With early voting results in, Houston’s proposed ordinance to establish protections from discrimination for gay and transgender residents and several other classes was behind in the polls by a significant margin. But with about 30 percent of precincts reporting, the measure was trailing badly, 62 percent to 38 percent, and The Associated Press called the election for foes of the measure.
Advertisement
Susan Hunter said she doesn’t know why anyone would think that men going into a women’s bathroom, swimming pool or locker room would be a good idea.
“This will have stained Houston’s reputation as a tolerant, welcoming global city”, Mayor Parker said.
The ordinance would ban discrimination in city employment and city services, city contracts, public accommodations, private employment and housing based on criteria including an individual’s sexual orientation and gender identity. He said that was one reason Christians rallied against it. He also told CBN News that it really came down to standing for God’s truth about sexuality.
Houston Mayor Annise Parker lost a big fight with the conservatives, when voters rejected an anti-discrimination law. Leading up to the vote, those opposed to HERO waged an all-out war against it, spreading fear and misinformation about the law’s protections for transgender Houstonians.
VILLAFRANCA: Already, a few groups are calling for a boycott of Houston businesses if the measure is not overturned and that could be significant, Scott, because Houston is in the running to host the 2017 Super Bowl.
The City Council passed the ordinance in May 2014, but in July, the Texas Supreme Court said that it had to be put on the ballot or repealed by the council. The ordinance allowed the city’s residents to file complaints for discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity.
Houston’s Equal Rights Ordinance, in its current form, was strongly rejected by the city’s voters.
Democratic Houston Mayor Annise Parker, who is gay, and other supporters of the ordinance had called this “bathroom ordinance” strategy highly misleading and a scare tactic. “They denied that they had any bias against gay people, and said the ordinance was so vague that it would make anyone who tried to keep any man from entering a women’s bathroom the subject of a city investigation and fine”, it added.
The proposition was put forward to shield people from racial, ethnic, gender and other discrimination.
While opponents of the bill said they’re protecting women, there have not been confirmed reports of men pretending to be trans to attack women in female bathrooms or reports of cisgender people being harassed by transgendered people in these spaces, according to The Advocate and Mic. The law had an exemption for religious institutions.
Advertisement
“The City Council is directed to comply with its duties, as specified in the City Charter, that arise when the City Secretary certifies that a referendum petition has a sufficient number of valid signatures”.
