question or a shadow of doubt, the legislation creates a special situation and special rights for those of the homosexual persuasion.

There are no quotas, there is no affirmative action in this legislation.

And the kind of discrimination that we're talking about does differ somewhat from the discrimination faced by African Americans and other ethnic minorities.

Our problem has not been getting in the door.

Our problem has been that we have been forced into denial or forced into hiding and that we in order to keep our jobs and to keep our housing.

The gay community wants to be able to marry and have it treated legally in the law.

They want to adopt children.

They want to get into our school system as a Project Ten in California that says there is no difference between the gay or the homosexual lifestyle and to be treated just like the heterosexual community.

There's not a special right to have a job, keep a job based on merit.

There's no, nor is it a special right to have housing or public accommodations without discrimination.

Civil rights legislation prevents people from being singled out for discrimination.

And what it has done is essentially to level the playing field that prejudice has denied the opportunities for.

The agenda is to legitimize the homosexual and lesbian lifestyle and to foster it on the rest of the 97% that are not of that persuasion.

Why civil rights legislation was passed back in 1964 was the horrendous treatment of African Americans in this nation.

And what the government decided was that personal prejudices and beliefs should not affect one's treatment in matters of housing, public accommodations and credit.

This is something they select to do. It's not something that they're born with.

This is a choice they make and they're trying to get that choice legitimized and covered under the Human Rights Act just like the black is born that way and can't change it.

These people can change.

What we are trying to say is that it's natural for people to be gay and that it is an immutable characteristic.

It may not be like race and sex that's something that you can see right on the surface.

But it's like left handedness deals with how the brain is wired and the American Psychological Association and American Psychiatric Association have concluded for many years that this is immutable.

It is not it is not pathological and new research in this in the biological fields are saying that there is a definite relationship.

The homosexual lifestyle is not natural. God has given us a plan in the Bible for what is natural.

And he tells us that they have changed the use of the woman and the using man instead of woman.

And this is totally wrong.

Religious morality has always been a very powerful force in individuals' lives.

And when people have been taught for generations that homosexuality is evil and sinful, this has an effect in public policy.

And what we are trying to say is that it's natural for people to be gay.

Call your legislature. Write him. Call the governor.

Let your feelings be known on this issue.

It's very important for the public to let the legislators know how they feel.

There has been a real absence sometimes of leadership.

Encourage.

For more information if you are opposed to Senate Bill 91, you can call Coalition for Responsible Government at 836-8205.

If you would like to support Senate Bill 91, you can call New Mexico Lesbian Gay Political Alliance at 275-9721.

If you would like to express your comments, please write.

At Weeksend and Care of K-N-M-E-T-V, 1130 University Boulevard Northeast, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87102, or call 27706-86.

For a cassette copy of this at Weeksend Program, send $35, which include shipping and handling 2, K-N-M-E-T-V, 1200 University Boulevard Northeast, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87102, or call 1-800-328-5663.

If you would like to support this at Weeksend Program, send $35, which include shipping and handling 2, K-N-M-E-T-V, 1200 University Boulevard Northeast, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87102, or call 1-800-5205.

If you would like to support this at Weeksend Program, send $35, which include shipping and handling 2, K-N-M-E-T-V, 1200 University Boulevard Northeast, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87102, or call 1-800-5205, 1200 University Boulevard Northeast, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87102, or call 1-800-5205.

Thank you.