Comments
by Delphi..
I read a little blurb in the paper today about
a case the ACLU has taken on behalf of a woman who was fired from her position
as a counselor at a Baptist home for abused and neglected children. Nobody
seems to be in any doubt that she was fired because she's a lesbian. She
is suing because the home gets money from the state (I believe the state
in question is Georgia, or Alabama; some southern state), and that violates
a state law which prohibits discrimination on the basis of religion. The
idea is that while the home may be Baptist, if it wants to get state funds,
it can't require anybody connected with it to be Baptist, or even to believe
the same things that Baptists believe (whatever those might be, beyond
a good dunking). The home says they fired her because they don't wish to
have a counselor who promotes a lifestyle that has "negative physical consequences."
How
curious. First thought to spring to mind: what does "negative physical
consequences" mean? AIDS? Getting the tar beaten out of you by some neanderthal
who think lesbians just haven't met the right man yet? In the first place,
as of 1995, there were 79 recorded cases of HIV positive lesbians in the
US who denied any sexual contact with men. Seventy-four infections were
traced to shared needles, and five were traced to tainted blood transfusions.
And while it may seem that being gay, especially in a region not normally
known for its tolerance of non-het non-WASPs, is a sure ticket to having
the snot drubbed ut
of
you on a regular basis, it's not a requirement. Perfectly "normal" people
have been known to be on the receiving end of a senseless beating.
Second
thought: when are people going to get it through their heads that sexual
orientation is not a "lifestyle choice"? Calling it a "lifestyle" rather
than an integral part of someone's identity makes it sound like you could
while away your time in the grocery store lines reading a Better Homes
and Gardens special magazine devoted to this season's trends in sexual
styles. If being gay or bi is a choice, why isn't heterosexuality also
a choice? For those people who are willing to concede that a person can
choose to be het, but that since most people choose it, it must be normal,
I'd like to remind them of all thosepeople who thought that the world was
flat and the sun revolved around it. Popularity doesn't equal truth.
I confess
that I'm a little tired of all these lawsuits. We've become a culture whose
favorite arena of contact is the small claims court, and that seems lamentable,
and kind of small minded, to boot. At the same time, I have to support
anybody who brings a suit on the basis of sexual orientation, or fat discrimination,
or any other kind of human rights issue. At least for now, it seems the
only real way to make any progress.
|
 
 
Hey,
we know!
.
Allegedly
Art's
Link Letters
Below
The Fold
Crazy
Talk
Dept.
Of Huh?
Eye2Eye
Fool4Love
Full
Disclosure
Get
Over It
Homoerrectus
New
World Hors Doeuvres
O-T-R
Patriarch's
Planet
Scene
& Herd
Strange
Bedfellow
Technophobia
|
