The Draconian ATL Anti-Prostitution Banishment Law Is Back

Back in April I signal boosted a post from Cheryl Courtney-Evans' A Bitch For Justice blog calling out the proposed draconian anti-prostitution law that has a controversial and probably unconstitutional banishment from the city of Atlanta provision  

It generated much outcry in the ATL and went away for a minute due to the intense scrutiny it got. 

Cheryl kept warning people that this unjust proposed ordinance wasn't dead yet and not allow the tranquilizing drug of complacency to divert their attention from what was going on with this unjust proposed ordinance. 

It turns out that Cheryl's repeated blog warnings were well founded, because the ATL's 'Queen of Mean' Peggy Denby along with some allies in the ATL's police force are making another attempt to galvanize support and put lipstick on this pig of an unjust ordinance.

Here's what Cheryl had to say about it:

This is such a ridiculous plan! First, it would not solve the "problem", but merely shift it to other parts of the city. Secondly, it would quite probably create another "crime", in that someone who actually lives in an "area of prostitution", could be arrested again JUST FOR GOING HOME (if they've been banned)...or are they expected to have found the money to just up and move outside of the "banned area"?? And finally, when the rubber meets the road, if individuals have been made to feel [experience] no other alternatives to survival, banishment or no banishment, arrest or no arrest, they will be back...what do they plan to do, build a wall or erect a fence around these areas [or Atlanta]? This will not solve anything; an improved system with services would be more logical, positive AND progressive.

You can read the rest of Cheryl's post along with her action suggestions to kill the unjust proposed ordinance here.

What Is An Unjust Law?

You've probably read a few posts ion TransGriot in which when I've commented on anti-TBLG laws or bad legislation that is purported to help us I've called them 'unjust laws'.

So what is an unjust law?   St. Augustine has said "an unjust law is no law at all." 

To clarify what he said, an unjust law would be one that takes away an individual's or a group's freedom, causes harm or basically just causes chaos.  It's the opposite effect of what a law is put in place to do.

The Rev Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. broke it down more eloquently in his 1963 'Letter From Birmingham City Jail' the concept of just and unjust laws.  

Now, what is the difference between the two? How does one determine whether a law is just or unjust? A just law is a man made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of St. Thomas Aquinas: An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law. Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust. All segregation statutes are unjust because segregation distorts the soul and damages the personality. It gives the segregator a false sense of superiority and the segregated a false sense of inferiority. Segregation, to use the terminology of the Jewish philosopher Martin Buber, substitutes an "I it" relationship for an "I thou" relationship and ends up relegating persons to the status of things. Hence segregation is not only politically, economically and sociologically unsound, it is morally wrong and sinful. Paul Tillich has said that sin is separation. Is not segregation an existential expression of man's tragic separation, his awful estrangement, his terrible sinfulness? Thus it is that I can urge men to obey the 1954 decision of the Supreme Court, for it is morally right; and I can urge them to disobey segregation ordinances, for they are morally wrong.

Let us consider a more concrete example of just and unjust laws. An unjust law is a code that a numerical or power majority group compels a minority group to obey but does not make binding on itself. This is difference made legal. By the same token, a just law is a code that a majority compels a minority to follow and that it is willing to follow itself. This is sameness made legal. Let me give another explanation. A law is unjust if it is inflicted on a minority that, as a result of being denied the right to vote, had no part in enacting or devising the law. Who can say that the legislature of Alabama which set up that state's segregation laws was democratically elected? Throughout Alabama all sorts of devious methods are used to prevent Negroes from becoming registered voters, and there are some counties in which, even though Negroes constitute a majority of the population, not a single Negro is registered. Can any law enacted under such circumstances be considered democratically structured?

Sometimes a law is just on its face and unjust in its application. For instance, I have been arrested on a charge of parading without a permit. Now, there is nothing wrong in having an ordinance which requires a permit for a parade. But such an ordinance becomes unjust when it is used to maintain segregation and to deny citizens the First-Amendment privilege of peaceful assembly and protest.

So the next time you see me in this space call a law just or unjust, you'll now have a better understanding of what I'm talking about

Nigeria Passes Draconian Anti-GLBT Bill

While the international community was focusing on Uganda and its attempts to pass their blatantly unjust 'Kill The Gays' Bill, they should have also been focused on Abuja, Nigeria.

In the most populous nation on the African continent, the Nigerian House of Representatives today passed the unjust 'Same Sex Marriage Prohibition Bill' that criminalizes being gay or lesbian in the country, bans gay marriage in a church or mosque and outlaws any groups actively supporting gay rights.  It was already approved by the Nigerian Senate in November 2011 and is now on its way to Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan for his signature.

If Jonathan signs it, gay or lesbian couples who marry could face up to 14 years each in prison.  If you witness the marriage, attend the wedding or helps a gay couple get married, you are risking a 10 year sentence behind bars. Anyone taking part in a group advocating for gay rights or anyone caught in a “public show” of gay affection also would face 10 years in prison if convicted by a criminal court.

As of yet President Jonathan hasn't indicated whether he will sign the unjust bill or not.
 
Save your breath if you're thinking that Western powers can put pressure on the 'Giant of Africa' by threatening to cut off financial aid.   Nigeria pumps 2 million barrels of oil per day and the United States is one of their major customers.  The last time I checked the price is hovering around the $90-$100 per barrel range.

Gay sex has been banned in Nigeria since the British colonial rule days and our gay and lesbian cousins there face open discrimination and abuse in a country divided by Christians and Muslims.   They may fight each other,  but the two things they universally agree on are soccer and uniform opposition to homosexuality.

So it'll be up to local activists in this nation of more than 160 million people, with the help of the international community as they did in 2007 and 2011 to do the bulk of the education and fighting against this unjust law. 

Chidi Odinkalu, the chairman of Nigeria’s National Human Rights Commission, said he only learned about the House’s vote late Thursday night and said the bill likely would be challenged in court.

Because right now, that's their only option if President Jonathan decides to sign this un-African and unjust bill

WTF Just Happened In Puerto Rico With SB 238?

Oops, guess I spoke too soon about SB 238 passing the Puerto Rican House and Senate .

Seems that while the news was being trumpeted around the world about the sweeping trans inclusive version that would have protected TBLG Puerto Ricans against discrimination in public accommodations, housing, governmental services and other private entities, the faith based haters were still actively working to strip those categories from it before it reached Governor Alejandro Garcia Padilla's desk for his signature.

According to an AP report they succeeded.   On May 27 a modified version of the bill was passed by the Puerto Rican Senate that removed the clauses banning discrimination against TBLG Puerto Ricans in commercial transactions, property rentals, public accommodations, and other circumstances.

So now the question inquiring GLBT human rights minds like moi are asking is which version of the bill did Governor Garcia Padilla sign into law?   Is it the version of SB 238 that has those clauses or the May 27 one the faith based haters were pushing to strip them from the bill and keep their special right to discriminate alive?

Governor Alejandro García Padilla signed the legislation at his official residence in San Juan along with HB 488, which adds domestic violence law protections for gender identity, sexual orientation, and marital status. 

He issued a statement via Twitter: 'The dignity of being a human being is inviolable because we are all the same and we must be equal under the law.'

He added: 'Today is a great day for Puerto Rico. I feel that I have fulfilled my duty as a Christian to sign these laws.'

But my question is how great a day?  Which version of SB 238 did you sign Governor Garcia Padilla?  If you signed the original sweeping bill, it was a doubleplus good day for the Puerto Rican TBLG community. 

If it was the modified one that strips commercial transactions, property rentals, public accommodations, transportation and other circumstances from it, you signed a worthless, unjust Massachusetts style law and far from 'fulfilling your duty as a Christian' to treat everyone equally, you just failed in that task. 

How can you even part your lips to call it equal if you have a LGBT non discrimination law that keeps you as a rainbow Puerto Rican from being fired from your job, but the transphobic bus driver transporting you to that job can kick you off his bus?  

You can work for a restaurant, but the homophobic restaurant owner can kick you out of his establishment if you and your trans, gay and lesbian friends attempt to eat there.  If you're trying to rent an apartment or beachside cottage the phobic building owner can refuse to rent it to you without fear of being punished for it.. 

Who the hell LGBT activist wise was watching the Puerto Rican legislature and the governor's office to ensure the tougher bill was the one that received Governor Garcia Padilla's signature?   Instead of doing the civil rights job right the first time you'll now have to (like Massachusetts is painfully doing right now) go back to the Puerto Rican Legislature and refight the pitched battle you just fought to have those categories the Senate just stripped out added back into the law.  

A human rights law without public accommodations language in it is not only unjust, it's a worthless law.

And since 2014 is an election year, good luck making that happen and getting a governor who narrowly won his seat in the 2012 election cycle to sign it.

0-32?

The polls open later today in the Tarheel State on the Amendment 1 ballot question to enshrine a same gender marriage ban (which by the way is already banned in the state) into North Carolina's constitution.

"Marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized."  states the Amendment 1 language.

But it also goes one odious step further in addition to inserting the ban on same-sex marriage in the North Carolina Constitution.  

If Amendment 1 passes it would also frack with civil unions or any other form of "domestic legal union" for both gay and straight couples by banning those as well. .

North Carolina was the last of the old Confederate states that didn't have a constitutional gay marriage ban to the disgust of the faith-based homobigots because it kept getting killed in committee when the Democrats controlled the state legislature. But when the Tea Klux Klan got control of the North Carolina legislature in the wake of the 2010 midterm elections, it opened the door for this to happen.

Elections matter, people.    Same gender marriage when it comes to a vote has lost 31 times, and unfortunately the polling coming out of North Carolina on the eve of this election isn't looking good for the rainbow team.   But there's always hope and the chance for an upset.  

To tell you how much this issue matters, I leave you with the wise words of the Rev Dr. William J. Barber II, the North Carolina NAACP president.    Dr. Barber breaks it down with a historical, moral and well-reasoned argument against these anti-gay marriage amendments. 

Please heed those words and defeat this unjust amendment, because no one's civil rights should be put up for a vote by a misguided and hate filled majority.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy