From: harsha@ksr.com (Paul Harsha)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Homophobia (really not about Homeschooling)
Date: 9 Jan 93 15:36:01 EST

msmorris@watsci.UWaterloo.ca (Mike Morris) writes:


>RL:
>       Why should one not have the right to claim discrimination on
>  grounds of sexual orientation?  

>Because the employer ought to have the right to free association.
>The point is, it's his business, his property, not fundamentally
>a grant made by him from the State.

Why is it that you believe "freedom of association" is not only a fundamental
right, but perhaps the most important human right?  I understand that you are
arguing from your own set of "natural laws" rather than the laws of the United
States, but I have never understood why I should be denied the opportunity to
work or a place to live or even a chance to advance within my place of work
because I'm gay or because my grandfather was a Jew.  Why should bigotry be
protected?  

I'm also not sure why you believe that this "right" to freedom of association
extends to businesses or why your list of fundemental human rights should
extend beyond individuals at all. Business are almost never single owner
entities and most discrimination laws don't apply to companies with fewer than
10 or so employees in any case.  Many instances of discrimination take place,
not between business owners and employees, but between managers and employees.
Does being a manager give someone a stronger freedom of association? 

>RL:
>  NO CLAIM OF DISCRIMINATION -- what more do you need?

>I need someone to explain to me *why* non-discrimination
>ought to be considered a Right.

It goes back to the "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" bit.  Again,
I think this country was founded on a differnet set of rights and laws than
those you recognize. 

Perhaps Steve Dyer is right and you don't get it because you just haven't
experienced it.  For example, I remember as a child changing hotels because my
grandfather had been told there was no vacancies when he tried to make check
in as "Dr.  Levy," but when my grandmother went in and used her maiden name
(Richard) she was told there were plenty of rooms.  I was raised Catholic --
it had never even really occured to me that going to temple wasn't something
that everyone's grandfather did or that there might be something BAD about it. 

>Why are you blind to the distinction I have maintained between moral
>wrong and something that warrants legal sanction? For the record, 
>I do not believe that mere stupidity or mere moral wrong warrants
>legal sanction. Legal sanction in the private sector is only appropriate
>when the moral wrong corresponds to a violation of some human Right.
>Do you have a problem with this?

I think you forget that some people don't believe blacks, jews, and gays are
human.  When I lived in Texas there was a case where a judge let
two men go for killing two gay men, because in his mind killing a gay man is
like killing a prostitute -- there's no real crime.  In the places where gay
rights laws have been banned (Springfield, Oregon and Colorado) attacks on
gays have increased dramatically, because, correctly or incorrectly, people
think they won't be prosecuted for it.  Your belief system may say otherwise,
but I'm more comfortable in a place which codifies my right to exist. 

-Paul
--
   Paul Harsha (harsha@ksr.com)               Kendall Square Research Corp.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books