Our View - Tuesday
March 11, 2008 10:50 AM
Discrimination rights
The danger of laws that force relationships
In a country founded to protect freedom, we must have the right to discriminate. Modern laws, however, forbid discrimination in a growing number of situations. Last week, State Sen. Jennifer Veiga, D-Denver, introduced a bill that would further erode discrimination rights.
If we can’t discriminate on a basis of religion, then we can’t shun those who picket the funerals of homosexuals in the name of God. We can’t discriminate against neo-Nazis in the Christian Identity movement, because the hatred is merely an expression of faith.
If we can’t discriminate on a basis of race, we’d be hard-pressed to discriminate against members of The New Black Panther Party for Self Defense — a racist, anti-Semitic organization of black nationalists — because “race” and “color” could be used in their defense.
Imagine a prospective tenant wearing a shirt that says “God hates homosexuals” applying to rent an apartment from a homosexual landlord. State law would force the landlord to rent to this person. It is, unequivocally, the religious teaching of the Westborough Baptist Church, in Topeka, Kansas, that homosexuals are evil people worthy of death and destined for hell. These fanatics should be shunned and avoided, but law requires us to ignore their activism when hiring, renting, or doing most any business with them. The homosexual landlord could be forced to provide property in which a Westborough member writes brochures designed to incite hatred of homosexuals.
Imagine a radical Muslim job seeker, sporting an anti-Zion lapel pin, seeking a job from a Jewish employer. Anti-discrimination laws prevent the Jewish employer from telling the applicant to buzz off.
In Colorado and throughout the country, our options to exercise reasonable forms of discrimination disappear with every act of political opportunism that comes along.
Veiga’s new bill would add “sexual orientation” to the list of human conditions one cannot discriminate against. The anti-discrimination law would apply in housing, employment, places of public accommodation, sales of cemetery plots, issuance of credit and 18 other circumstances. It defines sexual orientation as “a person’s orientation toward heterosexuality, homosexuality, bisexuality, or transgender status or another person’s perception thereof."
The bill would require the governor to appoint four members to the Colorado Civil Rights Commission who “might be discriminated against” because of sexual orientation. The four members are already supposed to be people who “might be discriminated against” because of disability, race, creed, color, sex, national origin, ancestry, marital status, religion or age.
For the governor, meeting the challenge shouldn’t be difficult. Who wouldn’t meet the qualification of “might be discriminated against” for 11 conditions, 10 of which apply to every human on earth? “Disability” is the only trait listed that some people don’t possess. We all have a “sex,” a “national origin,” an “age” and the rest.
Decent people don’t needlessly discriminate based on color, ancestry, sexual orientation, or various other superficial considerations. It’s socially unacceptable, immoral, and in most cases bad for business. The average landlord cares far more about collecting rent than what country a prospective tenant’s great-grandma came from. Modern employers care about ability in a world that’s far too competitive to support good ol’ boy networks.
On rare occasions in a civilized society, reasonable people want and need to discriminate for important reasons. Sometimes, it’s to protect themselves from hatred and intolerance that can flow from those who obsess about race, religion and sexual orientation. If an anti-Semitic Palestinian with a swastika on his forehead applies for work at a kosher deli, the owner may want to discriminate. Does that make him hateful? No, it makes him smart. But he can’t discriminate, because his opposition would relate to religion, race and national origin. If he can’t discriminate, he isn’t fully free from bigots who hate him. Government can’t force us to love one another. In trying to, it will only cause awkward, unfair, hateful relationships.
The danger of laws that force relationships
In a country founded to protect freedom, we must have the right to discriminate. Modern laws, however, forbid discrimination in a growing number of situations. Last week, State Sen. Jennifer Veiga, D-Denver, introduced a bill that would further erode discrimination rights.
If we can’t discriminate on a basis of religion, then we can’t shun those who picket the funerals of homosexuals in the name of God. We can’t discriminate against neo-Nazis in the Christian Identity movement, because the hatred is merely an expression of faith.
If we can’t discriminate on a basis of race, we’d be hard-pressed to discriminate against members of The New Black Panther Party for Self Defense — a racist, anti-Semitic organization of black nationalists — because “race” and “color” could be used in their defense.
Imagine a prospective tenant wearing a shirt that says “God hates homosexuals” applying to rent an apartment from a homosexual landlord. State law would force the landlord to rent to this person. It is, unequivocally, the religious teaching of the Westborough Baptist Church, in Topeka, Kansas, that homosexuals are evil people worthy of death and destined for hell. These fanatics should be shunned and avoided, but law requires us to ignore their activism when hiring, renting, or doing most any business with them. The homosexual landlord could be forced to provide property in which a Westborough member writes brochures designed to incite hatred of homosexuals.
Imagine a radical Muslim job seeker, sporting an anti-Zion lapel pin, seeking a job from a Jewish employer. Anti-discrimination laws prevent the Jewish employer from telling the applicant to buzz off.
In Colorado and throughout the country, our options to exercise reasonable forms of discrimination disappear with every act of political opportunism that comes along.
Veiga’s new bill would add “sexual orientation” to the list of human conditions one cannot discriminate against. The anti-discrimination law would apply in housing, employment, places of public accommodation, sales of cemetery plots, issuance of credit and 18 other circumstances. It defines sexual orientation as “a person’s orientation toward heterosexuality, homosexuality, bisexuality, or transgender status or another person’s perception thereof."
The bill would require the governor to appoint four members to the Colorado Civil Rights Commission who “might be discriminated against” because of sexual orientation. The four members are already supposed to be people who “might be discriminated against” because of disability, race, creed, color, sex, national origin, ancestry, marital status, religion or age.
For the governor, meeting the challenge shouldn’t be difficult. Who wouldn’t meet the qualification of “might be discriminated against” for 11 conditions, 10 of which apply to every human on earth? “Disability” is the only trait listed that some people don’t possess. We all have a “sex,” a “national origin,” an “age” and the rest.
Decent people don’t needlessly discriminate based on color, ancestry, sexual orientation, or various other superficial considerations. It’s socially unacceptable, immoral, and in most cases bad for business. The average landlord cares far more about collecting rent than what country a prospective tenant’s great-grandma came from. Modern employers care about ability in a world that’s far too competitive to support good ol’ boy networks.
On rare occasions in a civilized society, reasonable people want and need to discriminate for important reasons. Sometimes, it’s to protect themselves from hatred and intolerance that can flow from those who obsess about race, religion and sexual orientation. If an anti-Semitic Palestinian with a swastika on his forehead applies for work at a kosher deli, the owner may want to discriminate. Does that make him hateful? No, it makes him smart. But he can’t discriminate, because his opposition would relate to religion, race and national origin. If he can’t discriminate, he isn’t fully free from bigots who hate him. Government can’t force us to love one another. In trying to, it will only cause awkward, unfair, hateful relationships.
