Posted on 05/21/2003 2:38:13 AM PDT by kattracks
(CNSNews.com) - Activists seeking support for nondiscrimination policies for "transgenders" in employment on Capitol Hill are twisting the original intent of the civil rights movement - to redress wrongs committed against America's black population - and should be rebuffed, a public policy group said.
Instead, lawmakers should opt for the "compassionate response" and suggest counseling for people considering sex-change operations, Sandy Rios, president of Concerned Women for America, said in a letter to members of Congress.
By signing a nondiscrimination pledge, lawmakers also would forfeit the right to object if men came to work dressed as women and wanted to use the women's bathroom, Rios said.
"We suggest that your staff politely but firmly tell the 'transgender' lobbyists that you are declining to sign any pledge and that you do not want to do anything to encourage people to remain trapped in a serious psychosexual disorder," she said. "That would be the compassionate response."
The Gender Public Advocacy Coalition (GenderPAC), whose members are lobbying Congress, did not return calls seeking comment.
In a recent release announcing the joining of forces of GenderPAC and the Human Rights Campaign, a national homosexual advocacy group, GenderPAC said the new pledge asks members of Congress to affirm that they do not discriminate based on employees' "sexual orientation and gender identity and expression in their hiring practices."
This language, which is appearing more frequently in nondiscrimination clauses and in hate crimes legislation at the state and local level in the United States, could serve as a model for legislation that would prohibit private companies from enforcing their ethical, moral and dress codes as they wish, analysts said.
"You can't discriminate based on sexual orientation; now, you add perceived or actual gender identity, and gender identity would be what you choose to identify as gender," said Peter LaBarbera, a senior policy analyst with the CWA's Culture and Family Institute.
The city of San Francisco, for example, pays for sex-change operations for eligible city employees, LaBarbera said.
According to GenderPAC, 96 members of Congress signed diversity pledges affirming that they don't discriminate based on gender, including 70 lawmakers who signed both "gender identity and expression and sexual orientation" pledges since 1999.
Since 1995, the HRC has secured the signatures of 336 members of Congress on a pledge affirming that they do not discriminate based on "sexual orientation" in their hiring practices, GenderPAC reports.
GenderPAC quotes Winnie Stachelberg, the HRC political director, as saying the joint project "will provide members of Congress with the opportunity to follow the lead of some of the top Fortune 500 corporations in America, such as Bank One, Eastman Kodak, IBM, Intel, Nike and Xerox, which have implemented policies prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity and expression."
Some homosexual advocacy groups are urging caution, however. Patrick Guerriero, executive director of the Log Cabin Republicans, said his group intends to meet with representatives of GenderPAC in the coming days to discuss their initiative and to get a better understanding of GenderPAC goals.
But he stressed: "We oppose discrimination of any type against any part of the American family."
CWA accused GenderPAC of "aggressively" recruiting teenagers. At a recent "True Spirit Conference" hosted by transgender groups, girls grappling with gender issues were encouraged to undergo surgery to have their breasts removed, LaBarbera said.
"Imagine the confusion they're foisting on these very impressionable kids," he said. "I think that's unconscionable, and I think that's an aspect of how this movement exploits people and innocent children who have no idea what they're getting into."
E-mail a news tip to Lawrence Morahan.
Send a Letter to the Editor about this article.
How about euthanasia??
Psychiatrists? Haha. Read the literature. Like when John Money of Johns Hopkins took homosexuals off the list of mental disturbances.
"We suggest that your staff politely but firmly tell the 'transgender' lobbyists that you are declining to sign any pledge and that you do not want to do anything to encourage people to remain trapped in a serious psychosexual disorder," she said. "That would be the compassionate response."What a great response! Gentle yet makes the point. I suggest this response be used for any person/group promoting any sexual activity other than adult heterosexuality.
For understandable reasons the females refuse to share a bathroom with a man and all the pluming changes in the world will not affect one’s chromosomes.
The question comes down to balancing the rights of the individual with the rights of the other employees which we attempted but we ultimately failed to accommodate his every wish. He has filed a federal decimation law suite with the help of one of these civil rights groups.
Now to top everything off his performance has continued to decline but no one is sure if it would be wise to take a performance based action with the EEO suit pending for fear of a retaliation complaint.
All tolled the office supervisors and managers have wasted hundreds of hours dealing with this issue.
I just love the confusion that liberalism brings. I do not believe he will prevail in his case. In the end the only winners will be the lawyers.
Anyone who has actually researched this subiject knows that this is NOT a sexual activity issue, and MORE of a personality issue.
If a person is born with a birth defect, is there anything wrong with correcting it? Should all people with poor eye sight continue to go without glasses so as not to offend those with perfect eye sight? Me thinks not!
When we permit discrimination because of some percieved difference in another person -- where do we draw the line? Gender Dysphoria is serious and effects a number of people -- both male and female. If we agree to a "compassionate response" for these people -- why not for left handed folks, or everyone with blonde hair, or green eyes!
Da Du
Anyway, if everyone here understood how many different ways a person's gender can be messed up in the first 9 months of devolopment they might have a more "compassionate response".
By the way, I find it interesting that the people asking for this, are NOT asking for a law to be pass that everyone BUT the lawmakers have to follow, but instead for a agreement that the lawmakers will have to follow and that will NOT effect anyone else.
But firing someone for lack of job performance is valid and legal.
If someone took your advice, I hope they get sued and lose because what you are saying from a business standpoint legally, morally and ethically wrong.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.