 |
| Hugh Carey / Wyoming Tribune Eagle |
Council member Annette Williams (who has since lost her bid for reelection) had pressed for a law mimicking an Ordinance which was sprung upon the city of Laramie in April of 2015. It uses extremely broad powers to give the city attorney’s office investigative powers to impose penalties upon anything that it deems discriminatory, “based upon … actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity.”
The language of this ordinance had been hammered out behind the scenes with several of the council members and the LGBT lobby, Wyoming Equality. It has not even a modicum of protection for free speech and religious liberty but threatens even private schools, and Laramie’s churches with fines, jail time and mandatory sensitivity training unless they get fully on board with the latest LGBT dictates.
While it was quickly rammed through the Laramie City Council over the objections of many citizens, it quickly lost steam as it was introduced in other towns like Jackson and Cheyenne. In addition to the lack of First Amendment protections, there was significant worry about the high cost the city would pay in fighting numerous legal challenges to the ordinance.
In Cheyenne, these factors combined to stop the ordinance in its tracks. After consulting with Wyoming Equality and the ACLU, Williams sought to breathe new life into the issue by dropping the penalties and the investigatory powers converting Laramie’s “ordinance” into a compromise “resolution.”
The resolution states, “it is the policy of the City to reject discrimination of any kind and to respect the inherent worth of every person, with regard to race, color, religion, national origin, sex, pregnancy, gender identity, age, sexual orientation, family status, veteran status, disability, marital status, or source of income.”
This was certainly an improvement. But still, there were serious objections to the compromise Resolution. It added the ill-defined legal terms, “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” to city code. These are such fluid categories that they leave room for countless unintended consequences.
Nevertheless, at least some on the city council were persuaded that this compromise could resolve the issue and allow closure. It was a vain hope. Progressive compromises don’t settle issues, they only provide a launching pad for the next offensive.
The truce hoped for in the compromise resolution lasted a mere eight months. Now already Wyoming Equality is working with council members to bring Laramie’s punitive measures to Cheyenne. These include a $750 fine, 6 months in jail. Also, the definition of “public accommodation” is so incredibly expansive that it can be used against practically any entity that opens its doors to the public.
If a city hopes to treat all citizens fairly, regardless of their real or perceived identities or ideas, good laws are already on the books. They allow every citizen, business, or organization freedom to serve others in the best way they know how.
Good citizens of every town in Wyoming already offer a diversity of options which customers and clients can freely choose according to the approach best serving their own needs. An ordinance which would arbitrarily label some of these options “discrimination,” limits diversity and robs everyone of a full expression of options.
A clinical psychologist, using her training and experience, may think that her client’s alternate identity is treatable. She’s not basing this decision on whether the perceived identity is male or female. That’s clinically irrelevant. But a discrimination ordinance could unleash an investigation in one case, but not the other.
A surgeon may decline to remove a perfectly functioning organ because he believes it would do harm to his patient. What gives a city the expertise to second-guess his professional judgement?
Real medical discrimination gives inferior treatment based on irrelevant factors. SOGI discrimination codes which enforce irrelevancies will not make our towns any healthier.
A father who sees an adult male follow his daughter into the locker room is rightly concerned for her privacy and safety. It is not based on the man’s perceived identity. What threatens his daughter’s dignity is the man’s maleness!
Most good citizens of Wyoming still believe that sex is a relevant factor in treating all people fairly under the law. It is unjust and harmful to businesses, organizations, and individual citizens to assume that good-faith decisions based on sexual differences are, rather, malicious discrimination based on hate and prejudice.
Exemptions for certain religious organizations, or for businesses under an arbitrary number of employees, can toss a bone to those who oppose these ordinances, but such cut-outs do not make them any less unjust.
It is insulting and irrational to criminalize legitimate responses to the real world but then grant “exemptions” that allow certain people and certain organizations to remain “criminals.” Not only would this marginalize and stigmatize many of Wyoming’s most upstanding citizens, such cut-outs are sure to be the next targets to be taken out by some future progressive “compromise.”
Evanston and the rest of Wyoming’s municipalities, should learn from the events in our capitol. Cheyenne is a cautionary tale for us all. Be in constant contact with your own city council representative. Let them know your mind on Laramie’s ordinance and ask them to inform you if there are any behind-the-scenes lobbying efforts from Wyoming Equality.
Inform yourselves of the legal and First Amendment issues involved in SOGI ordinances. Beware that their real-world impact is never as advertised. The promise to enhance diversity and toleration invariably translates to an intolerance of traditional values and the criminalization of diversity.
No comments:
Post a Comment