From: rossco@iastate.edu (Ross Stenersen)
Subject: Re: Lifestyle Choices (was  Re: Sexuality)
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 21:32:38 GMT

In article <1992Dec31.191942.9665@anasazi.com> briand@anasazi.com (Brian Douglass) writes:
>In article <1992Dec31.005642.14893@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov> fogarty@sir-c.jpl.nasa.gov (Tim Fogarty) writes:
>>
>>In article <1992Dec30.234500.21163@anasazi.com>, briand@anasazi.com 
>>(Brian Douglass) writes:
>>|>
>>|>>In article <1992Dec30.185545.26789@cbnewsj.cb.att.com> 
>>|>>ecl@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (Evelyn C. Leeper) writes:
>>|>>
>>|>>>All people are asking is that unless you can come up with some
>>|>>>*secular* reason for why their lifestyle choice is bad, you grant
>>|>Tell that to a smoker.  Clearly this is a lifestyle choice, and yet
>>|>non-smokers have persecuted them out of most public places.  Why?  Because
>>|>...  
>>Read the first part again !  "unless you can come up with some *secular*
>>reasons".  
>That was not the point I was addressing.  The point is that the public and
>government CAN discriminate against a segment of the population based on
>lifestyle choices.  Smoker's being an example.

There is a reason for this "discrimination" against smokers:  smoking is
harmful to people who are around the smoker.

>>You have come up with some secular reasons why smokers are
>>discriminated against.  And most people would support this.  The question
>>for Mr Douglass was and still is "Can you come up with some secular 
>>(non-religious) reasons to justify discrimination against homosexuals ?"
>Homosexuals are currently discriminated from donating blood.  As are IV
>drug users, people who pay for sex, have recently visited certain
>countries, etc.  Because as a group these lifestyle choices present a public 
>health danger if they were allowed to donate.  Therefore, blood banks are
>...
Again, there is a reason for this "discrimination" against homosexuals:  this
act is potentially very dangerous to OTHER people.  I am also (by your
definition of "discrimination") discriminated because I am required to wear
glasses when I drive.  And, only because I can't see without them.  How
terrible.  I have never been rejected from housing because I have poor eyes.
Nor, do I expect to be rejected from any job _that does not require good
eyesight_ because of my eyes.  In the same way homosexuals should not be
kept out of housing, jobs, etc just because of their being sexual
orientation, preferences or practices.

>>How does granting equal protection to homosexuals impact the greater good
>>of the public ?
>Why is it necessary?  My employer has no idea nor needs to know my sexual
>preferences, attitudes, choices.  Why must homosexuality have protection?
>Must blonds next have protection because some hair-brained scientist shows
>that on average they have lower IQs?  Where does it stop?
>
>Discrimination in the work place based on anything other than job
>qualifications, is discrimination.  Why must we pigeon hole everyone in
>society into these little minorities?  That does nothing by fractionalize
>...
>Everytime we label another group of people under the law, we implicitly make
>them seperate but equal, and that isn't equal.
I agree here.  I think they should just make a law that says something
(although in more legal terms :-) like this:

"It is illegal to discriminate against anybody for any reason.  Pereiod.
People should be selected for jobs based only on job qualifications."

Of, course, if you consider keeping person A from harming person B because
of something person A does discrimination then you have to re-word a bit.  (I
realize that sentence is a bit incorrect, but I think you can get the idea.)

Rossco                                      "Ignorance and prejudice
rossco@iastate.edu                          "And fear
rossco@cpre1.ee.iastate.edu                 "Walk hand in hand"
rossco@aol.com                                  --Rush  ("Witch Hunt")
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:12791 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:11211 alt.politics.clinton:19458 alt.politics.bush:15356 alt.politics.homosexuality:8797