Anti-Gay Rights Referendum Failed
They need more signatures than they got. It's hard to fathom why, since it seemed like it should have been easy. Maybe they took it too much for granted?
Regardless, it will likely get on the ballot eventually, and as long as it is marketed properly, it will succeed. As of today, in Washington state, gays have more special rights in employment and housing than any other group of people, except for perhaps the disabled.
The first problem is that there's no significant incidences of actual discrimination in the state that warrants special protection. We reserve special protection for groups of people where there is a demonstrated need, and it is very limited: race/ethnicity/nationality, religion, gender, age, disability. I think that's about it. There have been significant problems with all of these in our history.
Where's the problem with homosexuals? Where in Washington are people refused housing or jobs because they are gay? When did this happen? It's not happening. It's a fraud. It's only going to create more opportunities for lawsuits.
Why not special protection for fat and ugly people? They are discriminated against far more than homosexuals in Washington, and no, I am not remotely kidding. It's quite obviously true.
And, of course, worst of all is the fact that this new law protects the expression of your "gender identity," a privilege that no other protected class of people gets. And there's no limits on the protection. I cannot fire for a gay waiter for wearing a dildo around his neck and calling everyone "bitch," if he can convince a judge that this is an "expression" of his "gender identity." You may think I'm being stupid, but the law says it, so don't blame me.
Regardless, it will likely get on the ballot eventually, and as long as it is marketed properly, it will succeed. As of today, in Washington state, gays have more special rights in employment and housing than any other group of people, except for perhaps the disabled.
The first problem is that there's no significant incidences of actual discrimination in the state that warrants special protection. We reserve special protection for groups of people where there is a demonstrated need, and it is very limited: race/ethnicity/nationality, religion, gender, age, disability. I think that's about it. There have been significant problems with all of these in our history.
Where's the problem with homosexuals? Where in Washington are people refused housing or jobs because they are gay? When did this happen? It's not happening. It's a fraud. It's only going to create more opportunities for lawsuits.
Why not special protection for fat and ugly people? They are discriminated against far more than homosexuals in Washington, and no, I am not remotely kidding. It's quite obviously true.
And, of course, worst of all is the fact that this new law protects the expression of your "gender identity," a privilege that no other protected class of people gets. And there's no limits on the protection. I cannot fire for a gay waiter for wearing a dildo around his neck and calling everyone "bitch," if he can convince a judge that this is an "expression" of his "gender identity." You may think I'm being stupid, but the law says it, so don't blame me.
"It is the common fate of the indolent to see their rights become a prey to the active. The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt."
Leave a comment