Our Views: A low score for the future

Despite progress in New Orleans for gays and lesbians, Louisiana has precious few legal protections against discrimination in much of the rest of the state.

A recent national survey rated the state’s capital city at a dismal 2 on a scale of 100 — making Baton Rouge one of the nation’s cities least-friendly to gay and lesbian residents.

New Orleans received 79 points in the same survey.

The inaugural report from the Human Rights Campaign evaluated 137 cities, which included the 50 state capitals, the 50 largest cities in the 2010 Census, and small, mid-size and large cities with high numbers of same-sex couples, according to the Williams Institute at the UCLA School of Law.

The cities were given points based on criteria that included whether a city has laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in areas of employment, housing and public accommodations.

It also awarded points for cities that had a domestic partner registry, employed a mayoral liaison to the gay community, and provided leadership in public positions regarding equality, including equality in policy efforts.

The poor rating for Baton Rouge should be a cause of concern. First of all, of course, because of the unfairness and discrimination that might ensue from the absence of legal protections that straight people take for granted.

Fortunately, at Baton Rouge’s city hall, two mayor-presidents have pushed for job protection for gay and lesbian employees, Republican Bobby Simpson and incumbent Democrat Kip Holden. Many private companies also explicitly protect employees from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

However, the extension of job protection to state employees and to workers generally in Louisiana’s private sector has stalled, either because of official inaction or business lobbies opposing anti-discrimination bills in the Legislature. As the New Orleans ordinances have demonstrated, as well as experience in other states, the argument that these laws are magnets for frivolous discrimination lawsuits is not justified.

Gov. Bobby Jindal declined to provide the same kind of job discrimination protection for state employees by executive order that were adopted by his predecessor, Kathleen Blanco.

It’s a fundamental matter of fairness, as we have long argued, that people should not be at risk of being fired from their jobs for purely private and legal behavior.

Baton Rouge businessman Joe Traigle has been an advocate for greater recognition of the gay community, but he said the time for merely symbolic statements is past. “We need an actual ordinance which prohibits discrimination in employment, housing and credit,” Traigle said in response to the HRC survey.

What the HRC survey also says: As a business proposition, the status quo is a loser.

We agree with Elaine Maccio, an LSU associate professor who studies lesbian, gay bisexual and transgender issues, that the perception that Baton Rouge is not gay-friendly could hurt it economically.

“The mayor and other folks went to Nashville, Austin and Portland to see what those cities are doing that we’re not, and all of those cities welcome people from all sorts of backgrounds,” Maccio said. “Mayor Holden wants us to be the next great American city, and we could be, except for a vocal minority that wants to hold us back.”

How is Baton Rouge going to retain and attract the college-educated young people who will fuel the economic engines of tomorrow’s economy? This kind of rating in the HRC survey gets noticed, particularly as young people — as demonstrated in the last presidential election — are increasingly at odds with anti-gay attitudes.

Louisiana is fortunate that New Orleans, home to a burgeoning tech sector, is more progressive. But that the capital city lags so far behind is a poor indicator for the region’s economic prospects.


Please log in to comment on this story

Comments (49)


1) Comment by Whatnow - 31/12/2012

twinkie1cat, so are Hindus, whites, Mormons, Asians and all those other people you put down.

2) Comment by phil - 30/12/2012

I really do not like general labels like conservative and liberal because people can be conservative on one issue and somewhat liberal on another. So it really depends on the subject being discussed. However, I noticed a lot of adjectives all grouped into one label below. I would like to add that I post here often and I also notice a trend here that I would possibly group into one category called the liberal, godless, homosexual, pro-abortion group. Therefore, if I am actually forced to pick a specific label, I personally prefer to stick with the label called "conservative". By the way, I am not a Republican.

3) Comment by twinkie1cat - 29/12/2012

God made Adam and Eve, Adam and Steve, and Eve and Yvette. They are all God's children and all covered under John 3:16 because they are all WHOSOEVER. You can go to MCCBR on YouTube and hear a sermon on this subject if you wish. It is the one from last Sunday Dec. 23, by Rev. Keith Mozingo.

4) Comment by twinkie1cat - 29/12/2012

Racist, sexist, anti-immigration, anti-abortion, homophobic, conservative, Republican. The characteristics all fit together and normally more than one, and often all of them appear in the same person. They often all do. Conservatives are just about everyone being the same. Sometimes you get variations. Since people are born gay you do get an occasional gay Republican, especially in a state that likes conservatism. But generally, 3 or more of the above characteristics are going to be present.

5) Comment by twinkie1cat - 29/12/2012

The reason we don't have protection at the state level is the hate group, Louisiana Family Forum. They may not be quite as loud as Westboro Baptist Church, but they are of more influence since they are not labeled as crackpots and are much worse because they keep their sheep clothing on while Westboro comes out as straight up wolves. (It's easy to know the devil if he has his horns and pitchfork; much harder if he wears a big smile and a nice suit.) But the message is the same. LFF has Bobby Jindal's ear and he does pretty much whatever they say from who is appointed to BESE to which non-profits to cut. They even stifled the enumerated bullying bill last year which listed among the specific groups that could not be bullied for who the are GLBT students. They also tried to insert in the school bills he jammed through the legislature clauses that would have allowed charter schools to exclude GLBT students.

6) Comment by Whatnow - 28/12/2012

Protean, kids are in private schools and private college and crime is no longer a problem since I have those guns of mine and I happen to love Louisiana and it's people, even if we don't meet your "intelligence and moral" standards. I wouldn't leave this place for all the money in the world. Why would I? But, if I were outnumbered I would think twice about staying.

7) Comment by ScotB - 27/12/2012

Equal rights for gays. But not special protections. If a gay person gets fired, I don't want employers to have to prove it wasn't because he was gay. As several previous posters noted, this is protecting a class of people who engage in a particular activity or lifestyle. What about a protected class for vegetarians? And if they get fired, employers would have to prove they didn't fire them because they won't eat meat. Makes about as much sense. Or you can't discriminate against people who listen to rap music, how about that one?

8) Comment by ScotB - 27/12/2012

Equal rights for gays. But not special protections. If a gay person gets fired, I don't want employers to have to prove it wasn't because he was gay. As several previous posters noted, this is protecting a class of people who engage in a particular activity or lifestyle. What about a protected class for vegetarians? And if they get fired, employers would have to prove they didn't fire them because they won't eat meat. Makes about as much sense. Or you can't discriminate against people who listen to rap music, how about that one?

9) Comment by registeredvoter - 27/12/2012

All the comments on this article really show how unfriendly Baton Rouge is to gays and lesbians. I am a straight person, married, have a good job, go to church, and I support equal rights for my gay and lesbian friends. We'll be leaving Baton Rouge as soon as my husband is done with his PhD. Baton Rouge is the same backwoods, racist, homophobic, xenophobic place it's always been, And apparently it always will be.

10) Comment by Protean - 27/12/2012

No one is preventing you from speaking your beliefs. However, in a grown-up world, _responsible_ free expression is available to all, even to those who don't share your fears and hatreds. So YOUR hatred isn't sacred. Your "live and let live" slogan is truncated. The missing part, which people like use when you wish to endorse the like-minded, is "... but those _others_ shouldn't live as freely". As for forcing things down your throats, that simply isn't happening in any place other than your own mind. By the way, given the topic of this letter, your choice of metaphor is a bit suspicious.

11) Comment by billynurse - 27/12/2012

As long as we are allowed to speak our beliefs, many of us will say this : We believe in our hearts that homosexuality is immoral and wrong. You can spew YOUR hatred all that you want. I say live and let live, but don't force your views down our throats.

12) Comment by Protean - 27/12/2012

Whatnow: And there it is, the feeble, old 'Merika, luv it or leave it' chant, theme song of the ignorant. Tell ya what. Next time you start whining about crime rate, schools, whatever right-wing reds-under-the-bed scare that pops up, be sure to pack up your indignant carcass and haul it outta here. That answer your throwback question?

13) Comment by Whatnow - 27/12/2012

Yet all you gay and gay advocate whiners about Louisiana and Baton Rouge still live here. There is only one question. Why?

14) Comment by Whatnow - 27/12/2012

Guess we have to work on getting that number lower, huh? That would make the AIDS number lower, too. Kill two birds with one stone.

15) Comment by nimby? - 27/12/2012

but we have a wonderful school system and very little crime to speak of ...

16) Comment by phil - 27/12/2012

How to destroy a nation from within? Destroy it's basic moral values by convincing folks that immoral actions are really just a right of a minority group, and then push the immoral activities as being a rights issue. Then start calling the folks who are against promoting the immoral activity names like "conservatives". If you consider someone who is against open homosexuality in society as being conservative , then I guess I am a conservative on THAT issue I guess you might say the Bible is fairly conservative on many issues too. Sorry, I am not buying into promoting homosexuality in the USA now or later.

17) Comment by Whatnow - 27/12/2012

"That the perception that Baton Rouge is not gay-friendly could hurt it economically." Bull noogies. This whole letter is bull noogies.

18) Comment by Spudaroonski - 27/12/2012

Gays do not want special privileges. It isn't about special privileges. All they want are equal rights. The right to marry the person they love and be afforded the same benifits and considerations as heterosexuals. If you can't grasp that simple fact then i'm afraid you are simple minded. I would bet my house that the people who are against granting equal rights to gays are overwhelmingly conservative. Conservatives have always been on the wrong side of history and they are wrong on this issue too. They always have to be dragged kicking and screaming forward toward the light of progress and enlightenment. I swear reading some of these comments I can almost hear those dueling banjos playing in the background.

19) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 27/12/2012

Please forgive me guys but...phil, what "immoral actions" are being touted as a "right of a minority group?" And Spud was just pointing out a pretty solid fact that most people who are anti-gay consider themselves to be conservative (Republican). How is that calling someone a name?

20) Comment by gofigger - 27/12/2012

Spudaroonski - "dueling banjos"?............I must be simple minded, are you in the canoe or on the mountain?

21) Comment by gofigger - 26/12/2012

Like I said........like cancer

22) Comment by Stephen - 26/12/2012

Take heart people. The polls are going our way. Majority support for same-sex marriage exists among 18-34 year-olds, according to good polling in Baton Rouge. Already 43% are in favor of same-sex marriage rights. 8% are not sure in that same poll. Older people are less supportive. This is understandable. Though I would have thought some would have learned something as they have seen the harm done to gay and lesbian relatives. So, the polls will change with time in strong favor of same-sex marriage rights. It is just a matter of time.

23) Comment by gofigger - 26/12/2012

Is that growth.............or cancer

24) Comment by Elderly Man - 26/12/2012

Placing blame is difficult but there are proper targets. The hierarchy of the dominant Roman Catholic denomination do not help though members of that religious body do often favour human rights. The dominant Pentecostal and Baptist churches are worse because their opposition includes both laity and clergy. Baton Rouge is a terribly backward place to live. Even mainline Christians here seem under the domination of Tea Party thugs and fundenlit thinking. Some of the responses here were expected but still appalling.

25) Comment by Old Man Kensey - 26/12/2012

Dear Advocate, why are the comments not being placed in order? To answer someone before they spoke kind of confuses things.

26) Comment by Old Man Kensey - 26/12/2012

Yes gofigger, the antibiotics are eating away at the cancer.

27) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 26/12/2012

my only concern is that people like gofigger remain here

28) Comment by gofigger - 26/12/2012

My only concern is that Baton Rouge will not maintain this position.

29) Comment by nimby? - 26/12/2012

then there are those who do nothing for a better B.R. ,who tend to make a negative contribution to overall society , could something be done about them ?

30) Comment by MBW - 26/12/2012

First they came for the socialists, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak for me.

31) Comment by MBW - 26/12/2012

This is really about math, folks. It's simple: the more people you turn away from your city, the harder it is to grow. The largest, most prosperous cities in the country didn't get that way by excluding people....they got that way because lots of people said "Hey, I want to live there".

32) Comment by Preppy6917 - 26/12/2012

Thanks for the reminder of why I and most of my fellow advanced degree-holding colleagues have left Baton Rouge with no intention of looking back. We have all moved on, while Baton Rouge has continued to stagnate and remains a city in which a new strip mall or telephone call center is considered a newsworthy step forward (hint: they aren't).

33) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 26/12/2012

i knew I could count on one of my fellow posters to grossly misrepresent the word "special" You see special means "Better, greater, or otherwise different from what is usual" Marriage does not fit that definition. It it quite the same, no greater than or different from what is usual.

34) Comment by Being_Stupid - 26/12/2012

****Comment Removed for Violation of Terms of Use****

35) Comment by Attila - 26/12/2012

Homosexuality is a perversion of natural law. The special privileges that are being pushed by the gay community include the right to marry and have that marriage justified, and legalized. Homosexuals are but a minute part of our society...they want us to accept them as mainstream. I think that if they would simply go about living their lives, stop calling attention to themselves, and cease pontificating about how they are no different than a heterosexual that they would not even be a blip on the radar. Gays call attention to themselves with their constant whining and demands for "rights" that are clearly against natural law.

36) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 26/12/2012

With all the hyperventilation about "special privileges from the fundamentalists, you would think that someone could come up with just one special privilege that the gay community has requested. I won't hold my breath.....

37) Comment by DMJ - 26/12/2012

Some (most) of our residents will look at this rating as a good thing. They're people who use religion as an excuse for their bigotry, and it's all the better if that bigotry is codified into law. Lack of empathy plagues the members of the Christian religion. It's shameful and embarrassing, and not it's having real consequences on our city's economy. Disgraceful. Moreover, since some people haven't gotten the memo, apparently, I'd like to point out that gay people don't want special rights; they want the same rights as everyone else, specifically, to not be discriminated against because of the way they were born. How thick does one's skull need to be to still not understand this in the year 2012...2013, that is?

38) Comment by Being_Stupid - 26/12/2012

These Gay Folks are going about Civil Rights all wrong. The goal of the gay community needs to be abolish existing laws and ordinances that discriminate against them, not create new laws, special priviledges, protections, or pointless resolutions that only further divide people from other people. What good is a resolution or a direct gay hotline to the Mayor's Office if we still got zoning laws that prevent gay and unmarried folks with children from living in a single family neighborhood? The housing laws in this city should have been the first target of the gay community, instead they are out there trying to pass some stupid resolution that will only further hurt their cause of being treated as equals instead of helping. Start with the strict zoning and housing laws that prohibit your gay families from living in this city. duh.

39) Comment by phil - 26/12/2012

I believe the statement "A recent national survey rated the state’s capital city at a dismal 2 on a scale of 100 — making Baton Rouge one of the nation’s cities least-friendly to gay and lesbian residents." is not 100 true. Baton Rouge can be friendly to these residents but also be smart enough to know there is not a special resolution, law, etc., that needs to be passed to actually promote that type of activity. Here we go again with that same issue that we have to face every year or so? Dear council members, please note that I believe BR folks still feel the same way about this issue as they have in the past. So please just say no - again!

40) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 26/12/2012

Midred et al: name ONE "special priviledge[sp]" that the LGBT community wants granted to them...

41) Comment by Being_Stupid - 26/12/2012

Can start by abolishing the zoning laws that outlaw gay, single, and unmarried couples with children from living in a house in this city.

42) Comment by 8point6 - 26/12/2012

Great comment from Mildred Citizen.

43) Comment by Mr. T - 26/12/2012

We don't want the gays, or the idiots who support them.

44) Comment by TheTardis - 26/12/2012

First, being gay is not a behavior. There are plenty of celibate gay people. Second, I don't know a single person who has expressed anti-gay views to me. My entire family and all my friends and co-workers appear to be OK with gays. Finally, God made Adam, Eve, Steve and everyone else. All should not be fired just because they are gay, straight, celibate, or bi. In fact it's no one's business and I fail to see how it could affect one's job performance. It's really pure bigotry. If you can't fire someone for being black, or female, you shouldn't be allowed to fire bc of orientation. As LMK said we pay our taxes. If we're not to be treated as full citizens, give us our money back.

45) Comment by lovemykids - 25/12/2012

My family and I do not want "special privileges and protections". We want to be treated as other families in Louisiana are treated. We do not want to worry about losing a job because we are gay. We do not want to pay extra for health insurance because we are not considered a family. We own a home, we pay our taxes, we donate to charities, we are a family and should be treated as one.

46) Comment by rgeraldwallace@cox.net - 25/12/2012

Why worry about how some people want to act out on their private peccadillos? I fail to see why they should have special protections and special considerations under the law. Anytime such laws are passed they are unfair to the rest who are not in the protected group.

47) Comment by CountryBoysCanSurvive - 25/12/2012

2 Stephen you are little confused sweetie, God made Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve.

48) Comment by Stephen - 25/12/2012

Most college educated young people view those who cannot see that gays and lesbians need protection from discrimination as backward, and even bigoted. As a result, they are ready to move on to places where there is an easy awareness of the need to actively include gays and lesbians in the community. By the way, the gays and lesbians are not looking for special rights at all. They want to be on a level playing field.

49) Comment by Mildred Citizen - 25/12/2012

What has granting special priviledges and protections for people with cetain sexual preferences have to do with attracting college educated young people? Are all college educated young people gay? Do all college educated young people support granting legal protections to classes of people who engage in certain sexual behaviors? I understand protecting people with disabilities, handicaps, race, sex. I think protecting behavior with legislation is stretching things. I am not against gays having access to all of the same rights as everyone else, but I am against adopting special rights for any group based on their behavior or preferences. Employers only hurt themselves if they discriminate against any person based on anything other than their job performance and capability. In a highly competitive society, most of the good employers anyone would enjoy working for already know that. This type of legislation is not needed or wanted by any employer because the determinations that would be made from it are often too subjective in nature, aside from the "creating a special class of citizen based on behavior" issue. Sometimes I think The Advocate reflexively supports the politically correct views that are popular in the liberal/progressive movement without ever really considering the merits.