More myths about the Metro Non-Discrimination Ordinance

Newschannel5 explores the Metro non-discrimination ordinance. Council Member Megan Barry does a great job of explaining the basis of the ordinance in terms of actual complaints of discrimination and the need to attract a talented workforce like private sector employers.

Those opposed repeat the same old arguments without any basis. Let's go point by point.

1. Special rights? Wrong. The same rights. What's the argument? Sexual orientation and gender identity are general categories that apply to all people. We all have a sexual orientation; it's not just for gay people. The ordinance would also protect straight people targeted for discrimination by a gay supervisor because they are straight. Gender identity is also a general category that is applicable to all people. Some people live their lives as men and some live their lives as women. Pretty basic. Men and women come across as more or less masculine and feminine on a full scale. Should it matter how masculine or how feminine people think you are if you can do your job? These are non-merit factors and shouldn't be the basis for firing or not hiring someone.

2. Sexual orientation is a choice? No, it's really not. Human beings don't really choose whether to be attracted to and fall in love with the same sex, the opposite sex, or both. It's not like going into a diner and saying, "I think I'll have the spaghetti today." Check the American Psychological Association if you don't believe an activist.

3. Won't there be lawsuits? It's not likely. Do we really think private employers choose to adopt employment policies that invite lawsuits and endanger the bottom line? The goal of non-discrimination policies is to prevent discrimination so people can focus on their jobs. Furthermore, the Tennessee Board of Regents has adopted the same non-discrimination policy that Metro is proposing and there have been no lawsuits based on sexual orientation or gender identity.

Stay tuned. I'm sure we'll have to break it down a few more times as the ordinance moves along.

Lemmings and Lawsuits: Debunking the arguments against the Metro NDO

The Tennessean explores how far ahead much of the private sector is on non-discrimination policies compared to Metro Nashville government. Family Action's David Fowler is quoted opposing the ordinance. His first argument sounds like the parent who asks the teenager, "If everyone jumped off a cliff, would you?"

"Just because someone else does something doesn't mean it's right, and we learned that when we all took off from kindergarten," said David Fowler, a former state senator and president of the Family Action Council of Tennessee. "So unless we are going to act like lemmings and just blindly do what everybody else is doing, we need to stop and think before we make this a law."

The Metro non-discrimination is not a lemming move. It is a policy that many people have carefully thought through for years. It has been tested in other cities and the private sector. It is a measured step that will be a real improvement for Metro government employees.

Fowler's other argument is that it would expose the city to lawsuits. One of the TEP district captains asked the general counsel for the Tennessee Board of Regents how many lawsuits based sexual orientation or gender identity discrimination have come forward since they adopted their non-discrimination policy. The answer is zero. The lawsuit myth is used to scare people based on the idea that the city will incur some huge expense. It just doesn't happen. The point of the policy is to prevent discriminatory incidents!

Look for more lies, myths, and scare tactics to emerge before the second reading of the ordinance.

In Your Face(book) Page

Well, just when readers of the Commercial Appeal discovered that TEP uses Facebook for activism, suddenly we encounter the anti-TEP. Here's their page. They are Tennesseans Against the Tennessee Equality Project. Hot damn! We've arrived.

They've even peppered their page with some lies: TEP is well funded and has actual employees. Yeah, I was, um, just processing payroll a minute ago, and, ah, oh yeah, we don't have employees as was pointed out in the same Commercial Appeal article above.

A refresher course on the Ten Commandments needed for some Shelby Co Churches

Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor. Lord, have mercy upon us, and incline our hearts to keep this law.
(The Decalogue preceding Rite I of the Holy Eucharist, Book of Common Prayer)

Take a look. Some Churches are complaining about the addition of sexual orientation to Shelby County's nondiscrimination ordinance. They cite a whole list of what sexual orientation means. The problem is that the ordinance also defines what it means by sexual orientation:

Sexual Orientation means a person’s real or perceived sexual preference (i.e.
heterosexuality, homosexuality, or bisexuality).

Oops. You're busted. You're lying in public to a lot of people about a lot of people.

Perhaps someone can minister to this coalition, provide them with copies of the Ten Commandments, and call them to repentance.

Hate crimes bill in Senate Judiciary on Tuesday

SB 0253, the companion bill to HB 0335, is up for consideration in the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday. As we have noted many times, the bill would add gender identity and expression as sentencing enhancement factors to our state's hate crimes statute.

The bearing false witness campaign against the bill continues. Despite what opponents are saying, the bill does not restrict speech, thought, or religion. The current hate crimes law already includes sexual orientation and not one church or pastor has been prosecuted under it for preaching against the GLBT community. So how is it that adding another sentencing enhancement factor is going to lead to problems for churches? It won't. The whole campaign is a lie designed to cover the real opposition to the bill, which stems from the belief that some people shouldn't be protected. I'm not lumping in that group some libertarians who simply believe that such laws are not needed. But they don't go around making up lies about the bill. So that's another matter entirely.

If you would like to contact the Senate Judiciary Committee about the bill, you can do so here.

Times Free Press writes glowing piece on reparative therapy

Geesh, I hope they got paid to write this. I just love how they describe mainstream psychological practice as "traditional." There is no proof that reparative therapy works. Furthermore, it is harmful to individuals and to the GLBT community as a whole because it bolsters a weak argument that people can and should change their sexuality.

The problem is not someone's sexuality. The problem is legal discrimination and social intolerance that conspire to keep people in the closet or pressure them to be something they aren't.

I know people who tried to "pray the gay away" and endure years of bizarre "therapies." They wanted it to work. They tried to be straight. It failed. These efforts to change sometimes lead to suicide because as time goes on and nothing works, people become hopeless.