« Rewards Programs: The New Credit Card Battlefield
John Yoo: Presidential War Powers Include Right to Order Massacres »
Virginia’s Disgrace Banning Gays From State Jobs
Feb 23rd, 2010 | 23 responses
I am not gay. It is a reason I seldom venture into gay rights issues. I’ll defer that usually to persons closer to the cause or the gay community themselves. But I also believe I am a compassionate individual.
And believe me, Buster, that compassion turns to outrage when a person’s basic dignity and civil rights are abused by government or special interests. I don’t care whether that person is colored, a religious zealot, another gender, a dwarf, and, yes, even a transvestite.
Who pulled my chain? Newly elected Republican Virginia Gov. Robert McDonnell, that’s who. By the stroke of a pen and rubber stamp, McDonnell has signed an executive order removing protection for lesbians and gay men from discrimination in state jobs.
It rescinds an order Democratic Gov. Tim Kaine issued in 2006 that extended state policy specifically banning discrimination against employees based on their sexual preference.
McDonnell’s chief of staff told The Washington Post the new order still bars “any and all discrimination,” whatever that means. Check that. Since sexual preference has been removed, to fire them for being gay is not discriminatory. Is that the idea?
What’s next on the Virginia public employment ax? Obese white guys. Blacks who can’t jump and useless on a basketball court for a pickup game between two department intramural offices. How about women who have had abortions. And what about the employment applications for state jobs. Is there a box to check that the applicant is gay?
Discrimination is discrimination. It sucks.
Having said that, I also think the gay rights issue is more than adequately covered in the main street media and Internet. The last I looked about 6% of America are gays or lesbians. Their advocacy in sheer number of stories outflanks by far their numbers as a group. But they are fighting bigots who hide their prejudice in the cloak of religion and that, my friends, is a formidable foe.
I’m a reasonable person and former owner of a small business. There are certain rules that must be established such as arriving at work on time and no drinking or drugs on the job.
If two gays stripped their clothes, jumped on top of their desks in an office and began getting it on, you fire the imbeciles. Short of that, common sense prevails until their sexual preference, political rants, religious preoccupation or vulgar vocabulary interferes with the work they’re paid to perform.
The Virginia case is not exclusive to Republicans for bigotry knows no political boundaries.
A friend of mine on the old San Diego Evening Tribune “came out of the closet” in the 1970s and made no secret of his homosexuality. Yes, he was a piece of work, but he did his job well and in time his gay advocacy gained respect from his colleagues. He may not have won the war but he has won numerous battles proving that gays are people too just like straights. I was happy for him and his partner who took advantage of the period when California’s brief same-sex marriage law in Proposition 8 was still legal.
It’s not that I am comfortable, as they say, in my own skin. Prop 8 and the dead-in-the-water U.S.constitutional amendment promoting marriage only between a man and a woman doesn’t threaten me.
You can read to me all the Bible scriptures in the Old and New Testaments about the sins of homosexuality and it won’t change my mind one twit. I counter with the Golden Rule.
To discriminate against gays in the market place, the work place or in Heavens’ Knows Where, is flat out wrong. What they do behind close doors is their business as it is for heterosexual couples.
23 Responses to “Virginia’s Disgrace Banning Gays From State Jobs”
Gay marriage
My concern is that more and more gay men get STD. It seems that gay men is easier to get an STD.
According to the report from the largest STD dating site == Positivefish.com ==(if I spell the site correctly), the gay subscribers
increased continually. Most of them are sexy.
If I was a gay person denigrated like that, I would know that the only way to reclaim my honor would be to assassinate him. But, of course, that would be evil. Which is fine with me – it's not out business to pray at the altar of goodness while people actively try to steal our human rights. McDonnell is evil – a thief, a bigot and a champion of apartheid. A superior society would recognize that he is effectively lawless, and a gay person with a still functional sense of honor and pride would see to it that McDonnell was incapacitated.
Sorry, that's the way the world works. We must break rules and forgo tenets of society in order to defeat evil.
Good post Jerry. Yup, that old Golden Rule gets right to the nitty gritty, it cuts right through the hypocrisy. Discrimination is discrimination. My hope is that those who go to bat for bigotry and small-mindedness might get a taste of their own medicine one day. How would Bob McDonnell would react I wonder, if he woke up one morning to discover he had brown skin, was gay, was female, or perhaps democrat?
I suppose enlightenment could be painful..
I am not gay either, Jerry, and I totally agree with you about the Golden Rule. A few won''t…
Thanks for your reasonable and compassionate thoughts.
I’m a reasonable person and former owner of a small business. There are certain rules that must be established such as arriving at work on time and no drinking or drugs on the job.
“If two gays stripped their clothes, jumped on top of their desks in an office and began getting it on, you fire the imbeciles. Short of that, common sense prevails until their sexual preference, political rants, religious preoccupation or vulgar vocabulary interferes with the work they’re paid to perform.”
***********
Exactly. But then you say this and it confuses me.
*******
“A friend of mine on the old San Diego Evening Tribune “came out of the closet” in the 1970s and made no secret of his homosexuality. Yes, he was a piece of work, but he did his job well and in time his gay advocacy gained respect from his colleagues.”
********
What exactly is a “piece of work”? Do you mean he was flaunting his sexuality on the job in an obvious manner? I think that's what you mean. Which if memory serves is a no-no in most goverment jobs. My question is then, how does the State of Virginia know someone is gay or not? If it is as obvoius as you say with your “piece of work” friend, then there is sexual flaunting going on and grounds for dismissal.
The only credible beef I've seen so far from gays is not being able to have pictures of the ones they are otherwise [besides sexually] close to on their desks and so on. The simple solution to that is to allow them to have pictures IN their desks, all of them, homo and hetero alike of people close to them. The state offices should be sterile as far as that goes except where the employee only may view reminders of why they're there slaving day after day.
Nice article, Jerry. I'm sensing an impending lawsuit — it's something I can scarcely believe hasn't been done yet in other states where it's legal to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation and identity gender.
My friend did not flaunt. He challenged anyone who slurred gays with disparaging remarks. I think he viewed himself as an educator, teaching us red-neck newsies about life in the shadows. Remember, this was the 1970s. PC was yet to be invented. By a “piece of work,” I was referring to the above as well as his penchant for being the office gossip and posting notes on the bulletin board criticizing management. I think he dared authorities to fire or reprimand him knowing he could use the gay discrimination excuse as a defense. In writing the column, I was about to refer to him as a pain in the butt but thought better of it as a matter of decorum based on the subject matter. — Jer
Hmmm.. Sounds like backpeddling to me. The way its written, it looks like a “piece of work” = flaming. And a flaming homosexual is an advertising one. And advertising sexuality at the workplace is illegal in most states. It may just be that the Virginia law is inadvertently or plainly reaffirming this.
There is no need for anyone to advertise or discuss what it is they do in their bedroom, homo or hetero. And when they insist on being allowed to advertise it, they should be summarily dismissed from employment. Sexuality is not a minority identification since there are so many many forms of it and everyone has one. Ergo, this is not an issue of descrimination.
That's right, Sil. I'm sure you know Jerry's coworker better than he does.
Never mind the vagueness and possible evasion (see below) and hyperventilation. This just looks like this far-right guy is just making Far-Right Buffoon News again. Any wrongful suppression of gays' rights with respect to mainstream, well-established anti-discrimination practices is no biggie, especially at the hands of this guy; others will correct it (even nervous Republicans); observers will, as normal people, roll their eyes at what he is doing. In fact, to normal people this is comical, because it's so ludicrous it actually puts not some noteworthy private business, but actually a state government in the position of being not merely Jim Crow, but somewhat beyond it, apartheid-like.
[shrug] Fourteenth Amendment easy case for correction if it really is that ludicrous.
[smile] I don't believe you have to fear this necessarily spreading to Oklahoma and the Front Range, much less proceeding from there to infect the rest of the country.
(That's if it's not reversing PC silliness. Even a far-right buffoon can be right in a case like that.)
Overdue style note:
As with other lefty stuff, we see here descriptions that are vague and generalist. (There's a sordid PC and militance association with GBLT issues that derates them routinely.) Vague or evasive language is an attempt to escape scrutiny and criticism, as with “choice” for abortion (more weasel language and a terrible amount of toxic baggage), and in a related way with “expressed their displeasure” to refer to people rioting and shattering windows of McDonalds or Starbucks, or burning down buildings.
“How would Bob McDonnell react I wonder, if he woke up one morning to discover he had brown skin, was gay, was female, or perhaps democrat?”
Do you remember “Black Like Me”? (Admittedly, from an earlier era; things have changed now.)
Well, imagine this condition (from the list of examples you provide above), imposed as a sentence for “hate” and related crimes? (I'll leave aside the issue of who, the offender, the victims, or variously interested others in society, find it most valuable.)
Not sure why “flaming” keeps coming up. I see plenty of “flaming” heterosexuals, whether it's men being “butch” or women being “feminine.”
Also, I don't understand why people always have to say “I'm not gay” when making a point about gay rights.
Last, I wonder if religious people would be in an uproar of he removed anti-discrimination protections based on religion.
Good point, benrw (I am one of those guilty of such). Don't really know why, but rest assured, generally such is not ill-intended.
Others may have different thoughts on this.
I guess, it could fall in a similar category as comments such as “Some of my best friends are[whatever]“
“Flaming” comes up a lot because it is the same as flaunting or advertising. Sexual advertising isn't allowed at jobsites or the military. Wanting to “come out” means wanting to flaunt one's sexuality to the world. And hence the problem with coming out at the jobplace or the military. What people do in their personal time is their own business.
Just watch a gay pride parade. It's much like watching a pole dancer, gyrating, dry humping, suggestive strutting etc., public displays of sexual attraction towards the same gender. I often wonder what the reception would be if a hetero-pride parade was thrown. The equivalent would be women wearing pasties and thongs strutting alongside men in loincloths grabbing the women and dry humping them, slobbering all over them and doing everything but illegal acts in public with them. And inviting the kids to come watch by the way [bring the family!]. Let's all act-out in pride of our sexuality. Let's truly make this an equal and free country.
Flaming, flaunting, advertising of any sexuality should be either across the board legal or across the board illegal in public places and workplaces.
[...] One is regarding Virginia’s decision to remove legislation that barred employers from firing an individual based on sexual orientation. http://themoderatevoice.com/63895/virginias-disgrace-banning-gays-from-state-jobs/ [...]
My little sister was in a parade once. She twirled a baton and did gymnastics in a leotard right down the middle of Main Street in my home town. She doesn't do those things at her job, because she would get fired. Wait! Does that mean that one might act differently while in parade than while at work? I know, crazy talk.
Sil, honestly, it's blatantly clear that nobody's ever come out to you (not that I'd blame them). It doesn't generally involve humping, or gyrating, or feathers and sequins and parades. If it's a first coming out (the person hasn't told anyone or alomst no one), it's generally a pretty serious conversation: “Hey, I just wanted to let you know that I've been doing a lot of soul searching, and because you're one of my best friends, I wanted to let you know that I'm gay.” If it's an out gay person who is comfortable, it might go like this:
coworker: hey there Bob, I was out shopping with my wife, and you know how wives are with their shopping…hardeeharhar.
gay person: well, George, I don't, but I think I can relate as my husband also has an eye for the sales!
See? Coming out without any gyration at all. Not a big deal.
“Also, I don't understand why people always have to say “I'm not gay” when making a point about gay rights.”
Hey benrw, I've got a few ideas on this, just throwing them out there. Three ideas, probably all reasons for different people in different amounts:
1) In general, people in the majority think (often subconciously) that the people in the minority are biased about their own issues. This is true, of course, but it should be noted that they are no more biased than people in the majority are, just in the opposite direction. This goes for race, religion, gender, orientation, disability, etc. Men generally think they are “unbiased” about women's issues, white people think they are unbiased on race issues, and straight people think they are unbiased on LGBT issues. So when someone from the majority who sides with the minority says “I am straight” (or “I'm a man” or “I'm white”), it tends to lend more authority to their opinion — if only in the minds of the others in the majority. It's a fine line one needs to tread, I think, between the understanding that every minority needs strong and vocal allies in the majority, while making sure that the ally doesn't pretend to have more credibility hirself than an actual LGBT person (or woman, or person of color, or disabled person, etc).
2) There's also the idea that the majority ally doesn't want to be a doppleganger and pretend to speak from a position of personal understanding, and so, particularly in a forum like the comments section of a blog, needs to
3) Particularly in the case of LGBT issues, we all know how few straight males have any desire to be even momentarily confused with a gay person, so they go out of their way to make sure the listener knows that none of his views should be in any way misconstrued for his sexual tendencies. I've had plenty of folks try to insult me by calling me “gay” because of my views; my response generally falls into the category of “If you're trying to insult me, call me ugly. Calling me gay is just a morally nuetral statement that just happens to be false in my case.”
(BTW, DdW — I'm not trying to smear you at all with reason number 3, because I truly don't believe that about you!)
Kind of funny people ask you if you're gay because of your views. I'm pro-choice, but nobody's ever asked me if I want to have an abortion. Go figure.
In any case, an ally is an ally is an ally, and we appreciate all we can get.
Ummm… I've seen plenty of heterosexuals “flaunting” their sexuality: the difference is that most heterosexuals take everything for granted, even small things like holding hands in public.
I've been to a few gay pride parades and have NEVER seen anyone doing anything I don't see heterosexuals doing almost every day of my life.
Have you even been to a gay-pride parade, or did you just get your information from The O'Reilly Factor?
You don't even know what you're talking about with DADT. Not a clue. It has nothing to do with sexual activity and everything to do with people even KNOWING you're gay. You wouldn't understand since you take it for granted that you'll never be fired for being straight.
And please don't talk about what “coming out” means. Unless you've ever had to, you really don't have a clue.
Very well-put. Echoes some of my own points exactly.
I don't take it as an offense, but I do think it's wrong that people are put in a situation where they have to say they aren't gay. It shouldn't even matter: and the fact that it does shoes that more people need to come out of the closet.
Good analyses, roro. And, no, no offense taken.
[...] Disgrace Banning Gays From State Jobs Virginia’s Disgrace Banning Gays From State Jobs | The Moderate Voice I know that this is an off the wall website, but It caught my attention. Is this actually true?? [...]