From: mjs@fc.hp.com (Marc Sabatella)
Subject: Re: interesting thought (ammendment 2)
Reply-To: marc@hpmonk.fc.hp.com
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.4 PL6]
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 23:53:31 GMT

Dan Kary (kary@col.hp.com) wrote:
: I live in Colorado Springs and you (aparently) live in or around Fort Collins. 
: Neither of these communities, nor the county or State they are in have ever
: ever had any kind of gay rights ordinance or law.  Has it always been legal
: to discriminate against homosexuals in these communities?  If not, why is
: it now legal to discriminate?

Yes, it has always been legal in both Colorado Springs and in Fort Collins to
discriminate against gays, although certain companies have policies (still
valid) against it.  Both cities had ordinances that would have outlawed this
discrimination on the ballot in the last five years (I think that is the right
time span); both were defeated.  I don't consider either of those particularly
significant - at least you don't see me railing about the terrible wrong
committed by not passing those laws; but taking away the right to try to pass
them, *that* I will rail against.

BTW, the Fort Cllins Coloradoan (local newspaper) had a short article today on
the effect of the housing crunch on the rental market.  They listed the various
things you can and cannot do, listing "discriminate against gays" as something
you can do, but "discriminate against people with children" as something you
cannot, which is absurd, I think.  They also quoted someone as saying the day
after the election, she got a call from her landlord telling her, "I've been
waiting for this day - you're outta here".  Apparently this bozo had thought
discrimination against gays was illegal before, and now he was finally free to
exercise his bigotry.

: I think it would have been illegal to discriminate against homosexuals before
: amendment 2, based on the US Constitution, Amendments and case law.  I think
: that is still the case.  Amendment 2 just removes city, county and state govt.
: from legislating/enforcing these issues.

I think you will be hard put to find an example where anyone has ever
successfully sued anyone for discrimination without a specific law to back them
up.  That is to say, there is nothing on a national basis that would have
made discrimination against gays illegal, although if such legislation (which
has been pending in legislature for years) ever passes, it will indeed "trump"
the state amendment in that respect.

: I've always thought that local civil rights ordinances are a bad idea because
: I feel that local government and what they have that passes for a "judiciary"
: is not competent to judge anything more important than traffic violations.

I'm inclined to agree.  I also don't like the idea that discrimination policy
should vary town by town.  it seems to me something that inherent belongs at
the state level.  Actually, I think the whole idea of dividing the country by
states has outlived its usefulness; there should be national and local and
that's it, but thatt's a bit much for most people to swallow.

--
Marc Sabatella
marc@hpmonk.fc.hp.com
--
Amendment 2 Is Legalized Discrimination - Shame On You, Colorado
--
"Neither the State of Colorado ... nor any of its municipalities ... shall ...
 enforce any ... ordinance ... whereby homosexual, lesbian, or bisexual
 orientation ... shall ... be the basis of ... any ... claim of discrimination"
--
All opinions expressed herein are my personal ones
and do not necessarily reflect those of HP or anyone else.
Newsgroups: co.general,co.politics