Thursday, March 14, 2019

Heritage Foundation writer claims that the equality act is some form of tyranny

Embed from Getty Images
Monica Burke at the Heritage Foundation possibly reports to Ryan T. Anderson (and it shows). Burke has penned 7 Reasons Why the Equality Act Is Anything But for the organization's blog. (Heritage writers are particularly fond of enumerating things.) So let us don hip boots and wade through the swamp of intellectual dishonesty.

Each article of faith is an assumption coupled to a “victim.” I have given each a generous drivelectomy given Ms. Burke's painful verbosity.
1. It would penalize Americans who don’t affirm new sexual norms or gender ideology.
Why can't these nutty people refrain from editorializing every American sneeze? This is medium-rare, re-fried bull exhaust for several reason. The first is that she is consumed with the notion that LGBTQ people seek the approval of others. She does not approve because of slavish devotion to ancient texts.

We do not care. She need not “affirm” anything. “Gender ideology” does not exist. Gender identity is a protected class in the Equality Act. Unlike say, religion, gender is not an ideology. Religion is an ideology yet it is protected under the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

From there Ms. Burke roasts more turds with her discussion of Jack Phillips despite the fact that Colorado's law is independent of the Equality Act. She moans about all of Phillips' lost revenues:
Phillips is just one of many Americans who have lost income because of their belief that marriage is between one man and one woman. Others cases involve florists, bakers, photographers, wedding venue owners, videographers, web designers, calligraphers, and public servants.

These cases are just the beginning. The same policies used to silence disagreement over marriage can be used to silence disagreement over the biological reality of sex.
These people lose business because they out themselves as bigots. People prefer to shop elsewhere. And calling discrimination resulting in a refusal of service a “disagreement” is just plain idiotic. This, again, relates to approval and disapproval.

Ms. Burke needs to get past her self-absorption. We really don't care whether she approves of us or not. Approval is unrelated to service in a public accommodation. I do not approve of Ms. Burke. That does not license me to violate valid nondiscrimination laws.
2. It would compel speech.

Virginia high school teacher Peter Vlaming lost his job for something he did not say.

A county school board voted unanimously to fire the veteran teacher over the objections of his students after he refused to comply with administrators’ orders to use masculine pronouns in referring to a female student who identifies as transgender.
The Equality Act would have no effect whatsoever in this regard. As for Vlaming, she is correct. It is compelled speech. An employer has every right to require employees to demonstrate respect for its customers; in this case students. There must be a directive from the Vatican (and others) to employ the awkward construction: “a female student who identifies as transgender.” They will twist themselves into pretzels to avoid writing "transgender man” and then they complain when we call them bigots.
3. It could shut down charities.

Foster care and adoption agencies, drug rehabilitation centers, and homeless centers already face challenges under state and local policies on sexual orientation and gender identity.
It will not shut anything down if people do not discriminate. Foster care and adoption agencies do the work of the state with taxpayer dollars. They should not be permitted to discriminate with our money. Apparently a gay or trans drug addict creates and insurmountable problem and homeless transgender person creates a crisis. Maybe with less bigotry that trans person would not be homeless in the first place.
4. It would allow more biological males to defeat girls in sports.

Two biological males who identify and compete as women easily defeated all of their female competitors in an event at the Connecticut State Track Championships. Transgender athlete Terry Miller broke the state record in the girls’100-meter dash. Andraya Yearwood, also transgender, took second place.
Once again, the Equality Act would have no effect on sports eligibility. The IOC solved this issue with testosterone levels and time-in-gender. We can have a reasonable conversation about testosterone and whether or not transgender women have an unfair advantage. The religious set is not interested in anything other than marginalization.
5. It could be used to coerce medical professionals.

Under state sexual orientation and gender identity laws, individuals who identify as transgender have sued Catholic hospitals in California and New Jersey for declining to perform hysterectomies on otherwise healthy women who wanted to pursue gender transition.

If these lawsuits succeed, medical professionals would be pressured to treat patients according to ideology rather than their best medical judgment.
There is that “ideology” BS again. In the New Jersey case a hysterectomy was approved and the surgeon had privileges at the hospital which canceled the procedure at the last minute. What is the big deal if a surgeon performs a procedure that the Church does not approve of?

Either it is a healthcare facility or it is an extension of the Church. Moreover, why is there always yellow highlighter around LGBTQ people? The hospital undoubtedly cares for unwed mothers without the same concern. The Vatican has condemned religious circumcision. How many Jewish and Muslim babies are born at Catholic hospitals? Abortion? I get it. But a trans man's hysterectomy harms no one.
6. It could lead to more parents losing custody of their children.

The politicization of medicine according to gender ideology will create more conflicts among parents, doctors, and the government. A federal sexual orientation and gender identity law would jeopardize parental rights nationwide.
The Equality Act would have no effect on child custody matters or parental rights. “The politicization of medicine according to gender ideology” is just meaningless gibberish.
7. It would enable sexual assault.

A complaint under investigation by federal education officials alleges that a boy who identifies as “gender fluid” at Oakhurst Elementary School in Decatur, Georgia, sexually assaulted Pascha Thomas’ 5-year-old daughter in a girls’ restroom. The boy had access to the girls’ restroom because of Decatur City Schools’ transgender restroom policy.
Accommodating transgender people does not endanger anyone.The school has already investigated the matter and determined (essentially) that mommy is crazy. One case after all these years of complaining and it appears to be bogus. There is no evidence that transgender women pose any threat to other women.

In the end Monica Burke is claiming that, due to religion, people need to discriminate against others. She is confusing service with approval. Service approves of nothing other than the exchange of money. She might have a legitimate concern for Catholic hospitals but she is not interested in discussion or resolution. Her exclusive interest is the intentional marginalization of LGBTQ people because of superstitions.

Related content:

No comments:

Post a Comment

Please be civil and do NOT link to anti-gay sites!

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.