PFLAG SPIRIT
Page 1
P F L AG S P I R I T
September 2016
Volume XX11, Number 8
Newsletter of Parents, Families, & Friends of Lesbians and Gays, Fort Worth Chapter, P.O. Box 8279, Fort Worth, TX 76124. Published monthly except January.
MISSION:
Parents, Families & Friends of Lesbians and Gays promotes the health and well-being of gay, lesbian, bisexual and
transgendered persons, their families and friends through support, to cope with an adverse society; education, to enlighten an illinformed public; and advocacy, to end discrimination and secure equal civil rights. PFLAG provides opportunity for dialogue about
sexual orientation, and acts to create a society that is healthy and respectful of human diversity.
Federal transgender bathroom access
guidelines blocked by judge
September meeting
Our guest speakers will be Vicki Cooper and Jane
Rogers, who will share their 19 1/2 year journey together. Dr.
Rita Cotterly will give us an update on the transgender bathroom issue.
Samaritan House Supper Club
Supper Club is a great opportunity to volunteer for a project
that really makes a difference. Our dedicated group of volunteers cooks and brings food on the fourth Monday of the
month, serving dinner from 5:30-7:00. The residents look
forward to our meals, and we enjoy both preparing and sharing the meals with them. Please contact Christy Matthews at
805-717-2454 if you’d like to join us or contribute food.
Dates to Remember
9/1
9/8
9/18
9/26
10/1
PFLAG Fort Worth Monthly Meeting
PFLAG Dallas Monthly Meeting
PFLAG Denton Monthly Meeting
Supper Club for Samaritan House
Fort Worth Pride Parade—We are Family
6:45 pm
7:00 pm
3:00 pm
5:30 pm
Noon
PFLAG FORT WORTH INFORMATION
Meetings: First Thursday of each month at 7:00 p.m.
First Jefferson Unitarian Universalist Church
1959 Sandy Lane, Fort Worth, TX 76112-5412
Hotline: 817-428-2329
Website: http://pflagfortworth.org
National Website: http://www.pflag.org
Newsletter: Sharon Salih, Editor
Change of address & news to share: 817-496-1587
PFLAG/FW is not directly affiliated with any religious group.
By Erik Eckholm and Alan Blinder, August 22, 2016
A federal judge on Sunday blocked the Obama administration from enforcing new guidelines that were intended to
expand restroom access for transgender students across the
country.
Judge Reed O’Connor of the Federal District Court for
the Northern District of Texas said in a 38-page ruling, which he
said should apply nationwide, that the government had not complied with federal law when it issued “directives which contradict
the existing legislative and regulatory text.”
Judge O’Connor, whom President George W. Bush
nominated to the federal bench, said that not granting an injunction would put states “in the position of either maintaining their
current policies in the face of the federal government’s view that
they are violating the law, or changing them to comply with the
guidelines and cede their authority over this issue.”
The judge’s order, in a case brought by officials from
more than a dozen states, is a victory for social conservatives in
the continuing legal battles over the restroom guidelines, which
the federal government issued this year. The culture war over
the rights of transgender people, and especially their right to
use public bathrooms consistent with their gender identities, has
emerged as an emotional cause among social conservatives.
The Obama administration’s assertion that the rights of
transgender people in public schools and workplaces are protected under existing laws against sex discrimination has been
condemned by social conservatives, who said the administration was illegally intruding into local affairs and promoting a policy that would jeopardize the privacy and safety of school children.
The ruling could deter the administration from bringing
new legal action against school districts that do not allow transgender students to use bathrooms and locker rooms of their
choice.
“We are pleased that the court ruled against the
Obama administration’s latest illegal federal overreach,” Attorney General Ken Paxton of Texas said in a statement on Mon-
(Continued on page 5)
PFLAG SPIRIT
For trans kids,
back-to-school a cause for concern
By Richard A. Marinie, August 14, 2016
Before his senior year at Jefferson High School last
summer, Leo Tyler Castillo-Anguiano and his parents went to
meet with the principal to discuss a sensitive subject. Leo, 18,
had recently told his parents he was transgender and was undergoing medical transition from female to male.
“The principal was open and receptive to allowing Leo
to go to school as a boy, but then he asked what bathroom Leo
would use,” said Lori Ann Castillo, Leo’s mother. “Leo told him
he was going to use the boys bathroom and that he’d already
been doing it for two years. The principal was a little shocked
and taken aback. He had no idea.”
The “b-word,” as the bathroom issue was referred to
several times during a plática (talk) and workshop for trans children and their parents Saturday at the Esperanza Peace and
Justice Center, is just the tip of the type of transphobia that
trans children face as they prepare to return to school over the
next few weeks.
“We decided to hold this workshop because we’ve
seen such hateful rhetoric about trans kids on the news this
summer,” said Natalie Rodriguez, an Esperanza fellow and one
of the workshop organizers. “And that rhetoric often turns to
violence.”
There’s no official count of the number of transgender
students in Texas. Schools aren’t required to collect such information and wouldn’t be allowed under privacy laws to release
such data if they did, according to Lauryn Farris with the Transgender Education Network of Texas.
“But I personally know of 20 to 30 trans kids in San
Antonio schools,” she said.
About 110 people — parents, children, educators and
other trans allies — attended the workshop to learn about student rights and to hear from parents of trans kids and from the
kids themselves.
Most speakers decried the use of trans children for
political gain. They were especially critical of a lawsuit filed by
Texas and 12 other states asking a federal judge to overturn
guidelines for treatment of transgender students contained in a
letter sent to school districts nationwide by the Education Department and Justice Department….
Victor Cornell, statewide advocacy manager for the
American Civil Liberties Union of Texas, gave attendees a quick
primer on the rights of trans students under the federal law
commonly known as Title IX. The law prohibits discrimination on
the basis of sex in any federally funded education program.
Cornell explained how students should stand up for
their rights if they feel they’re being discriminated against — be
First Jefferson
Unitarian Universalist Church
Affirming the inherent worth and
dignity of all human beings.
Sunday Services at 11:00 a.m.
1959 Sandy Lane
Fort Worth, Texas 76112
817 - 451 - 1505
www.firstjefferson.org
Page 2
respectful, document everything, rally friends and family for
support, etc. — and that rules must apply equally to everyone.
If, for example, a school has gender clothing rules covering
things such as the length of a girl’s dress, a trans girl must
abide by that rule.
Students, he emphasized, also have the same rights of
assembly and free speech as anyone else.
“As long as they’re not interrupting class, they cannot
be silenced by a teacher just because that teacher doesn’t like
what they’re talking about,” he said. “And if the school allows
other clubs, like a chess club, the school has to allow trans students to form their own club and hold meetings on school property.”
For more information about transgender issues, contact the Transgender Education Network of Texas at
transtexas.org.
For the rest of the story:http://www.expressnews.com/
news/local/article/For-trans-kids-back-to-school-a-cause-for-concern9142186.php?t=f79f1ce9075cfd7659&cmpid=twitter-premium
Texas court says trans man can’t be listed
as male on his driver’s license
By John Wright, August 11, 2016
A Houston man is running afoul of Texas’ onerous
and opaque requirements for gender-marker changers on identification documents.
A Texas appeals court ruled last week that a transgender man isn’t entitled to change the gender marker on his
driver’s license from “female” to “male.”
However, LGBT legal experts say they don’t expect
the decision from the 14th Court of Appeals, which covers the
Houston area, to have much practical impact, since so few
local judges typically grant gender-marker changes in the first
place.
Katie Sprinkle, a Dallas attorney who handles identification and gender marker cases, said some Democratic judges
in Bexar, Dallas and Travis counties allow trans people to correct gender markers on their driver’s licenses and birth certificates if they provide proper documentation, including letters
from doctors and therapists. Sprinkle also said the 14th Court
of Appeals’ decision may be “persuasive,” but is not “binding,”
on other jurisdictions.
“I don’t see anything in it that I think is going to
change the status quo, because the status quo in 95 percent of
the state is, they don’t do it anyway,” Sprinkle said. “Worst(Continued on page 5)
I can tell you that in my former experience, I
spent 7 years, almost 8 years in San Francisco, we
had transgender bathrooms the entire time I was
there. Never had one issue, zero reported issues
with a transgender restroom. So you know I think
we need to kind of peel the onion. Is it really about
the restroom, or is it about something else?
- - - New Houston Independent School
District Superintendent Richard Carranza
PFLAG SPIRIT
Wyoming Supreme Court to hear
arguments on same-sex marriage
By Ben Neary, Associated Press, August 12, 2016
Cheyenne, WO—The Wyoming Supreme Court is set to hear
arguments next week on whether a Pinedale judge who has said
she wouldn't perform same-sex marriages because of her religious beliefs should be removed from office.
Ruth Neely in April filed a petition asking the court to
reject a recommendation from the Wyoming Commission on
Judicial Conduct and Ethics that she lose her posts as a municipal judge and circuit court magistrate.
The commission started an investigation of Neely after
she told a reporter in 2014 she would not perform same-sex
marriages because of her religious beliefs. The U.S. Supreme
Court ruled last year that same-sex couples nationwide may
marry.
Attempts to reach Neely and her attorneys, including
the Alliance Defending Freedom, an Arizona religious advocacy
law firm, were not successful on Friday. Neely is not a lawyer.
In fighting removal, Neely argues that she has a constitutional right to voice her opinion. Her lawyers have said no
same-sex couples have asked her to preside over their weddings. She's currently suspended from the circuit court post.
"In a chilling forecast, the commission leaves no doubt
that if it has its way, no judge who holds Judge Neely's religious
beliefs about marriage can remain on the bench once the public
learns of those beliefs," Neely's lawyers wrote.
Neely's case has similarities to the legal action in Kentucky against clerk Kim Davis. A conservative Christian, Davis
was jailed briefly last year after she refused to allow her office to
issue marriage licenses. Although her case sparked a national
debate over the religious freedom of civil servants versus the
civil rights of same-sex couples, she ultimately agreed to alter
the licenses to remove her name and title.
Casper lawyers Patrick Dixon and Britney F. Turner
represent the Wyoming commission. Attempts to reach them for
comment were unsuccessful. Commission Executive Director
Wendy Soto declined comment Friday.
"The Wyoming Commission on Judicial Conduct and
Ethics has no interest in interfering with Judge Neely's or anyone else's free exercise of religion," Dixon and Turner wrote in a
brief to the Wyoming Supreme Court, which is set to hear arguments Wednesday in Cheyenne. "Neither is it concerned with
suppressing her First Amendment right to permissible speech.
However, it is tasked with enforcing the Code of Judicial Conduct. What Judge Neely did and said is a violation of that Code.
Given her unwillingness to even acknowledge the ethical implications, she cannot remain in office."
The Wyoming Supreme Court has denied requests
from a number of religious organizations and current and former
state lawmakers file legal briefs in support of Neely's position.
The court is allowing a joint brief from the town of Pinedale and
the Sutherland Institute, a Utah-based conservative public policy
organization.
http://www.newsobserver.com/news/nation-world/
national/article95405572.html
Page 3
Texas leading suit over federal
transgender health policy
By Alexa Ura, August 23, 2016
Ramping up its fight over the rights of transgender people,
Texas filed a lawsuit Tuesday against the federal government
over a regulation prohibiting discrimination against transgender
individuals in some health programs.
Texas, on behalf of religious hospital network Franciscan
Alliance, and four other states are claiming the new federal
regulation would force doctors to perform gender transition procedures on children and requested the court to block the federal
government from enforcing the regulation. The federal rule on
nondiscrimination in health care prohibits denying or limiting
coverage for transgender individuals, including health services
related to gender transition.
The lawsuit was announced by the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which is representing the Franciscan Alliance.
It was filed Tuesday morning in the Wichita Falls-based District
Court for the Northern District of Texas.
The case was assigned to U.S. District Judge Reed O'Connor, who on Monday sided with the state and blocked the
Obama administration's guidelines to accommodate transgender
students. Those guidelines say that schools must treat a student's gender identity as the student's sex for the purposes of
complying with federal nondiscrimination statutes.
Under the health rule, protections against discrimination
based on sex extend to gender identity. The rule applies to
health care providers, including hospitals and doctors that accept federal dollars and insurance plans offered through the
federal marketplace.
The health care providers and the state are claiming that
the federal government is redefining the term "sex" to "thwart
decades of settled precedent" and impose "massive new obligations" on health care providers.
Among several legal claims, they argued that the new rule
violates the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act because
it compels religiously affiliated health organizations to violate
their sincerely held religious beliefs. The federal government
is "forcing them to choose between federal funding and their
livelihood as healthcare providers and their exercise of religion,"
the wrote in a court filing.
The federal health rule does not include a blanket exemption for religiously affiliated health care organizations, but it does
indicate that those providers could claim exemptions under existing federal religious freedom laws….
Transgender rights activists say claims that the health rule
prevents doctors from using sound medical judgment are unfounded.
The health rule "doesn’t force an individual to do anything in
particular" but instead clarifies that health care providers can't
deny services or insurance to someone because they're transgender, said Sarah Warbelow, legal director for the Human
Rights Campaign….
"What the doctor can't do is say, 'I won't treat you because
you're transgender.'"
For the rest of the story: https://
www.texastribune.org/2016/08/23/texas-leading-suit-againsttransgender-health-poli/
PFLAG SPIRIT
Page 4
For first time, court opens door to anti-LGBTQ
discrimination through religious freedom law
Transgender youths may struggle
to find gender-affirming care
The decision will likely be overturned on appeal. But it’s
worrying LGBTQ advocates nonetheless.
By German Lopez, August 20, 2016
Businesses can cite religious freedom laws to discriminate against transgender employees, a federal court in Michigan ruled on Thursday — the first time a court found that the
federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) can potentially be used to discriminate against LGBTQ people.
The decision is the latest in a back-and-forth between
the federal government and Detroit-based R.G. & G.R. Harris
Funeral Homes, which fired its transgender funeral director,
Aimee Stephens, because she began transitioning and “dress
[ing] as a woman” at work. The funeral home’s owner admitted
that he fired her because she began transitioning, citing the
business’s restrictive dress code.
But previously, the US Court of Appeals for the Sixth
Circuit had found that the ban on sex discrimination encoded in
federal law — specifically, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act — also
protect trans people. So at first glance, that made the funeral
home’s decision to fire a trans employee look illegal.
US District Judge Sean Cox acknowledged the higher
court’s ruling over Title VII. But, citing the controversial Supreme Court ruling in Hobby Lobby, he said the federal RFRA
may allow the funeral home to discriminate against its trans
employee anyway. Cox agreed that the federal government has
a compelling interest to protect LGBTQ people from discrimination, but he argued that the government had not proven that it
took the least restrictive means necessary to achieve that goal
in this case.
This speaks to legal technicalities in RFRAs: They
broadly protect people’s religious rights as long as the government doesn’t prove it has a compelling interest to interfere with
those rights and the government doesn’t prove it’s interfering
with those rights in the least restrictive means possible.
In this case, Cox found that the Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission (EEOC), a federal agency that oversees workplace discrimination claims, likely has a compelling
interest to prevent discrimination against a trans employee. But
the court concluded that the EEOC hadn’t proven that filing a
lawsuit against the funeral home — instead of, say, finding
some compromise between the funeral home and Stephens —
was the least restrictive action it could take to prevent discrimination in this case.
The result: Stephens remains fired for now, although
the EEOC is likely to appeal the case or try to show that a lawsuit really is the least restrictive means.
As Mark Joseph Stern wrote at Slate, chances are this
decision will be overturned on appeal: “The bigger problem is its
application of the ‘least restrictive means’ analysis to RFRA.
Courts are not allowed to make up a less restrictive alternative
in RFRA cases and scold the government for not complying
with its fantasy solution. That’s doubly true in an employment
discrimination case, where the universally accepted solution to
unlawful termination is a Title VII suit.”
For the rest of the story: http://
By Melissa Jenco, AAP News Content Editor, August 3.2016
Transgender youths report multiple barriers to receiving
gender-affirming health care, according to a new study.
Delaying such care comes with a price as it is connected to increased risk of psychiatric issues like anxiety and
depression, which already are higher in transgender youths than
in their peers.
The Academy and other health organizations recommend supporting transgender youths and providing referrals for
transitions.
Researchers set out to see if these youths were able to find
gender-affirming care. They used surveys, interviews and focus
groups to garner input from 15 youths ages 14-22 and 50 caregivers of transgender youths. They found six common barriers:
www.vox.com/2016/8/20/12558034/religious-freedom-lgbtqdiscrimination-michigan
•
.limited number of providers trained in supporting transgender youths
who were accessible in terms of insurance coverage and distance;
• lack of office protocols or awareness of professional guidelines;
• providers who did not use the patient’s chosen name or pronoun;
• lack of coordination between providers;
• trouble accessing pubertal blockers and cross-sex hormones due to
age, parental approval or lack of provider training; and
• insurance exclusions
The team suggested remedies for each barrier, including
training providers and staff, developing office protocols, opening
multidisciplinary gender clinics and providing cross-sex hormones at an age that allows adolescents to develop at the same
time as their peers.
“Our data suggest that the implementation of clear, comprehensive, evidence-based best practices and policies that take
into account patient age, pubertal stage, desired future treatments, and comorbid conditions and address barriers to genderaffirming care are likely to improve mental and physical health
outcomes for transgender youth,” authors wrote.
http://www.aappublications.org/news/2016/08/03/Transgender072816
Legal challenge against NJ law calling for
lesbians to first have sex with men
if they want to have children
By Arturo Garcia / Raw Story, August 12, 2016
A pair of lesbian couples in New Jersey are suing state
officials over a law they said discriminates against same-sex
partnerships concerning insurance coverage for fertility treatments, NJ.com reported.
The lawsuit stated that the law requires couples to
engage in unprotected heterosexual intercourse on top of being
medically diagnosed with infertility before their coverage can
pay for the treatments.
One of the two couples bringing the lawsuit, Marianne
and Erin Krupa, said they suffered six miscarriages between
them and paid $50,000 for treatments while being denied coverage. The suit stated that they have tried to conceive a child
since 2013….
The suit targeted the Department of Banking and Insurance for allegedly failing to update its definition of an infertile
couple in the wake of the legalization of same-sex marriages.
New Jersey is one of 15 states requiring insurance companies
(Continued on page 5)
PFLAG SPIRIT
Page 5
Reverend Shari Woodbury
Sunday Services at 10:00 and 11:30 a.m.
(Continued from page 1)
day. “This president is attempting to rewrite the laws enacted by the elected representatives of the people, and is threatening to take
away federal funding from schools to force them to conform.”
A spokeswoman for the Justice Department, Dena W. Iverson, said the department was disappointed with the decision and
was reviewing its options.
In a statement, several civil rights organizations that had submitted a brief opposing the injunction called the ruling unfortunate and premature.
“A ruling by a single judge in one circuit cannot and does not undo the years of clear legal precedent nationwide establishing
that transgender students have the right to go to school without being singled out for discrimination,” the groups — Lambda Legal; the
American Civil Liberties Union and the A.C.L.U. of Texas; the National Center for Lesbian Rights; the Transgender Law Center; and
G.L.B.T.Q. Legal Advocates & Defenders — said in their statement.
The ultimate impact of the Texas decision is unclear and likely to be limited, legal experts said. For one thing, more senior
courts in other regions have agreed with the administration that transgender students and workers are protected by existing laws
against sex discrimination, and their decisions will not be altered by the Texas ruling.
Also, the decision will not necessarily affect the outcome of other current cases. In the most prominent one, a federal court in
North Carolina is weighing almost identical issues in suits brought by civil rights groups and the Department of Justice that seek to
block a state law requiring people in government buildings, including public schools, to use bathrooms that correspond to the gender
listed on their birth certificates.
For the rest of the story: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/23/us/transgender-bathroom-access-guidelines-blocked-by-judge.html?_r=0
(Continued from page 2)
case scenario, it goes up to the Texas Supreme Court, and they just put the kibosh on everything. There are at least several hundred
thousand Texans that that could seriously adversely affect.”
For the rest of the story: https://www.texasobserver.org/texas-appeals-court-says-trans-man-cant-be-listed-as-male-on-drivers-license/
(Continued from page 4)
like Horizon Blue Cross Blue Shield, the Krupas’ provider, to provide such coverage. However, only California and Maryland have
added language covering same-sex couples into their legislation.
For the rest of the story: http://www.alternet.org/news-amppolitics/nj-lesbians-must-first-have-sex-men-receiving-insured-fertility-treatment-video?
Membership Application
∇ Individual
∇ Family
$
25
Date
$
45
Name
∇ Sustaining Member
$
100
∇ Benefactor/Life
$
500
Address
City
Make checks payable to:
PFLAG/Fort Worth
Mail to:
P.O. Box 8279
State
Zip
Phone
Fort Worth TX 76124
RENEWAL ____
NEW ____
Email
You membership automatically includes a subscription to the national PFLAGpole newsletter which shows PFLAG on
the return address. Please check one:
____ I do
____ I do not
want to receive the PFLAGpole.
PFLAG SPIRIT
PO Box 8279
Fort Worth, TX 76124
FIRST CLASS
Page 6