On March 6, the Associated Press reported that the Utah State Legislature failed to pass a bill which would have barred therapists from practicing conversion therapy on minors [1]. “Conversion therapy” is the practice of attempting to alter someone’s sexual orientation using psychology. The practice has been largely discredited and has been rejected as ineffective and unsafe by both the American Medical Association [2] and the American Psychological Association [3]. The bill’s progress collapsed when Representative Lisonbee added amendments that would have weakened the law to the point of being unproductive. Conversion therapy on minors will continue in Utah, as will a trend of LGBT+ youth developing low self-esteem and psychological trauma as a result [4]. This failure of the Utah State Legislature is harmful to the LGBT+ population, but, despite some recent improvement, it is not the only problem that needs to be resolved with the state’s treatment of its LGBT+ community.
Currently, the state of Utah offers a semi-protected class status for sexual orientation. A protected class is a legal safeguard meant to prevent discrimination against certain groups. For example, protected class laws prevent businesses from refusing service to customers based upon their religion, race, or gender. A business can refuse service, however, based on something like political affiliation because political affiliation is not classified as a protected class. These laws have generally sought to protect inherent traits such as race, gender, age, or disability, though there are important inclusions for other immutable traits such as religion or veteran status.
Utah has made some progress in protecting LGBT+ people. In 2015, state law changed to prevent denying anyone employment or housing based on the person’s sexual orientation [5]. This law, however, did not make sexual orientation a fully protected class because it did not include prohibitions on discrimination for public accommodations. This lack of protection allows business owners to refuse service to individuals based upon their sexual orientation. A lesbian woman could be turned away from purchasing her lunch solely for the reality that she is attracted to women.
Imagine that a boyfriend and girlfriend living in a small Utah town plan a date night to the movies. They show up hand-in-hand but upon approaching the purchasing counter they are informed that because they are heterosexual they will not be allowed to purchase tickets or watch a film. This bizarre scenario is entirely legal in the state of Utah. And while the example may seem far-fetched, it is not unheard of for LGBT+ individuals to experience such discrimination. Just in February news outlets from Indiana reported that an accountant refused to file the taxes of a lesbian couple [6][7].
Utah law has come a long way in recent years with how it treats the LGBT+ community. Even compared to other states, Utah fares well in this area—28 states have no protections [8]. Some states, such as Iowa, do better and can be looked to as an example. While much of Iowa is socially conservative, the state was one of the earliest to designate sexual orientation as a protected class [9]. But setting the comparisons aside, it is still legal in Utah for therapists to practice pseudoscientific conversion therapy on LGBT+ minors and for any LGBT+ individual to be refused a table at a restaurant. Irrespective of how other states do in comparison, Utah can be better.
Unfortunately, the problem lies not just with the state government or its laws. In a republic, the government is a reflection of its people. It is worth each of us reflecting on how we treat each other and whether an individual’s sexual orientation should affect their ability to participate equally in society.
[1] https://www.apnews.com/74361aaa91824d63a8db9efcddeabb9f
[2] https://www.hrc.org/resources/policy-and-position-statements-on-conversion-therapy
[5] https://www.freedomforallamericans.org/category/states/ut/