As the AP and Virginian Pilot are reporting (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/K/KENNEDY_GAYS?SITE=VANOV&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2008-04-02-06-52-09), Senator Edward Kennedy is seeking to move the House version of ENDA forward in the U. S. Senate. As the article notes, even the non-transgender inclusive version of the bill will be a tough battle. Once again, throwing rationality and pragmatism to the wind, some gay-rights organizations are saying that they will oppose any version of ENDA that is not 100% inclusive. They would rather leave millions of gays without any employment non-discrimination protections rather than support an incremental approach to gaining legal protections eventually for all. To be blunt, this mentality is STUPID and SELFISH on the part of the transgender community (or at least those who claim to speak for them). They would rather throw out the baby with the bath water for the sake of principle. Believe me, I am VERY sympathetic to the situation of transgender individuals and believe that they deserve legal protections too. Nonetheless, at some point pragmatic reality needs to be factored in to the equation.
That reality is that I receive calls weekly from LGBT individuals fired from jobs here in Virginia, and 99% of them are non-transgender. The ideological purist would rather throw all of these folks under the bus and hold out for something that cannot be passed under the current make up of Congress. True, the Chimperator may well veto the bill if passed by Congress, but we NEED to put him and the GOP on the spot and make them reveal their bigotry and intolerance. Surveys show that upards of 70% of the public support employment protection for gays. Why not spotlight how out of step the GOP is with the majority of the country? Plus, if the Barney Frank version of ENDA can pass Congress, psychologically, we have made a significant step forward towards an eventually all inclusive ENDA. Over 15 years of political activism tells me this is the common sense approach and it is why I have not renewed my NGLTF membership since the organization is working AGAINST much needed legal protections for the majority of the LGBT community. After all his years in Congress, I believe Ted Kennedy knows what is the most sensible approach to ultimately gain passage of a fully inclusive ENDA. In any event, here are some story highlights:
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Sen. Edward M. Kennedy is jumping into the middle of an uproar within the gay community whose causes he has long championed. The Massachusetts Democrat is leading a push in the Senate for a federal ban on job bias against gays, lesbians and bisexuals - but not transsexuals, cross-dressers and others whose outward appearance doesn't match their gender at birth. "We will strongly oppose it," said Roberta Sklar of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. "Leaving transgender people out makes that a flawed movement."
That reality is that I receive calls weekly from LGBT individuals fired from jobs here in Virginia, and 99% of them are non-transgender. The ideological purist would rather throw all of these folks under the bus and hold out for something that cannot be passed under the current make up of Congress. True, the Chimperator may well veto the bill if passed by Congress, but we NEED to put him and the GOP on the spot and make them reveal their bigotry and intolerance. Surveys show that upards of 70% of the public support employment protection for gays. Why not spotlight how out of step the GOP is with the majority of the country? Plus, if the Barney Frank version of ENDA can pass Congress, psychologically, we have made a significant step forward towards an eventually all inclusive ENDA. Over 15 years of political activism tells me this is the common sense approach and it is why I have not renewed my NGLTF membership since the organization is working AGAINST much needed legal protections for the majority of the LGBT community. After all his years in Congress, I believe Ted Kennedy knows what is the most sensible approach to ultimately gain passage of a fully inclusive ENDA. In any event, here are some story highlights:
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Sen. Edward M. Kennedy is jumping into the middle of an uproar within the gay community whose causes he has long championed. The Massachusetts Democrat is leading a push in the Senate for a federal ban on job bias against gays, lesbians and bisexuals - but not transsexuals, cross-dressers and others whose outward appearance doesn't match their gender at birth. "We will strongly oppose it," said Roberta Sklar of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. "Leaving transgender people out makes that a flawed movement."
Some gay rights groups, including the Human Rights Campaign, supported Frank's bill and the decision not to risk its rejection by Congress by insisting on immediate transgender protections as well. "We will continue this work until all members of our community no longer fear being fired for who they are," said Brad Luna, Human Rights Campaign communications director. Kennedy said Senate approval of the bill could pave the way for extending protections to transgender workers next year, when he hopes Democrats will increase their numbers in Congress and a Democratic president supporting gay rights will be in the White House.
Kennedy expects an "uphill fight" in the narrowly divided Senate, where 60 votes rather than a simple majority would be needed to overcome expected GOP stalling tactics. Kennedy and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., who supports the bill, are working on the timing for bringing the bill to the floor. The bill would make it illegal for employers to make decisions about hiring, firing, promoting or paying an employee based on sexual orientation. There are exemptions for churches and the military.
"My concern would be the Democratic leadership in the Senate is a bit reticent in stepping into what is a minefield," said Patrick Sammon, president of Log Cabin Republicans. The nation's largest gay Republican group is lobbying GOP lawmakers for support. A veto from President Bush is expected if the proposal does pass the Senate. The White House has cited constitutional concerns and said the proposal could trample religious rights.
No comments:
Post a Comment