Civil rights: lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or queer people.
The resolution recognizes that being LGBTQ is a natural part of human diversity and asserts the state's commitment to protect the physical and psychological well-being of minors, particularly those within the LGBTQ community. ACR 99 advocates against the stigma experienced by LGBTQ individuals, which often leads to severe mental health issues, including suicide and depression. It encourages institutions with significant moral influence in society, such as churches and educational establishments, to foster an environment of acceptance to counteract the harmful impacts of societal stigma.
Assembly Concurrent Resolution No. 99 (ACR 99) emphasizes the importance of embracing the individual and social benefits of family and community acceptance for individuals identifying as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or queer (LGBTQ). The resolution calls upon Californians, particularly community leaders and religious figures, to approach LGBTQ issues with compassion and understanding. It aims to raise awareness regarding the psychological and social harms of conversion therapy, which has been widely discredited by major health organizations as ineffective and harmful.
The sentiment surrounding ACR 99 is generally positive among supporters who view it as a necessary step toward achieving equality and acceptance for all individuals, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity. Proponents argue that the resolution promotes mental health and encourages communities to support their LGBTQ members. However, there may be opposition from groups who hold traditional views regarding sexuality and may not support the call to end conversion therapy, viewing it as an infringement on personal beliefs.
While ACR 99 primarily serves as a symbolic assertion of support for LGBTQ rights, some critics may argue that it lacks enforceable measures to provide real protections against conversion therapy practices. The resolution's focus on community acceptance and education rather than legislative restrictions could be seen as insufficient by activists who seek more robust legal protections for LGBTQ individuals, indicating a need for further dialogue and potential legislation to comprehensively address the issues faced by the community.