From: bpk@evolving.com (Brad Knotwell)
Subject: Re: Stripped of Civil Rights?
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 19:25:35 GMT
Organization: Evolving Systems, Inc.
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3

altinbay@netcom.com (John Altinbay) writes:
: In article <1993Jan8.002158.9439@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> pciszek@nyx.cs.du.edu (Paul Ciszek) writes:
: >Let's keep this in perspective, folks.  Amendment 2 does not strip away
: >the conventional Civil Rights such as voting and due process.  It does
: >remove the "right" to be considered a minority.

Fundamentally true.  But don't let reality creep into the discussion.  
: 
: Yes, do let's keep it in perspective.  Here's the amendment:
: 
: -- Neither the State of Colorado, through any of its branches or departments,
: -- nor any of its agencies, political subdivisions, municipalities, or school
: -- districts, shall enact, adopt or enforce any statute, regulation, ordinance
: -- or policy whereby homosexual, lesbian or bisexual orientation, conduct,
: -- practices or relationships shall constitute or otherwise be the basis of,
: -- or entitle any person or class of persons to have or claim any minority
: -- status, quota preferences, protected status or claim of discrimination.
: 
: So we're saying that certain people cannot claim discrimination!

Yes, heterosexuals can claim discrimination based on orientation and 
homosexuals cannot.  Idiotic distinction because of the very few
heterosexuals who would claim discrimination.  

Based on your distinction it would have been perfectly okay for the amendment 
to state.

 -- Neither the State of Colorado, through any of its branches or departments,
 -- nor any of its agencies, political subdivisions, municipalities, or school
 -- districts, shall enact, adopt or enforce any statute, regulation, ordinance
 -- or policy whereby matters of sexual orientation shall constitue or 
 -- otherwise be the basis of, or entitle any person or class of persons to
 -- have or claim any minority status, quota preferences, protected status
 -- or claim of discrimination.

I'm tired of everyone pretending the issue is about the fact that the
amendment leaves a certain groups (hets) with special rights while removing 
certain rights from other groups.  

Perhaps more relevant discussions would be:

	1)  Does sexual orientation deserve special protection under the law?

	2)  Does anyone believe that the boycott will hurt cities specifically
	    offering protected status based on sexual orientation while
 	    not affecting cities in favor of the law. . .many of whose 
	    citizens may not like Denver, Boulder, or Aspen very much
	    anyway and thus, get even more satisfaction from the law.

	3)  Does anyone believe this law (or a variant) couldn't pass anywhere              . . .yes even California?

	4)  Why all the anger about the amendment?  Is it because of the fear
	    generated by the amendment's wording?  It is because it shows
	    changing political sentiment?  Or is it because this vote was
	    the first one lost by the gay political community in Colorado 
  	    (correct me if I am wrong)?


: -- 
: John Altinbay   -   altinbay@netcom.com
: ===============================================================
: There's a spirit that guides me, a light that shines for me
: My life is worth the living, I don't need to see the end.

--Flame me if you would like.

--And yes, all opinions are mine.


Brad Knotwell 				bpk@evolving.com
Evolving Systems, Inc.			   	
Denver, CO

Newsgroups: co.general