Bill requires hiring ‘gays,’ cross-dressers
Saturday, May 12th, 2007 |
Email This Post
|
Posted by John under: Days of Lot
‘Perceived sexual orientation or gender identity’ protected
“But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter: And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them.”
—Genesis 19:4-5
Rep. Barney Frank – that requires businesses to give special privileges to “gay” and “transgendered” individuals.Following on the heels of an ‘anti-discrimination’ plan Christians insist would virtually outlaw their religious beliefs comes another proposal – introduced by openly homosexual U.S.
Shari Rendall, director of legislation and public policy for Concerned Women for America, the nation’s largest women’s public policy group, said H.R. 2015, the “Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2007,” would be a disaster.
“This bill would unfairly extend special privileges based upon an individual’s changeable sexual behaviors, rather than focusing on immutable, non-behavior characteristics such as skin color or gender. Its passage would both overtly discriminate against and muzzle people of faith. Former Secretary of State Collin Powell put it well when he said, ‘Skin color is a benign, non-behavioral characteristic. Sexual orientation is perhaps the most profound of human behavioral characteristics. Comparison of the two is a convenient but invalid argument,’” Rendall said.
The proposal, from U.S. Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., follows H.R. 1592, the House-approved plan that would add sexual orientation and gender identity to a list of valid arguments for allegations of a “hate crime” and allow the federal government to intervene when those occur, or even in order to “prevent” one.
The White House has issued a statement saying the proposal is “unnecessary and constitutionally questionable” and the president’s advisers would recommend a veto if it advances to his desk.
The new bill’s goals are within the same agenda, critics say.
“According to proponents, this bill merely seeks to insulate people who choose to engage in homosexual behaviors (“sexual orientation”) or who suffer from gender confusion (“gender identity”) against employment discrimination,” said the CWFA station. “But regrettably this legislation would effectively codify and encourage the very thing it purports to prevent – workplace discrimination.”
It would apply to any business with 15 or more employees and would declare “it shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer … to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise discriminate against any individual with respect to the compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment of the individual, because of such individual’s actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity.”
“This bill would force Christian, Jewish or Muslim business owners to hire people who openly choose to engage in homosexual or cross-dressing behaviors despite a sincerely held religious belief that those behaviors are dangerous, sinful and not in keeping with basic morality,” added Matt Barber, policy director for cultural issues for CWFA.
“ENDA would essentially force employers to check their First Amendment protected rights to freedom of religion, speech and association at the workplace door. It’s absurd! For instance, female employees would have to endure both systematic sexual harassment and a hostile work environment by being forced to share bathroom facilities with male employees who get their jollies from wearing a dress, high heels and lipstick,” Barber said.
“Over the years, the homosexual lobby has done a masterful job of co-opting the language of the genuine civil rights movement in their push for special rights. This bill represents the goose that laid the golden egg for homosexual activist attorneys,” he said.
Peter LaBarbera, of Americans for Truth, also suggested voters contact Congress and urge members to reject ENDA “and the insanity of forcing businesses across the nation to accommodate and subsidize gender confusion in the name of ‘civil rights.’
“Several giant corporations have already settled on pro-’transgender’ bathroom and dress policies – probably the same companies who would subject their employees to biased, pro-homosexual ‘diversity’ lectures – but can you imagine inflicting these ‘transgender’ regulations on small and mid-level companies through federal law via ENDA?” LaBarbera asked.
“What female employee wants to share the company restroom with a big-boned man claiming to be ‘transitioning’ to ‘womanhood?’ Will companies have to build ‘transgender male’ and ‘transgender female’ restrooms?”
He said there are some unsatisfactory exemptions for religious-oriented employers, but secular companies whose owners choose to run their operations on biblical guidelines would have no option.
The law would require companies to allow workers to use the restroom of the sex they “present.”
“What about the privacy rights of [a transgender's] female co-workers? Don’t they have the right not to feel personally invaded as they go to the restroom at their job?” he asked.
“Of course, the larger goal here – shared by the ‘gay’ and ‘transgender’ lobbies – is to change your mind and heart regarding gender-confused conduct. The law is merely a tool in their never-ending quest to overturn America’s Judeo-Christian norms regarding family, sex and marriage,” he said.
Former White House insider Chuck Colson, in his Breakpoint commentary, called the earlier plan, H.R. 1592, a “Thought Crimes” plan.
“It’s called the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act. But this bill is not about hate. It’s not even about crime. It’s about outlawing peaceful speech – speech that asserts that homosexual behavior is morally wrong,” he said.
“Some say we need this law to prevent attacks on homosexuals. But we already have laws against assaults on people and property,” Colson said. “Moreover, according to the FBI, crimes against homosexuals in the United States have dropped dramatically in recent years. In 2005, out of 863,000 cases of aggravated assault, just 177 cases were crimes of bias against homosexuals…”
He noted, as WND earlier reported, in other locations, such as England, Sweden, Canada, and even Philadelphia, where similar laws have been approved, the “Thought Police” already have prosecuted Christians.
One Philadelphia woman, Arlene Elshinnawy, 75, and grandmother of three, was holding a sign: “Truth is hate to those who hate the truth,” before she was hauled off by police officers, according to reports.
Faith2Action has launched a series of ads, which can be viewed at StopHateCrimesNow.com about the concerns.
Steve says Comment posted on May 13th, 2007
Next they will try to outlaw putting male or female on birth certificates so a child can choose if they want to be a male or female when they reach adulthood, and it will also be ilegal for parents to raise children as boys or girls they have some type of gender nuteral thing you will have to do.
It is just a mtter of time, even now, the history channel and others are bringing up the gay, bi-sexual and perverted life styles of peoples of the past like they were a good thing.
What everyone misses in thses programs is the cultures they are praising were completly wiped out. Why? Not becuse they were progressive free thinkers who were tolerant of others but becuse they were evil and they more perverse things they allowed the more evil and cruel they became.
Chris says Comment posted on May 15th, 2007
uh…Ive hired and worked along side gays and lesbians for quite some time because where I worked it was about who could do the job better. If it was a white guy then it wasn’t because he/she was white, it was because he/she did better in the interview. Ive seen heterosexuals hit on customers just like Ive seen gays and lesbians hit on customers. I just don’t see what the big deal is with this notion that we HAVE to create laws saying that gays HAVE to be hired. Its like affirmative action, which is totally stupid.