New research by Caroline Beer and Victor Cruz Aceves examines the puzzling finding that Mexico has offered greater legal equality for LGBT people for a longer period of time than the United States. They argue that this can be explained by the wider separation of church and state in Mexican politics and the strong importance of human rights in new democracies. Examining LGBT rights at the subnational level, they also find that states with more LGBT organizations and governors from left parties are more likely to recognize same sex relationships, but the religious makeup of states only matters in the United States, and not in Mexico

Beer, Caroline

Cruz Aceves, Victor

LSE Research Online

Compared	to	Mexico,	religion’s	role	in	US	society	hashindered	progress	on	legal	equality	for	LGBT	peopleNew	research	by	Caroline	Beer	and	Victor	Cruz	Aceves	examines	the	puzzling	findingthat	Mexico	has	offered	greater	legal	equality	for	LGBT	people	for	a	longer	period	of	timethan	the	United	States.		They	argue	that	this	can	be	explained	by	the	wider	separation	ofchurch	and	state	in	Mexican	politics	and	the	strong	importance	of	human	rights	in	newdemocracies.		Examining	LGBT	rights	at	the	subnational	level,	they	also	find	that	stateswith	more	LGBT	organizations	and	governors	from	left	parties	are	more	likely	to	recognizesame	sex	relationships,	but	the	religious	makeup	of	states	only	matters	in	the	United	States,	and	not	in	Mexico.Common	stereotypes	of	Mexico’s	macho	culture	might	lead	us	to	expect	that	the	legal	landscape	for	gay	rights	inMexico	would	be	far	less	egalitarian	than	in	the	United	States.		Major	theories	of	comparative	politics	about	theinfluence	of	social	movements,	religion,	and	the	left	would	also	predict	more	equal	legal	treatment	of	sexualminorities	in	the	United	States	than	in	Mexico.		Yet,	our	review	of	important	gay	rights	legislation	in	the	two	countriesshows	the	opposite.		We	find	that	this	puzzling	outcome	exists	when	comparing	national	level	laws,	but	not	incomparing	subnational	policy	outcomes.		In	both	countries,	state	governments	have	control	over	many	important	gayrights	policies,	and	evidence	from	the	state	level	supports	theoretical	expectations	about	social	movements	and	leftgovernments,	but	not	religion.Comparative	research	has	found	that	countries	with	more	powerful	social	movements,	less	religious	populations,	andstrong	left	parties	are	more	likely	to	extend	equal	rights	to	sexual	minorities.		The	US	has	a	much	more	powerfulLGBT	rights	movement,	a	less	religious	population,	and	was	governed	by	a	center-left	party	for	a	greater	proportionof	the	past	two	decades	than	Mexico.		We	would	therefore	expect	the	US	to	have	a	much	more	egalitarian	legalframework	for	sexual	minorities	than	Mexico,	but	in	fact,	that	is	not	the	case.Mexico	abolished	most	discriminatory	legal	distinctions	based	on	sexual	orientation	long	before	the	United	States.	Mexico	decriminalized	sodomy	in	1871,	more	than	100	years	before	the	US	Supreme	Court	overturned	anti-sodomylaws	in	2003.		The	lone	legal	discriminatory	point	in	Mexican	law	was	a	double	penalty	for	corruption	of	a	minor	if	itinvolved	homosexuality.		This	provision	was	changed	in	1998.		The	United	States	has	no	national	antidiscriminationlaws	to	protect	LGBT	people.		In	2003	the	Mexican	Chamber	of	Deputies	unanimously	passed	a	national	anti-discrimination	law	that	included	sexual	orientation	as	a	protected	category,	established	a	new	agency	to	enforce	theantidiscrimination	law,	and	developed	a	national	anti-homophobia	campaign.		Moreover,	the	first	article	of	theMexican	Constitution	prohibits	discrimination	based	on	“sexual	preferences”.		There	is	no	explicit	constitutionalprotection	for	sexual	orientation	in	the	United	States.		We	should	emphasis	that,	in	many	ways	the	rule	of	law	has	notbeen	effectively	implemented	in	Mexico,	and	agents	of	the	state	use	violence	in	ways	that	are	not	authorized	by	thelaw.		Individual	state	actors	have	used	state	violence	against	sexual	minorities,	often	with	impunity.		While	the	law	isnot	always	effectively	enforced	in	Mexico,	the	law	does	not	allow	for	legal	discrimination	of	sexual	minorities.The	legal	recognition	of	same-sex	relationships	has	taken	place	over	a	similar	time	frame	in	Mexico	and	the	UnitedStates.		The	first	civil	unions	bill	was	proposed	in	the	United	States	in	2000	and	in	Mexico	in	2001.	While	the	civilunions	bill	was	adopted	in	Vermont	in	2000,	it	was	not	approved	in	Mexico	City	until	2006.		In	2004	Massachusettsbecame	the	first	state	to	issue	marriage	licenses	to	same-sex	couples	in	the	United	States.		Marriage	equalitybecame	the	law	in	Mexico	City	in	2009,	and	in	2010,	the	Mexican	Supreme	Court	ruled	that	same-sex	marriagescarried	out	legally	in	Mexico	City	must	be	recognized	in	every	jurisdiction	in	Mexico.		The	United	States	SupremeCourt	similarly	extended	same-sex	marriage	to	the	entire	country	in	2015.USApp – American Politics and Policy Blog: Compared to Mexico, religion’s role in US society has hindered progress on legal equality for LGBT people Page 1 of 3		Date originally posted: 2018-04-10Permalink: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2018/04/10/compared-to-mexico-religions-role-in-us-society-has-hindered-progress-on-legal-equality-for-lgbt-people/Blog homepage: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/“XXXVI	Marcha	del	Orgullo	GLBT,	Mexico	DF”	by	alitow	is	licensed	under	CC	BY	NC	SA	2.0While	a	simple	understanding	of	the	major	theories	of	comparative	politics	do	not	adequately	explain	thesedifferences,	we	find	that	a	more	nuanced	understanding	of	religion	and	party	ideology	help	explain	national	leveldivergences.		An	overwhelming	majority	of	Mexicans	belong	to	a	religion	that	condemns	homosexuality,	andMexicans	are	more	religious	than	people	in	the	United	States.		However,	the	separation	between	church	and	statehas	been	much	wider	in	Mexico	than	in	the	United	States.		In	Mexico,	there	is	a	powerful	discourse	about	the	secularnature	of	the	state,	and	it	is	politically	unacceptable	to	promote	a	religious	rationale	for	policy	decisions.		Evenreligious	conservatives	couch	their	political	discourse	in	secular	terms.		This	contrasts	sharply	with	the	pervasiveappeals	to	religious	doctrine	found	in	US	politics.		Thus,	while	religious	denomination	and	level	of	religiosity	do	notexplain	LGBT	policy,	the	relationship	between	religion	and	the	state	seems	to	be	important.We	would	expect	reforms	to	grant	greater	rights	to	sexual	minorities	would	be	more	likely	when	secular,	leftist	partiesare	in	power.		But	in	Mexico,	the	new	national	anti-discrimination	policies	and	constitutional	reforms	took	place	whilethe	Partido	Acción	Nacional	(PAN),	a	rightist	Catholic	party,	was	in	power.		Moreover,	no	similar	national	initiativeswere	in	play	in	the	United	States,	even	when	the	Democratic	Party	controlled	the	presidency	from	1992-2000	and2008-2016.		Still,	left	parties	may	be	important.		While	the	US	has	a	two	party	system,	Mexico’s	mixed	electoralsystem	allows	for	small	parties.		Small	leftist	parties	such	as	the	Revolutionary	Workers’	Party	and	the	SocialDemocratic	Party	were	key	advocates	for	gay	rights.		Another	important	explanation	for	Mexico’s	advances	in	gayrights	is	its	recent	transition	to	democracy.		In	a	new	democracy	struggling	to	overcome	the	legacies	of	authoritarianrule,	human	rights	have	more	salience,	and	therefore	there	may	be	greater	consensus	on	the	importance	ofprotecting	the	human	rights	of	all	people.Since	many	important	gay	rights	laws	are	under	the	jurisdiction	of	state	governments	in	Mexico	and	the	UnitedStates,	we	focus	on	subnational	policymaking	for	same	sex	relationship	recognition.		In	our	subnational	case	studies,we	find	that	LGBT	organizations	and	leftist	parties	are	important	in	both	the	US	and	Mexico,	but	religiousdenomination	is	only	important	in	the	US.	States	with	more	LGBT	organizations	and	with	leftist	governors	are	morelikely	to	propose	and	pass	laws	to	recognize	same-sex	relationships.		In	the	US,	states	with	a	higher	percentage	ofevangelical	Protestants	were	less	likely	to	provide	legal	recognition	of	same-sex	relationships.	By	contrast,	neitherthe	percentage	of	the	population	that	is	evangelical	Protestant	nor	Catholic	matters	in	Mexico.Our	work	has	three	important	takeaways.	First,	Mexico	has	been	more	progressive	than	the	United	States	in	anumber	of	ways,	including	gay	rights.		Second,	religion	plays	a	different	role	in	different	countries,	and	the	outsizedpolitical	role	of	evangelical	Christians	may	be	unique	to	the	United	States.		Finally,	in	terms	of	methodology,	differentlevels	of	analysis	may	produce	different	results,	so	it	is	important	for	social	scientists	to	be	thoughtful	about	theappropriate	level	of	analysis.This	article	is	based	on	the	paper	“Extending	Rights	to	Marginalized	Minorities:	Same-Sex	RelationshipUSApp – American Politics and Policy Blog: Compared to Mexico, religion’s role in US society has hindered progress on legal equality for LGBT people Page 2 of 3		Date originally posted: 2018-04-10Permalink: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2018/04/10/compared-to-mexico-religions-role-in-us-society-has-hindered-progress-on-legal-equality-for-lgbt-people/Blog homepage: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/Recognition	in	Mexico	and	the	United	States”	in	State	Politics	and	Policy	Quarterly	Please	read	our	comments	policy	before	commenting	Note:		This	article	gives	the	views	of	the	author,	and	not	the	position	of	USAPP–	American	Politics	and	Policy,	nor	ofthe	London	School	of	Economics.		Shortened	URL	for	this	post:	http://bit.ly/2Hoe9m3About	the	authorsCaroline	Beer	–	University	of	VermontCaroline	Beer	is	associate	professor	of	Political	Science	at	the	University	of	Vermont.	Her	recentresearch	focuses	on	subnational	politics	and	gender	policy	in	Mexico.	Victor	D.	Cruz-Aceves	–	Christian-Albrechts	Universität	zu	KielVictor	D.	Cruz-Aceves	is	a	doctoral	candidate	in	Political	Science	at	Christian-AlbrechtsUniversität	zu	Kiel	(Germany).	His	areas	of	expertise	are	morality	policy,	policydiffusion,	US-American-,	Mexican-	&	German	politics.USApp – American Politics and Policy Blog: Compared to Mexico, religion’s role in US society has hindered progress on legal equality for LGBT people Page 3 of 3		Date originally posted: 2018-04-10Permalink: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2018/04/10/compared-to-mexico-religions-role-in-us-society-has-hindered-progress-on-legal-equality-for-lgbt-people/Blog homepage: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/

Compared to Mexico, religion's role in US society has hindered progress on legal equality for LGBT people

http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/89657/1/usappblog-2018-04-10-compared-to-mexico-religions-role-in-us-society.pdf

Compared to Mexico, religion's role in US society has hindered progress on legal equality for LGBT people

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

LSE Research Online