From: huntting@advtech.uswest.com (Brad Huntting)
Subject: Re: Amendment 2 (was: What happened to all the refe)
Organization: U S WEST Advanced Technologies
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 00:46:08 GMT

In article <1992Nov14.203155.25754@ncar.ucar.edu> rosinski@isis.cgd.ucar.edu (Jim Rosinski) writes:
>The words I quote from Mr. Huntting below have been edited for spelling
>errors and grammatical clarity.

Thank you...

>huntting@advtech.uswest.com (Brad Huntting) writes:

>>And that's as it should be.  It's none of [an employer's] damn business 
>>whether you like boys, girls, neither, or both.  Or perhaps you can point out
>>some job situation where a homosexual might not be as competent as a
>>heterosexual?

>1) Marriage counselor.  I'm not saying that someone who is gay *cannot* be as
>competent in this job.  I am saying that sexual orientation can be a legitimate
>selection criterion in that to people seeking the services of a marriage
>counselor, it may be desirable that the professional selected has been in
>similar life situations (e.g. also has a wife/husband or kids).  Along
>the same lines, many women prefer to be treated by *female* doctors.  I
>see nothing "wrong" in this.

I'm shure some people wouldn't want to hire a marriage counselor who
was gay.  I'm shure there are gay couples who would prefer a counselor
who prefer a counselor who is gay.  But while this is "discrimination
based on affectational orientation" it's not institutionalized hence
there is no institution to blame, and usually no way to establish clear
evidence of a pattern of discrimination.

Now call me naive, but I think I would prefer a counselor who had *not*
been in the same situation as me and my (nonexistant) spouse.  I
suspect such a person would have much better objectivity.

>2) Catholic priest.  It is my understanding that the Pope says homosexuality is
>wrong.  Since he is by definition infallible, this would seem to make such a
>trait undesirable for the priesthood.

Oh god...  First, I've never been catholic, and dont intend to start.
But it's my understanding that one of the long standing political
strugles in "the church" is over the line that seperates the political
authority of preists vs the political authority of the higherups.
After all, it was the catholic church which invented "liberation
theology".  I suspect this issue falls in that grey area.

Besides, catholic clergy aren't premited to practice sex anyway.  What
difference could it make?

>Examples of the converse exist also:

>1) Gay Crisis Hotline phone answerer.  Again, I'm not saying that a hetero
>*cannot* do a good job in this capacity, only that some people would prefer
>that the phone be answered by a person who *knows* first-hand what the caller
>might be going through.

Again the issue of objectivity can also be raised.  Hopefully anyone
who was hired for such a job would understand and empathize (if not
sympathize) with the problems the callers would have.  Does this mean
that a gay person could do the job better?  Not nessesarily.

>Personally, I am quite skeptical of the whole concept of "anti-discrimination
>legislation".  Hopefully the above examples will enable me to escape being
>labelled a "gay-basher" or "insensitive asshole" by the 
>net.police.politically-correct for making such a statement.

I dont particularly like "discrimination" legislation myself;
particularly since most desision's must involve "discrimination"
othersize you might as well throw dice.

What's worse is that discrimination legislation only addresses the
symptoms of bigotry, and agravates those who end up being
"discriminated against" in the name of equality.

But rather than point fingers at the laws, fix the problem.  Once we
mature beyond really minding wheather our freinds family or business
aquantances are gay or straight, then we will no longer need to have
laws that prohibit discrimination based on afectational orientation.

But the sad fact that CFV can get support for the ugly propaganda it
distributed and the fact that gays are still harrased at every turn
just because their gay is evidence that we still have a long way to
go.  And we need to give our gay and lesbian freinds, familly and
buisness aquantances the support they need to take recourse against
institutionalized homophobia.  Send homophobes a message:  Your
attitudes are not cool, catch a clue.  Untill you do, you'll have to
pay if you screw someone because they're gay.

And, well, if the catholic church get's sacked with a law suit or two along
the way...  bummer...  It's not like they can't afford it.


brad
Newsgroups: co.politics