Well, for those of you in washington state, ie, Hyacinthus, Deepspace87, gothic gay boi, paper moth, and whoever else, you probably already know about the gay rights bill that was passed earlier this year, and the Tim Eyeman referendum, referendum 65 that was on the bill about a month ago to repeal it......well, here is a dumb local woman's perception of the GLBT community and where they stand politically...here goes the letter to the editor she published in this week's paper:
I supported Referendum 65 to repeal Engrossed Substitute House Bill (ESHB) 2661, which adds "sexual orientation" to the state's law against discrimination in employment, housing, credit, insurance and certain issues which would have placed the issue on the ballot for the November elections.
LIke all "compassionate" (note, I added the quote there), I abhor unjust discrimination against people seeking housing and jobs. However, this broad and vaguely-worded bill will create more problems than it solves. Consider:
1. Civil Rights legislation is designed to protect certain classes of people that meet the following three criteria: (1) They are politically disadvantaged. (umm, we are dumbass...). (2) They are economically disadvantaged. ( I kinda agree here, we aren't really). (3) They have an immutable (unchangeable) condition, such as race, sex, or disability.(umm, yeah, we do... you can't change ur sexuality, unless ur bi, in which u can choose it...and trannies choose to get a sex change, so that is the only part of this in which u are right.) The Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered community does not meet these criteria.
"Sexual orientation" under the bill encompasses "heterosexuality, homosexuality, bisexuality, and gender expression, identity, appearance and behavior." Almost any behavior or dress, regardless how bizarre, can now (and no doubt will) be called "gender expression" or "gender behavior" that is protected under the law. ( who's to say what "bizarre" is??? that is a matter of opinion, not fact.)
3. Discrimination simply means selecting the best for the situation between two or more choices. (umm, that's one definition;there's a lot more). Most would agree it is appropriate to discriminate against convicted child-molesters(comparing the old steretype-gays are molesters), for example, when hiring teacher aides for elementary school classrooms. ESHB 2661 eliminates the right of employers or landlords to not employ or to rent to people who behave in a way they believe to be immoral or offensive. The law also eliminates the ability of insurers to charge higher rates to a people group (yes, a people group, not a group of people;this is one of many errors she made in her letter, I just corrected the countless other.) with well-documented higher rates of illness and mortality.( really??? higer illness? what? Higher mortality rate??? only because assholes like you drive gays to commit suicide!!!)
4. Public School curriculum designed to teach our children (beginning in kindergarten!!!!) that the GLBT lifestyle is normal and acceptable is ready for immediate deployment once the law is enacted. ( What the hell??? a plot by teachers to educate young kids on moral issues. I know that the NEA is fairly liberal and there are no-discrimination laws in eduacation, but come on, teachers are brain-washing your kids??? I bet when your son or daughter grows up, they're going to be gay and you're going to have a nervous breakdown). No one understands what harm or confusion this can cause in the mounds of young, developing children. ( so that's why kids are gay??? they choose it because they are confused??? *cough* Cough* Bullshit...) This also clearly infringes on the rights of parents to teach their children faith-based values. (How, exactly? And if you really practiced faith-based values, you'd realise the bible tells you to turn the other cheek and love thy neighbor. )
5. Also waiting in the wings is a Washington State Supreme Court ruling on same-sex marriage. (uhh, it happened yesterday, and they ruled against.) Many folks of the "live and let live" variety believe that legalizing gay marriage will have no effect on society or them personally. (umm, it won't...people would just be allowed to show their love freely and live out their lives without bothering others.) This is not true. Other states, including California and Massachusetts, are already transitionting (or trying to-her, not me) a genderless society-deleting all references to "mom" and "dad" from school books for example. (umm, no. They aren't even attempting that.) In addition, legal scholars and advocates on both sides of the debate agree that legalizing same-sex marriage opens up a whole gamut of conflicts between "sexual liberty" and "religious liberty". ( It does??? How? How does a gay couple in love getting married inflict damage to religious liberty or religious practices...it doesn't. It's not like they are preventing you, in any way, from practicing or advocating your beliefs...look at the history of christianity and religion...marriage was originally just a scam by the catholic church to make money and control people's lives...) It seems incredible to think that barely more than 200 short years ago, our country was founded by men and women fleeing religious intolerance and seeking religious liberty-liberty that is now being stripped away in the name of "tolerance".
Washington citizens should be able to decide through voting whether to adopt legislation that would have such a wide-spread impact on our public schools, workplaces, churches (only some), homes(how?), and society at large. Unfortunately, now we will not be able to, and we will see the results.
Port Orchard Washington
I thought this was a pretty ridiculous letter and it almost wasn't worth the time it took to post...Message me if you want more about the letter...I'm probably going to write a letter, either to her, or the editor, in response to this letter, as I'm sure many will for weeks to come.