Whether you want to call it a movement or a trend (or an agenda for that matter), American courts are beginning to recognize gays as a legally protected class.
"The legal definition of specified groups of people who suffered widespread discrimination in the past and who are given special protection by the judicial system."
This question is being dealt with more in the courts than by legislatures because there is a lack of unity among various jurisdictions as to what constitutes a protected class. There is a good deal of support for this position on the basis of the inclusion of "sexual orientation" on the list of those protected by various anti-discrimination laws, including the Equal Rights Amendment, which, of course, never became law.
On the other hand, the other protected classes are arguably limited to members who became members by means not of their own choosing. There is a good argument that religion is much more a matter of choice than sexual orientation, especially in the case of one protected as a member of a religion that they adopted later in life.
I'd rather not include a poll, because I'm more interested in analysis than demographics. (I'm also not interested in google results, slogans, and conclusions not supported by analysis.) I personally am kind of on the fence on this, balancing my long-held beliefs in personal freedoms against my feeling that homosexuality is unnatural. So here's a rare chance to engage in a discussion that could actually influence somebody's opinion!
"The legal definition of specified groups of people who suffered widespread discrimination in the past and who are given special protection by the judicial system."
This question is being dealt with more in the courts than by legislatures because there is a lack of unity among various jurisdictions as to what constitutes a protected class. There is a good deal of support for this position on the basis of the inclusion of "sexual orientation" on the list of those protected by various anti-discrimination laws, including the Equal Rights Amendment, which, of course, never became law.
On the other hand, the other protected classes are arguably limited to members who became members by means not of their own choosing. There is a good argument that religion is much more a matter of choice than sexual orientation, especially in the case of one protected as a member of a religion that they adopted later in life.
I'd rather not include a poll, because I'm more interested in analysis than demographics. (I'm also not interested in google results, slogans, and conclusions not supported by analysis.) I personally am kind of on the fence on this, balancing my long-held beliefs in personal freedoms against my feeling that homosexuality is unnatural. So here's a rare chance to engage in a discussion that could actually influence somebody's opinion!
Facebook
Twitter