HRC on ENDA

The [Homosexualilty Advocacy] Campaign, which calls itself the Human Rights Campaign, which doesn't support rights for polygamous people (so much for equality), as been advertising on behalf of passing "ENDA", which could force employers to let people dress inappropriately on the job along with a bunch of other things.

Here's a statement they have been using:

There’s no state law protecting LGBT workers in 33 states! Sign our petition to Congress to pass ENDA!

That first sentence, of course, is FALSE. There are many laws protecting workers in every state, and LGBT people are not excluded from those laws. Taking their statement at face value, I could note that perhaps 50 (or all 57) states have no state law protecting heterosexual workers! What HRC is trying to do is further erode freedom of association, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, free enterprise, and property rights, by further intruding into the hiring, firing, promotion, demotion, and other decisions of employers.

They want people to get upset that there's no specific law in 33 states that prevents an employer from saying, "I don't want to hire you because you're a man who has sex with men" or "I don't want to hire you because you're a man who is dressed as a woman." However, there's no law against an employer saying :I don't want to hire you because you're heterosexual." That's right. There's also no law againt an employer saying "I don't want to hire you because you're ugly", "I don't want to hire you because you're an introvert", "I don't want to hire you because you like to watch Honey Boo Boo", or a million other things, but the HRC doesn't seem to care about any of that. They have a very narrow focus of wanting to force people who do not approve of homosexual behavior or crossdressing to hire people who do those things anyway, and create whole addition class of potential lawsuits, as in "The reason I didn't get promoted is because I'm bisexexual!" when perhaps the reason was poor performance.

I think employment decisions should be up to a mutual agreement between an employer and a potantial employee (or their chosen representatives), not anyone else.

Of course, the homosexuality and crossdressing advocates will try to liken this to civil rights laws meant to stop discrimination against people based on their skin color or ethnicity, but there's a difference because those things are more readily apparent and are not behaviors. There was also a history in this country of enslaving people, denying them basic human rights, and publicly torturing and lynching people with impunity in well-attended festive events based on their skin color. Finally, a lot of people think it is time to drop the laws about racist discrimination, too, rather than increasing restrictions on employers.

You know what protects LGBT workers? The same thing that protects heterosexual workers: making your employer's job easier in a way it wouldn't be if they didn't have anyone at all for that position or had to go through the trouble of finding someone else. Being a good employee is an employee's protection. If someone doesn't keep or doesn't promote an employee who should be kept or promoted, it is the employer who loses out the most, especially of that employee goes elsewhere.

Opportunity

I haven't been updating this blog much lately because I'm busy rioting, looting, and beating up people for no reason, whining about some imaginary racist conspiracy.

We're Freaks - We Want a Decent Education For Our Kids

Have you ever noticed that homeschoolers are portrayed as freaks for homeschooling?

Yeah, I'm a freak.  I'm a freak because my wife and I are homeschooling our kids.


I'm a freak because I think it is better for my children to be educated and supervised by an R.N. who is smart as a whip, loves them more than anything else in the world, and can immediately and effectively discipline them without red tape. We don't want them sitting in a room with a teacher who is a pervert, or burnt out, or powerless, overwhelmed and a captive to a union, or worse yet, believes all of the junk the union promotes and hasn't been fired because of the union. We don't want them sitting a room with a bunch of disruptive kids who have no parental supervision and were "raised" by hired help, such as a "day orphanage", or have chaotic home lives involving stepparents, stepsiblings, or a revolving door of their parents' lovers.

We want our kids to be "socially retarded", by denying them the opportunity to fornicate in a full classroom or at a school dance on the dance floor, or to learn the latest combination of derogatory terms, or the latest lies, excuses, and techniques kids are employing to subvert teacher and parental authority. We want  them to have a little more trouble contacting the drug dealers in the schools.


We don't want to fight over uniforms or no uniforms, or dress codes where our child can't wear a t-shirt reflecting his or her religious beliefs but is ineffective at keeping girls from dressing like "hos".


We don’t want to deal with endless appeals for money or employing my child as a shill to raise funds, even though we're already paying plenty in taxes to fund the school.


We don't think "one size fits all" or even very few sizes fits all. Frankly, my kids are smarter than most their age.


We don't want our kids to have to deal with bullies who are not removed from the school after proving themselves to be thugs. In the adult world, the bullies get fired from the workplace.


We don't want to deal with endless PTA and school board squabbles.


We don't want to fight over class placement.


We don't want to fight with administrators over testing methods, or the content or method of textbooks or curricula, including material that attacks our faith, asserts philosophical naturalism, promotes pagan or New Age concepts and practices, embraces environmental alarmism, twists history, bashes America and its founders, denies the positive Judeo-Christian influence in this nation's history, or denies the Bible's influence on government, law, and the arts.


We don't want to fight over which languages will be taught, or the emphasis, funding priorities, or other decisions applied to electives, sports, physical education, arts courses, etc.


We don't want to fight over the content of assemblies.


We don't want our kids to have to use substandard facilities, especially dirty restrooms.


We want our children to know that getting the right answer the right way and applying it to the right uses, and other accomplishments is the key to self-esteem, not touchy-feely motivational programs about how they're "okay" no matter how badly and often they screw things up when they should know better.


We want to be able to let our kid know when he or she gets a wrong answer – with a red marker even, and help them figure out how to get the right answer instead of telling them the wrong answer is okay.


We don't want to fight over the food offerings and quality at the school.


We don't want to fight over reading selections and whether or not they include enough works from obese disabled crossdressing lesbian Buddhist Marxists of color.


We don't want to fight over the nature and amount of homework.


We don't want to have to structure our lives around the school's schedule, or fight over extending the school year or school day. We want to spend time with our kids.


We don't want to fight over what to call vacations and activities clearly scheduled around Christian holidays, or struggle to allow our kids to express their celebration of those holidays.


We don't want our children prevented from citing, referencing, or mentioning the Bible or Jesus Christ in their schoolwork.



We don't want to fight over school prayer, or the even the school mascot.


We don't want our children being taught the bogus notion that disapproving of a behavior or disagreeing with an opinion makes someone intolerant or bigoted. We don't want them subjected to speech codes with which we disagree.


We don't want our grade-schooler accused of sexual harassment for hugging someone.


We don’t want someone else teaching our children in a way that normalizes fornication when we're raising them to value the sacredness of marital lovemaking.


We don't want school officials aiding and abetting statutory rape by taking our daughter to get an abortion without our knowledge.


We don't want our children being taught that homosexual sodomy is no different from heterosexual coitus, or that there is no difference between a couple of both sexes and a couple missing one of the sexes.



We don't want our children being taught that if they have some sort of emotional or psychological difficulty, that they must be homosexual or are really the opposite sex and should have body parts lopped off.


We don't want our children taught relativism, postmodernism, or multiculturalism, or otherwise subvert what we're teaching them.


We want to teach our children with an integrated, logical, consistent worldview, to judge people based on their actions as individuals, that it is good to have traditional values and to make moral judgments, that not all religions, customs, or cultures are the same or equivalent, that some actions AND ideas are evil or just plain stupid, and that feelings can change, can be managed, and don't necessitate action.


We know better what's best for our child than lawmakers in Sacramento and Washington D.C, who want to micromanage.  I see all of these battles over every aspect of public schooling as arranging deck chairs on the Titanic.  The government should get out of the education business, and I vote against using any more tax money (including bonds) for public schools.


I respect school teachers, I really do.  I had some great ones myself and I have family members who are or have been school teachers. Almost all of my formal education was in public schools. But times have changed too much, and especially in California, the public schools have far too many problems.


Plus, I know my kids will not get shot at home.

What We Mean When We Say 'The Homosexual Agenda'

As a limited government conservative, I would never want to use the force of government to stop consensual socializing, physical interaction, cohabitation, religious ceremonies, voluntary associations and business transactions, or free expression. I do think it is the role of various levels of government to cite, fine, and incarcerate one who physically harms someone else or steals or damages the property of someone else against their consent.

Therefore, I would never try to pry two (or three or more) men in bed together apart, to disrupt a "gay wedding" in a church, nor do I think it is excusable to assault someone just because they are gay, or spraypaint vulgarities on their home. I think we should all have the freedom to exercise our rights to life, liberty, and property, regardless of whether we are attracted to men, women, both, or neither.

Yes, I believe that homosexual behavior, like all sexual or sex-like behavior outside of marriage, is sinful (a license from a state does not make a brideless or groomless pairing marriage). I do not believe, however, that our laws should attempt to prevent the commission of all sins.

When someone like me refers to "the homosexual agenda" negatively, we're not talking about seeking to live as you choose in your own home, or protecting yourself from crimes.

What we are talking about are things like:

• Denigrating traditional gender roles. If the traditional masculine or feminine roles do not work for you as an individual or a couple (understandable, especially with two men or two women), that's fine, but the rest of society can still embrace traditional gender roles, and should be able to without being accused of animus towards homosexual people.


• Trying to punish thoughts with "hate crime" legislation.


• Instituting official public school clubs centered around expressing sexuality and the affirmation of homosexual behavior. I'm against public schools in general, but schools full of minors should focus on academics, athletics, and the arts, not to whom you have an attraction. If you really, really need to form a gay-straight "alliance", take Drama. Grades K-12 should not be forming official sex clubs, and make no mistake, it is about sex. Also, in California, the Leftists running the state now require textbooks to include and identify people as "LGBT" and call positive attention to their sexual attraction, behavior, or gender confusion.


• Trying to get our churches to abandon Scriptural teaching on sexuality and marriage.


• Telling someone, especially a child, with homosexual thoughts or feelings that they must identify and affirm themselves as homosexuals and engage in homosexual behavior, and that there are no alternatives. This may include trying to prevent anyone from offering assistance to modify behavior away from homosexual sodomy.


• New or increased government funding for HIV/AIDS research, prevention, treatment, etc., especially at the expense of funding for other diseases not as easily preventable. I’m not convinced it is the federal government's place to spend any money on any disease, except in treating military personnel and federal prisoners.


• Trying to get us to believe it is okay for someone to dress inappropriately or undergo surgical mutilation and unnecessary hormone treatments in an attempt to appear to be the opposite sex, and that to accommodate such behavior, we should allow men and women (AND BOYS AND GIRLS!) to use the public restrooms of each other. (I don't lump "transgendered" with homosexual, but so many activists do.)


• Intolerance of anyone who does not affirm homosexual behavior. Labeling as a "hater" or "bigot" anyone who doesn't affirm homosexual behavior, and trying to silence such people or prevent them from publicly expressing their opinions.


• The notion that someone who engages in homosexual behavior should receive special or extra protection under the law, and shouldn't in any way be criticized.


• Neutering state marriage licensing, especially through judicial imposition. Preventing adoption agencies from preferring homes with bride+groom couples when placing children.


• Placing into law, curriculum, medical/counseling policies, church teachings, the media, and workplace training and policies that one must affirm:


• Homosexual behavior is healthy and morally neutral or positive.


• Homosexual attraction should be embraced and acted upon.


• There is no difference between heterosexual coitus and homosexual sodomy, and no qualitative difference between a couple comprised  of both sexes and a couple comprised of one.

Since I believe in property rights, I do believe employers should be able to fire someone based on their sexual orientation. But, I believe employers, absent a contract that says otherwise, should be able to fire (or not hire) anyone for any or no reason, so it isn’t like I think someone should be able to be fired because they are gay. An employer should be able to fire someone because they are the employer.

I do not think there is right to two men to commit sodomy with each other. They have the freedom to, and as long as they are doing it in private I wouldn’t try to stop them. But I’m against having laws or court decisions that there is a right to such behavior in a way that government must, say, license "marriages" between two men.

I recognize that not all people who identify themselves as homosexual support this homosexual agenda. While some homosexual people make it the end-all, be-all of their existence and thus are "homosexuality advocates" or even "homofascists", I know that there are plenty of homosexual people who, like straight me, have higher priorities, such as Constitutionally limited government, national security, and national fiscal sustainability. They don't obsess over trying to get people like me to abandon our belief that homosexual behavior is wrong. And I don't obsess over trying to get them to renounce homosexuality.

Under limited government conservatism, we can use our right to free speech to try to persuade each other, but we should not use the force of government to try to silence each other, or to force "affirmation" from each other.

Declaration of Independence