From: glp@fig.citib.com (Greg Parkinson)
Subject: Re: Gay and Lesbian Affirmative Action
Originator: glp@merlin
Organization: Citibank IBISM
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 15:46:40 GMT


In article <21054@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu>, ez000281@hamlet.ucdavis.edu writes:
|> In <1993Jan7.073905.15107@cs.brown.edu> David O'donnell writes:
|> 
|> >Subject: Re: Specil or equal rights?
|> >Summary: (Hopefully) correcting yet-another-phobe
|> 
|> >In article <1993Jan6.204624.17742@wam.umd.edu> aap@wam.umd.edu (Alberto 
|> Adolfo 
|> >Pinkas) writes:
|> [...]
|> >>As far as I understand, Gays and Lesbians are asking for equal protection
|> >>under the law and not for special rights.
|> >>Also, I understand that it has nothing to do with Affirmative Action 
|> >>programs.
|> 
|> >The latter paragraph is correct. Bisexuals, gay men and lesbians are NOT out
|> >to "grab" any rights other than those which should be accorded every human
|> >being: life, liberty and the pursuit if happiness are among them. We pursue
|> >the right to a job, and the right to not be fired -solely- based on our sex-
|> >uality. We pursue the right to a place to live, and the right not to be 
|> >ejected -solely- based on our sexuality.
|> 
|> And I, agree totally with such rights, in fact they are protected by the 14th 
|> amendment of the Constitution and the Section 1983 of the Unites States Code, 
|> so I don't see why you need any special statute on the matter, unless, of 
|> course you are asking for ADDED (not equal) protection under the law; and BTW 
|> I'm getting sick and tired of hearing everyone who dissents from politically 
|> correct positions regarding gay rights to be immediately labeled a homophobe.

But your premise that the 14th amendment protects gay men,
lesbians, and bisexuals from discrimination based on their
sexual orientation is wrong.  Given that fact, the rest of
your statements are meaningless.

|> I have consistently denounced homophobic practices in my University, and in 
|> Latin America, particulary in Cuba, where there are prisons especially built 
|> for gays.  However, once ther is dissent from Gay and Lesbian PC you 
|> immediatlely get labeled a homophobe.  In the recent Irish parade in NYC, the 
|> organizers wold permit gays to march as gays but instead they had to march as
|> Irish.  So, what was the response, well they pissed  (literally) and excreted
|> on top of Jesus.  And if someone dare complain, he is immediately tagged as 
|> homophobic.  What are we getting to?

It wasn't an "Irish parade", it was the St. Patrick's Day
parade, an even heavily funded by New York City. There
are "Irish Firemen" and "Irish Students" and "Irish
Actors" - but they didn't want "Irish Gays and Lesbians".
And what is this about pissing?  More lies.  What happened
was that the gay group (including Mayor Dinkins) had bottles
and full beer cans thrown at them.  "Excreted on top of
Jesus"?  Where do you get these stories?  You spout horrible
lies about gay people and then get upset when people object.

|> No, they are evicted or harrassed because in such cases (which you have easily 
|> avoided documenting) legal actions haven't been brought up against the proper 
|> authorities, not becuase we as a society currently allow for people to be 
|> murdered on account of sexual preference.

It is legal in most places in the United States to
evict or fire someone *solely* because they are 
gay, or are perceived to be.  

|> In addition to the cases which you 
|> avoid to talk about, you can also find a myriad of cases in which 
|> convicitions/penalties against hatemongers have been reached.

A "myriad"?  Where's *your* list?  I've not heard
of them.

|> So any comparison 
|> between the rights of Gays in the U.S., and those in other parts of the planet 
|> will leave you with stark contrasts.  

You can compare blacks in South Africa to blacks
in the U.S. but you wouldn't say that racism does
not exist in the U.S.  Why do you try the same 
reasoning here?

|> 
|> >        We do not seek preferential treatment: we seek EQUITY.
|> 
|> Well, then use the 14th amendment and USCA 1983 to get it, unless of course 
|> you want to get quota bills and preferential legislation passed in order to 
|> seek equity.

You are totally and completely wrong about the 14th amendment.
And gay rights bills have *never* included quotas or preferences.

-- 
Greg Parkinson                  Phone: 212-657-7814  Fax: 212-825-8607
Citibank,111 Wall Street        E-Mail: glp@fig.citib.com
New York, New York  10043
The opinions expressed are my own and not those of the big 'ol bank.