Words Matter

And tells a lot about someone… it is just not a slip of the tongue.

Judge Barrett, don't use 'sexual preference' for LGBTQ people. It's incorrect and alarming.
Amy Coney Barrett graduated from law school first in her class. She's 48 and came of age with the LGBTQ rights movement. She should have known better.
USA Today – Opinion 
By Steven Petrow
October 14, 2020


Judge Amy Coney Barrett stepped into a queer hornet’s nest during her confirmation hearings to become the next Supreme Court justice. Asked about her views on discrimination against LGBTQ people, she replied: "I have no agenda, and I do want to be clear that I have never discriminated on the basis of sexual preference and would not ever discriminate on the basis of sexual preference."

Then the internet erupted in flames. That’s because Barrett used two words—sexual preference — that LGBTQ people find offensive, and which takes a blind eye to all the credible scientific research showing that sexual orientation is not a preference or a choice. It is an immutable part of our identity, and that’s true whether a person is straight or gay.

Sexual preference is a code word that is used by the right, it implies that it is a choice.

In fact, “sexual preference” is what’s considered a dog whistle, coded language to a specific audience. For instance the anti-LGBTQ Alliance Defending Freedom regularly uses “sexual preference” instead of “sexual orientation.”

So yes, words matter.

The Alliance Defending Freedom is the law firm that is suing Connecticut Interscholastic Athletic Conference (CIAC) and towns here in Connecticut.

Who is Alliance Defending Freedom? The religious-conservative legal group has targeted transgender high school athletes in Connecticut
Hartford Courant
By Alex Putterman
February 14, 2020


The first sign that the families of three Connecticut high school track runners are serious about preventing transgender athletes from competing in girls sports in the state is the involvement of a group called Alliance Defending Freedom.

ADF, a longtime fixture in religious-conservative legal advocacy, has built an impressive record in front of the U.S. Supreme Court while pushing causes such as abortion restrictions and limits on LGBTQ rights.

Here is what to know about an organization the New York Times has called “the largest legal force of the religious right.”
[...]
In 2018, ADF successfully argued in front of the Supreme Court on behalf of Masterpiece Cakeshop, a Colorado store that refused to provide a wedding cake to a gay couple. Last year, the group took on a Pennsylvania school district that allowed transgender students to use bathrooms and locker rooms corresponding with their sexual identity. The Supreme Court declined to take that case, allowing the policy to stand.

Over time, the group has seemed to broaden its focus. Asked the connection between transgender athletes and religious freedom, ADF vice president of U.S. advocacy Jeremy Tedesco said the suit relates to “fundamental fairness in women’s athletics.”
[…]
In 2016, the Southern Poverty Law Center designated ADF as an anti-LGBT hate group, citing the following:

ADF’s support for criminalization of same-sex marriage.

• Its attorneys’ defense of state-sanctioned sterilization of transgender people in Europe.
• Its officials’ suggestion that homosexuality is linked with pedophilia.
• The group’s claim that gay rights will “destroy our society.”
• One SPLC executive has said an ADF lawyer’s support of an Indian law banning gay sex was “what really pushed [them] over the top" in designating the organization a hate group.

Now add to mix Judge Barrett who has close ties to the ADF, USA Today opinion goes on to say…

So, too, does Barrett’s actual record. In previous years she’s spoken five times to the ADF. “Were you aware of the ADF’s decades-long efforts to recriminalize homosexuality?” Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy asked the nominee. In response, she claimed not to know all of their positions. And while Barrett said she had never  discriminated against LGBTQ people, from 2015-2017 she sat on the board of directors of an Indiana school that opposed same-sex marriage then and still does now.

Did she simply make a goof at her hearing? Of course, that’s possible. And Barrett did offer a meek apology later in the day when pressed. "I certainly didn’t mean and would never mean to use a term that would cause any offense in the LGBTQ community. So if I did, I greatly apologize for that," she said.

Was it willful ignorance? Indeed her prep time has been rushed to ensure her nomination is voted on before Election Day. Still, ignorance is a hard card to play since a woman’s right to abortion, the Affordable Care Act and LGBTQ rights are the hot-button issues of these hearings. At the top of her handlers’ list of “LGBTQ 101 issues” would be this admonition: Do not use the term “sexual preference.”

You know that the Connecticut case with trans athletes will go to the Supreme Court, the question is will she recuse herself from the case and other cases where the ADF is the plaintiff's attorney?