The Latest Q^POLL Results
There are many gay and lesbian organizations
seeking your financial contribution. How many did
you send a donation to in 1998?
The Carolinas’ Most Comprehensive Gay & Lesbian Newspaper
Vote at www.q-notes.com
Published Every Two Weeks On Recycled Paper • Volume 13, Number 20 • February 20, 1999 • FREE
Jennings to keynote Journey party
by Brian M. Nyer
Q-Notes Staff
CHARLOTTE—On March 4, Journey, an
organization focused on the spiritual and edu
cational issues of GLBT youth, will sponsor its
second I.C.E. Party to acknowledge its bene
factors and raise awareness of the group’s work.
I.C.E. (Inform, Contribute and Embrace)
originated a few months ago as an introduc
tory gathering for Journey. The evening con
sisted of food, fellowship and the premiere of
Journey’s promotional video. Approximately 30
people attended.
This second I.C.E. Party, which will be held
at the Afro-American Cultural Center from
6:30-8:00pm, has even loftier goals than did
the start-up event. “This one, in panicular, is
to really empower our youth and to learn new
techniques to empower others,” said Journey’s
Executive Director Kim Honeycutt. “We also
want to celebrate the individuals who made fi
nancial contributions to Journey in the past.
They believed in us when Journey was simply
an idea. Today we have programs running we’ve
given assistance to youth in college—back then
it was just me going ftom person to person tell
ing them I had an idea.”
The keynote address at the upcoming gala
will be delivered by honorary Journey board
member Kevin Jennings. A native North Caro
linian (Winston-Salem), Harvard graduate and
author of three books (including Telling Tales
Out of School: Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual People
Remember Their School Years — from which he
will read and sign copies), Jennings is best
known as the founder and executive director
of the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education
Network (GLSEN). Because of his
groundbreaking work with GLSEN, which fo
cuses on GLBT issues within the public school
system, Jennings was named one of the “Top
100 Newsmakers and Earthshakers” by Out
magazine as well as one of the “100 People to
Watch in the New Century” by Newsweek.
Also scheduled to speak is Connie Vetter,
an attorney with The Southern Center for Law
and Justice. “[Connie] will be speaking about
her personal experiences with Journey,”
Honeycutt noted. “She also recognizes the im
portance of spirituality and understands what
happens when you leave that part out of your
life.”
Wes Liles, a Journey participant who re
ceived a car from the group, will discuss how
the organization — and its contributions —
have positively affected his life.
Admission to the I.C.E. Party is a $25 do
nation. Afterward, attendees can stay for a spe
cial reception with the evening’s speakers for
an additional $50 donation. Beer, wine and
heavy hors d’oeuvres (choice cuts of meat pro
vided by Hormel) will be served.
For more information on the I.C.E. Party
or to inquire about general volunteer opportu
nities with Journey, call (704) 531-6900 or e-
mail Journey@makingapath.org. ▼
National group stresses need
for United Airlines boycott
by Kim I. Mills
Special to Q-Notes
WASHINGTON, DC—The Human
Rights Campaign (HRC), the nation’s largest
GLBT advocacy organization, is reiterating its
support for a boycott of United Airlines orga
nized by a San Francisco-based group. Equal
Benefits Advocates. According to group repre
sentatives, HRC supports the boycott for two
primary reasons: United’s leading and unique
role in filing a lawsuit that seeks to deny gay
and lesbian employees bereavement leave and
family travel benefits and the fact that the air
line finds itself on the same side of the issue as
Pat Robertson’s American
Center for Law and Justice
(ACLJ) which is seeking to
undermine San Francisco’s
equal benefits ordinance.
“First, United is the only
commercial airline to chal
lenge an April 1998 court rul
ing that said airlines would
have to provide bereavement
leave and equal travel benefits
to San Francisco employees,”
said HRC Communications
Director David M. Smith.
“Second, United, which claims to be gay-
friendly, has found itself on the same side as
one of the most notoriously anti-gay groups in
the country.”
United’s main argument against this boy
cott has been that it is fighting the San Fran
cisco law not because it objects to domestic
partner benefits, but because it objects to local
government attempts to regulate a federally
regulated industry.
“Unfoitunately, United’s credibility vanishes
when its recent actions are considered. On Janu
ary 14, United Airlines agreed to comply with
a Los Angeles law imposing a minimum ‘living
wage’ for workers,” said Smith. “That means
“United finds
itself on the same
side of the issue
as Pat Robertson’s
American Center
for Law and
Justice (ACLJ):
that people who work for United subcontrac
tors at Los Angeles International Airport and
do not get benefits will be paid at least $8.50
per hour and those with benefits will get at least
$7.50. Meanwhile in San Francisco, United
continues to fight to ensure that benefits ineq
uities for gay employees remain intact.”
In a January 16 San Francisco Chronicle ar
ticle, United further undermined its claim that
the lawsuit is only about business and not up
holding discriminatory policies when airline
spokesman Matt Triaca said, “The two issues
of the living wage and domestic partners are
totally separate in United’s eyes. These ordi-
nances affect different em
ployee groups.”
San Francisco Supervisor
Leslie Katz put United’s
policy, as articulated by Triaca,
in perspective for the San
Francisco Chroniclr. “United is
saying that paying higher
wages in Los Angeles is rea
sonable, but giving benefits to
gay and lesbian couples in San
Francisco is not.”
In November 1996, the
San Francisco Board of Super
visors passed a law that requires companies
doing business with the city to provide the same
benefits to workers with domestic partners as
they give to married employees. The law went
into effect in June 1997. United joined the Air
Transport Association, an industry group rep
resenting the nation’s major airlines, in a law
suit seeking to ban San Francisco from forcing
it to comply with the ordinance since most air
lines contend that they only have to follow fed
eral government mandates.
In April 1998, US District Judge Claudia
Wilken ruled that San Francisco could not re
quire the airlines to provide health and pen-
See BOYCOTT on page 8
:irs
"n.
Approximately 100 panels from the Names Project AIDS Memorial Quilt will
be displayed February 26-27 in UNC-Charlotte’s Belk Gymnasium. The
display will feature an opening and closing ceremony and new panels will
be accepted for, inclusion. For more information, see page 30 of this issue.
Legislative sessions begin with
record number of GLBT bills
by Tracey Conaty
Special to Q-Notes
WASHINGTON, DC—The National Gay
and Lesbian Task Force (NGLTF) has released
its first summary of state legislative activity for
the 1999 legislative session and reports that this
is the busiest start ever with respect to gay- and
AIDS-related bills.
In 26 states. 111 such measures have been
introduced. Like in the previous three years,
the right wing has taken aim at GLBT couples.
At the same time, there is greater momentum
for hate crimes legislation than in years past.
Legislative attacks on GLBT families became
pervasive after the first anti-marriage bills were
introduced in 1995. Since then, anti-marriage
measures have beconfe law in 30 states. There
are currendy anti-marriage bills under consid
eration in nine more states. There are efforts in
nine states to prevent GLBT people from be
coming adoptive or foster parents. Most of these
measures are legislative, though in two states
they are proposed state regulatory policies.
In addition to batding hostile bills through
out the country, activists in 12 states are work
ing to pass hate crimes bills. The highly publi
cized killing of Matthew Shepard has spurred
greater support for hate crimes legislation.
Hate Crimes
Favorable. Thirteen hate crimes bills have
been introduced in 12 states. In seven states,
bills have been introduced to add sexual oricn-
tadon to existing hate crimes statutes (CO, MS,
NY, VA, OK, ID, MT). The New York Assem
bly recendy passed its bill; it is now under con
sideration in the Senate, where the bill has
stalled during previous attempts at passage. In
Texas, a measure has been proposed to
strengthen the state’s existing statute by enu
merating groups that would be covered under
the law. The law as it is written is currently too
vague to be enforced effectively. Bills in Indi
ana and South Carolina would establish first
time hate crimes laws in those states. California’s
legislature is again considering a bill to equal
ize penalties for anti-gay hate crimes with pen
alties for hate crimes committed against other
groups. Other states likely to see hate crimes
legislation this year include Michigan and Ha
waii.
Unfavorable. One Montana senator, having
decided that there are too many laws on the
books in that staK, has vowed to repeal many
of the state’s existing laws. The first on his list
is the hate crimes law which currently excludes
sexual orientation.
Civil Rights
Favorable. Measures promoting GLBT
equality at work and within communities have
been introduced in four states (CA, DE, NY,
WV). California Assembly Speaker Antonio
Villaraigosa has re-introduced a bill to add
sexual orientation to the Fair Employment and
Housing Aa which would strengthen the state’s
employment and housing non-discrimination
policies. Activists in Delaware have reintro
duced a bill prohibiting discrimination in em
ployment on the basis of sexual orientation.
New York’s bill would prohibit discrimination
on the basis of sexual orientation in the areas
of employment, housing, education, public
accommodations and credit. Organizers in West
Virginia have introduced two bills that collec
tively would ban discrimination on the basis of
sexual orientation in the areas of housing and
employment. Maryland Governor Parris
Glendening has also publicly vowed to push
for inclusion of sexual orientation in the state’s
civil rights law if a bill is introduced.
Unfavorable. Bills seeking to deny equal
rights to GLBT people have been proposed in
four states (MS, NE, OR, SC). An employment
non-discrimination measure in the Nebraska
legislature would prohibit employment dis
crimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
However, a homophobic provision known as
the “Boys Town Clause” exempts employers
who “engage in or are responsible for the care
and education of children less than 18 years of
age in a residential facility.”
Last December, in Tanner v. OHSU, an Or
egon appeals court ruled that the state consti
tution mandates that all government employ
ees be eligible to receive domestic partnership
benefits. The ruling also determined that
Oregon’s constitution prohibits private and
public employment discrimination on the ba
sis of sexual orientation. Right-wing groups are
now challenging this ruling by attempting to
pressure the state legislature to pass a series of
anti-GLBT referenda to appear on the Novem
ber ballot. One such measure pertaining to
GLBT civil rights, HJR 6, would require ma
jority approval through referendum of any state
or local measures banning discrimination based
on sexual orientation. Another Oregon bill
would establish a zero tolerance policy for dis
crimination in public employment against vari
ous groups, but excludes sexual orientation and
See SESSIONS on page 8