Wednesday, November 17, 2010

Another Dumb, Liberal, Feel-Good Idea

Haverford Township is considering an ordinance that purports to outlaw discrimination against gays.

Before they do this township commissioners ought to ask themselves this: How big a problem is anti-gay discrimination in the township? Are gays routinely being denied jobs and housing in the township? Are gays being denied service at local restaurants and bars because they are gay?

If these are not real problems in the township, and I seriously doubt they are, than this is just a political effort by gay activists to guilt local officials into restricting the rights of their fellow citizens and creating causes of action for gays who feel slighted or victimized by one or two people.

Proponents of the ordinance want to see the creation of a Human Relations Board that can sit in judgment of township residents brought up on charges of being mean, unfair and/or discriminatory against a member of this or that victim group.

Such government boards have proven themselves to be divisive, bullying and asinine in their judgments and actions.

Remember when Joey Vento put up that sign at his cheesesteak joint asking people to "Order in English"? He was hauled up on charges by the Philadelphia Commission on Human Relations. It was only thanks to public pressure and outrage that the commission finally backed off.

The state Human Relations Commission is no better in helping people get along or dispensing justice. It awarded some overly sensitive knucklehead at WYSP hundreds of thousands of dollars after he and his co-workers were asked to read a book about how to dress for work. (A real court threw out the PHRC's decision.)

You don't have to be a conservative Christian to be against the creation of more such lame government bodies. The mischief they do in the name of doing good, is well documented. America needs fewer not more of these kangaroo courts.

UPDATE: Here's the first comment on the story:
HaverMom wrote on Nov 17, 2010 7:58 AM:
" Why are Republicans always against disenfranchised groups? How can an anti-bullying ordinance hurt anyone? My guess is that Heilman was a bully. Thats' how he comes across. "
This is a perfect example of liberal argument. If you're against creating a government board to protect gay people you must be a bully. Just how gays are "disenfranchised" HaverMom doesn't say because she can't. Gay are no more disenfranchised than redheaded stepchildren are. Being included into a list of groups Americans are not allowed to discriminate against is hardly enfranchisement, now is it?

2 Comments:

Blogger steve mcdonald said...

I'm in no way anti-gay, but this ordinance is ridiculous. Anti-discrimination shouldn't be under municipal control, it should be federal. Wasn't that why prop 8 was overturned? Can't someone simply bring up a boatload of supreme court cases to protect against discrimination?

This town simply wants attention. And shopping dollars. They're promoting the former in order to sucker a segment of the population into giving them the latter.

I don't know what's more useless - this or Media's 'fair trade' nonsense.

November 17, 2010 at 3:39 PM 
Blogger jake said...

Steve,
Agreed. And I'd put all the hate speech pandering into this worthless category, also.

The only thing I've ever heard about Media's fair trade label is that it is really bad coffee.

November 18, 2010 at 9:52 AM 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home