The Herald Journal

 
default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
|
Not you?||
Logout|My Dashboard

Public hearing scheduled on Logan anti-discrimination ordinance

Print
Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Saturday, May 15, 2010 3:00 am

A little more than a week after mothballing ordinances aimed at protecting gay people from discrimination in employment and housing, Logan's Municipal Council has turned 180 degrees, putting the measures up for a public hearing and possible approval Tuesday.

On May 5, when Councilman Herm Olsen introduced the measures, a majority of the council, including Holly Daines, came out against it, in part because they questioned if the protections were needed in Logan. They voted to reconsider the proposals in August.

"I didn't think there was a problem in Cache Valley; that opinion has changed," wrote Daines in a letter sent to colleagues this week. "Although I am still concerned with the logistics of the ordinance, or the ‘letter of the law,' I have come to believe that the ‘spirit of the law' - or the message we send by its passage - outweighs my concerns."

In an interview, Daines said: "I think it's important we send a message to all of our citizens that we don't tolerate discrimination. ... We may disagree with their choices but that's even more reason to respect them."

After shelving the proposals, Daines and others on the council said they received abundant correspondence from gay people recounting cases of perceived discrimination and from straight people arguing for the ordinances as basic rights, like the LDS Church did in supporting Salt Lake City's recent bans on discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity.

Council Chairman Jay Monson, who supported the ordinances at the time they were introduced, said, in effect, that Logan should pass the ordinances to not look bad to people elsewhere.

"I think if we didn't pass it, it would a detriment to the community," he said Friday. Monson said he put the ordinances on next Tuesday's agenda after a majority of the council expressed a desire to move forward now.

Olsen could not be reached for comment Friday.

At the end of the council discussion May 5, Monson asked the audience if they had experienced discrimination based on sexual orientation; a dozen hands of college students went up, including that of 23-year-old Seth Jensen.

"‘We're against discrimination, but we're not passing it.' That tells me you are not against discrimination," said Jensen after the meeting. Assuming there are no problems in Logan "is a lame excuse," he said.

Maure Smith, program coordinator of Utah State University's Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender and Ally Services, described the response from the local GLBT community to the council's postponement as "sheer outrage" and "utter dismay."

"It was a sense of ‘you've got to be kidding me,'" she said.

Speaking of the GLBT community's robust response to council members, Smith said: "I think they were moved to action because it was so clear council members didn't understand the issues."

Smith said she's thrilled with the about face.

"I think that caring, kind individuals who take a moment to hear stories do have a change of heart," she said.

Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, West Valley City and Park City have already passed laws banning discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity.

The statewide group Equality Utah is pushing a "Ten in 2010" campaign encouraging 10 cities or counties to approve anti-discrimination laws before the Legislature convenes in 2011. Group leaders said at that time they could push for a state law; a recent Salt Lake Tribune poll found 66 percent of Utahns support statewide protections.

The public hearing on Logan's proposed ordinances is set for 5:30 p.m. on Tuesday at City Hall, 290 N. 100 West.

---

E-mail:

jpatrick@hjnews.com

© 2015 The Herald Journal. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

More about

More about

More about

Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
  • 2 Don't Threaten or Abuse. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated. AND PLEASE TURN OFF CAPS LOCK.
  • 3 Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
  • 4 Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 5 Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 6 Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.

Welcome to the discussion.

72 comments:

  • advoc8 posted at 3:12 pm on Thu, May 20, 2010.

    advoc8 Posts: 3407

    BeauHEman,

    Vote 'em out!

    As I've said before, NOW is the driving support behind this cause too. NOW is the biggest backer, spearheading this disguised movement. Now backs this movement with their same old classic deceptive supremacist intent,,, in sheep's clothing as usual. They always pretend to be all about compassion, equality and anti-abuse, which is the exact opposite of their actions and destructive trail they leave. This only serves, as always with NOW, to put some in a supreme position while others become targets of this moment (NOW's aggression), as with all of NOW's toxic waste agenda in sheep's clothing.

    A rose is a rose, is a rose, by any other name is still the same. And the same goes for disguised sugar coated crap in pretty gift wrap - still toxic crap incognito. Others and I know NOW far too well to believe that this is not more of the same in sheep's clothing.

    Vote 'em out! Whether they intentionally know exactly the rot they are supporting (sugar-coated NOW supremacy) or whether they are just ignorant mislead sheeple thinking they are doing good - neither destructive extreme should be representing the people with this type of fine looking supremacy and lies.

     
  • boHEMiAN posted at 11:52 am on Thu, May 20, 2010.

    boHEMiAN Posts: 26

    Q, for questioning not U for undecided.

     
  • boHEMiAN posted at 11:40 am on Thu, May 20, 2010.

    boHEMiAN Posts: 26

    ebeye, it is necessary because of what it shows this community, the LGBTA in particular but not because they are asking for special consideration.

    advoc8, keep spinning your information to fit your mind and what you allow yourself to be taught. It is a free country. It appears your group thinks we have a bunch of conspiring Americans and homosexuals running around. It may serve your group well to become a little more “PC” and use the term “LGBTA” in the future, not just homosexual. It may also give you a better understanding. I was using homosexual freely too when debating and realized it was probably ignorant. There’s a lot more to what bothers your group than just homosexuality. Maybe you should throw in the letter “U” for those who are undecided. Oh, but wait, no one has the right to be undecided either, it’s a sin.

     
  • ebeye posted at 1:33 pm on Wed, May 19, 2010.

    ebeye Posts: 397

    boHEME,

    Would you be so kind as to reiterate the essential element I'm missing out on here? I've had plenty of gay employees and a few were friends, including the once infamous Courtney Moser. There's Federal laws already in place that cover the workplace. It just all strikes me as a non-issue. Not right or wrong, just unnecessary.

     
  • advoc8 posted at 10:38 am on Wed, May 19, 2010.

    advoc8 Posts: 3407

    VOTE 'EM OUT !!! NOW supremacist-agenda supporters in sheep's clothing? Or, sheeple? Either way, vote 'em out!

    NOW has brought you the religion/cult of abortion on demand
    Anti-religion agenda
    Anti-family agenda
    Anti-male agenda
    Anti-father agenda

    And much, much more in the name of equality and anti-abuse (yes, NOW supremacists in sheep's clothing) bring you NOW's SUPREMACIST "Education for Injustice" as well, even indoctrinating your media and churches with their lies and abuse:

    http://www.mediaradar.org/alert20070521.php

    Now you know where it comes from.

    VOTE 'EM OUT !!! Supremacists in sheep's clothing that is.

     
  • boHEMiAN posted at 10:18 am on Wed, May 19, 2010.

    boHEMiAN Posts: 26

    advoc8, my comment “PASS!!!!!!!!” was regarding the fact that the ordinance passed. As soon as I returned home from the hearing I posted the comment. And no one is getting “persecuted” but you are welcome to believe what you will, follow who you will. It might serve you well in the future to read all comments in order before commenting. It might give you and AmericaPatriot better insight and less room for error.

    AmericanPatriot, good luck to you. Your interpretations are way off base.

    Ebeye, you obviously don’t get what this whole thing is about either.
    Thanks for freedom of speech.

     
  • advoc8 posted at 10:06 am on Wed, May 19, 2010.

    advoc8 Posts: 3407

    Patriot, ooopsie, I was just looking at that manly name which sounded very guy-ish: Beau-HE-man

     
  • AmericanPatriot posted at 1:24 am on Wed, May 19, 2010.

    AmericanPatriot Posts: 159

    Great book on job hunting ebeye! Amen.
    Say it isn't so advoc8! She? said her husband... in her first entry here.
    Is she? in one of those new fangled relationships where two people of the same sex refer to each other as husband and wife?

     
  • ebeye posted at 12:53 am on Wed, May 19, 2010.

    ebeye Posts: 397

    It's standardized business practice for years now to have an objective list of necessary job requirements and expectations. Why or where, in any non-sexual job (otherwise known as illegal trade), particularly in government service, have any cause, reason or expectation where sexual preference could possibly be considered as a requirement or restriction to job performance?

    By setting up a law against a thing, sets up the legal framework for a lawsuit using the law as a pretext.

    Here's the list of things you need to do the job.
    Can you do them, or not?
    The End.

     
  • advoc8 posted at 11:34 pm on Tue, May 18, 2010.

    advoc8 Posts: 3407

    No, I think the rest of us should sew a yellow Star of David on our shirts so the chosen ones know who to persecute...

    That's what "equality" hate-laws are all about.

    (American Patriot, psssst, I think BeauHEman is a guy.)

     
  • AmericanPatriot posted at 11:16 pm on Tue, May 18, 2010.

    AmericanPatriot Posts: 159

    Okay. It's official. All members of LGBTA please put a gold star on your forehead so those of us who don't want to get in trouble by offending you won't do so. Please do it now so we'll know who's "special".
    Any gay people who want to be treated as regular human beings, don't put a gold star on your forehead. Carry on.
    isaacusmagnus I have enjoyed discussing this with you. You're an intelligent human being and I wish you well, sincerely.
    boHEMiAN, finally realized you're a girl. Please join Strings in the corner. She'll tell you the drill.

     
  • Omega D posted at 10:23 pm on Tue, May 18, 2010.

    Omega D Posts: 517

    Medium I know know! It was just in fun. Just can't believe you will defend someone who lumps black, gays and the handicapped together. What special treatmant does he have a problem with the handicapped?

     
  • Omega D posted at 10:04 pm on Tue, May 18, 2010.

    Omega D Posts: 517

    Otter yeah that sounded bad, but it was just a question to Udink about why he has a problem with the law. You can read in to it as much as you want and even put words in my mouth. I know who I am.

    Gomez I respect that, and will remember that.

     
  • advoc8 posted at 9:54 pm on Tue, May 18, 2010.

    advoc8 Posts: 3407

    OK, I'll be the first to say it: I think it's time to TEA Party the City Council right outta here.

    Supporting NOW supremcists is not equality-based.

     
  • advoc8 posted at 9:30 pm on Tue, May 18, 2010.

    advoc8 Posts: 3407

    boHEMiANNNNN, I thought you were going to passsssss

     
  • boHEMiAN posted at 9:06 pm on Tue, May 18, 2010.

    boHEMiAN Posts: 26

    advoc8, any chance you’re one of those Rodrigues family members who is a sheep for your family?

     
  • advoc8 posted at 8:52 pm on Tue, May 18, 2010.

    advoc8 Posts: 3407

    This ordinance fits right in with hate-speech laws and hate-crime laws which don't create equality. They divide and create special preferred classes and disharmony. These types of laws and ordinances do not create equal protection under the law, thus they violate the 14th amendment which does protect equally. But few of our leaders support the 14th amendment anymore since it just gets in the way of creating extra layers of parasitic bureaucracy and more problems for themselves to "solve."

    Heading up special class laws is a step backwards for gays, not forward.

    Watch and learn the hard way if you can't learn form history, specifically the history of hate groups in sheep's clothing such as NOW. NOW opposes 14 amendment equal rights for other groups, but proposes bypassing 14th amendment to gain supremacist rights for themselves. Why would any equality minded gay or lesbian person support and team up with NOW supremacists? Some do oppose NOW just for that.

    As for this ordinance (and so many more laws and proposals), it is backed by NOW a supremacist hate-organization in sheep's clothing pretending to be for equality and against domestic violence while actually promoting and profiting from both along with their domestic violence coalitions. NOW has it tentacles in to such a broad variety of things, but most Americans are ignorant and support their supremacist destruction because NOW and their crafty attorney politicians make it sound wonderful to the sheeple.

    Others and I have found that generally you can watch what a supremacist organization like NOW supports and you will know what to check out further as being corrupt and unfair for everyone but them and their chosen ones.

     
  • boHEMiAN posted at 8:20 pm on Tue, May 18, 2010.

    boHEMiAN Posts: 26

    Ummmm………. Can I just say PASS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! How do you like them apples?

     
  • MediumCharge posted at 7:45 pm on Tue, May 18, 2010.

    MediumCharge Posts: 127

    Udink, You did it!!! You exposed Omega for what he or she is ----- a racist pig.

    Omega, You've got to be one of the dumbest people on the planet to know know that when Udink typed "WHILE" he meant "WHITE."

     
  • AmericanPatriot posted at 6:54 pm on Tue, May 18, 2010.

    AmericanPatriot Posts: 159

    Well said Otter and Gomez! Your response to Odumbasss covers it perfectly.

     
  • Gomez posted at 4:40 pm on Tue, May 18, 2010.

    Gomez Posts: 45

    You may not be aware of it, Omega, but some of us minorities value individual liberty, private property rights, freedom to associate or not with whomever we choose, etc. We don't need or want the government, through quotas, set-asides, majority rule vote, or otherwise, to grant us phony "rights" at the expense of other peoples' liberties or by the government discriminating against other peoples' freedoms to choose.

     
  • Otter posted at 4:28 pm on Tue, May 18, 2010.

    Otter Posts: 181

    Unbelievable! Omega's response is akin to saying every Black person should favor programs that give Blacks preferential treatment in college admissions, employment, etc. Omega, are you a racist pig who feels it necessary to treat all people of a racial group as if they are like-minded and in need of your guidance? Did you invent the term, "Uncle Tom"?

     
  • Omega D posted at 3:03 pm on Tue, May 18, 2010.

    Omega D Posts: 517

    HAHAHA! I guess your right! I just realized you said WHILE male. What ever that is. If you aren't white then what problem do you have with a discrimination law? You should be fine with it.

     
  • boHEMiAN posted at 3:02 pm on Tue, May 18, 2010.

    boHEMiAN Posts: 26

    Omega D, Udink is a waist of time. The name Udink says enough about the individual. Apparently Udink has a chip on the shoulder about many things. Unfortunate! Life can be good Udink. Udink, whatever you are, there should be an ordinance for YOU and yours. You sound like a minority of sorts.

    This has been fun and it has been real but it hasn't been real fun..............

     
  • Udink posted at 2:26 pm on Tue, May 18, 2010.

    Udink Posts: 1119

    What makes you think I'm white, Omega D?
    Seems you have a problem with discrimination. How ironic. Such hypocrisy. Completely predictable.

     
  • Omega D posted at 1:44 pm on Tue, May 18, 2010.

    Omega D Posts: 517

    OOOHHH! Do you feel picked on Udink. They should also have a place where you and other discriminated white males can go and hash out your feelings. Maybe you can act like your gay, then apply for a job, not get the job, then cry white discriminaton.

    And as for those handicapped people and all of their ramps and handrails in the bathroom. If they want respect, why not learn to be normal, right??? Go out and show your white able-bodied white pride today! Don't hold back!

     
  • Udink posted at 11:43 am on Tue, May 18, 2010.

    Udink Posts: 1119

    With all these ordinances implicitly granting preferential treatment to blacks, gays, handicapped, etc., we'll soon need to pass an ordinance making it illegal to discriminate against being a while male!

     
  • boHEMiAN posted at 11:22 am on Tue, May 18, 2010.

    boHEMiAN Posts: 26

    Udink, what the passage of this bill will NOT give is gays and lesbians preferential treatment. We as a society have a responsibility to show that want everyone to be treated with justice.

    AmericanPatriot, I’m as hetero as they come and I’m totally relaxed and peaceful because I know this will work out the way I am hoping for. Most people don’t want to be where they aren’t welcome as I’m stated before. People don’t generally choose to spend their time dealing with unlike minded individual but in the business world and on a day to day basis we need to be respectful to everyone. We usually don’t have a choice to stay away from everyone we don’t agree with. That just wouldn’t work. We cross paths with people all the time who we know nothing about. I hope you know understand that cross dressing doesn’t necessarily have to do with gay men! isaacusmagnus never said he’s wearing a gold star nor do I see him beating his chest. That’s you interpretation. I’m up, thanks. My marriage comment was directed to Little Al’s comment. Don’t think I’m assume I’m just directing my comments to you only. I do see however that gay marriage is on your mind and important to you. “Why I won't support gay marriage? I hate repeating myself but, THERE IS A DIFFERENCE.” That’s your opinion and you are entitled to it. Isaacusmagnus, EVERYONE should be protected. Keep up the good work!

    email, I have heard concern about enforcement BUT at least it will be in place. That’s a GREAT start! I’m sure it will work itself out.

    mountaindyke, don’t feel hurt. Unfortunately, there is always a negative group in the bunch. If you spend time looking at comments on other articles you’ll probably notice these are the same people commenting negatively. Things workout they way they should!

    The squeaky wheel does often get the oil but it’s interesting to me to see how much further you get with trying to attract bees with honey. I received very nice replies from 4 of the 5 city councilpeople.

     
  • mountaindyke posted at 10:29 am on Tue, May 18, 2010.

    mountaindyke Posts: 3

    I am a member of the LGBTQ community and have lived in Logan. Logan is really an outstanding place to live and has a thriving and growing LGBTQ community. I want my friends in Logan who identify as LGBTQ to have EQUAL access to housing and employment as all other residents. This is a civic right that has nothing to do with local religious authority, but rather has to do with legal and civic anti-discrimination.

    There are a lot of people with a lot of privilege saying some incredibly hurtful things here. I don't care if you want to associate with me or be my neighbor, but I do care about other members of the LGBTQ community feeling SAFE here and feeling as though they can apply for a job or for housing without hiding their identity or being excluded because of it.

     
  • Little Al posted at 10:11 am on Tue, May 18, 2010.

    Little Al Posts: 3107

    isaac and bohemian ?????????????????? What was that all about ???????????
    I agree its not right to discriminate for any reason .
    But making one more law and one like this , I believe will be, your guilty untill you prove your innocent .

     
  • Coyote posted at 9:57 am on Tue, May 18, 2010.

    Coyote Posts: 168

    isaacusmagnus, I wonder if you are sincere in your statement, "I respect your opinions and beliefs but will always disagree with anyone who thinks it right to discriminate to the detriment of another individual for any reason in any situation." The proposed ordinance discriminates against a person's right to freely choose whom to associate with. Do you include a person's right to choose with whom to associate among those situations where you feel it is inappropriate "to discriminate to the detriment of another individual for any reason in any situation"?

     
  • isaacusmagnus posted at 9:27 am on Tue, May 18, 2010.

    isaacusmagnus Posts: 21

    Feel free to agree however you wish. I respect your opinions and beliefs but will always disagree with anyone who thinks it right to discriminate to the detriment of another individual for any reason in any situation.

    I hope Logan City Council makes the right decision today, because everyone in Logan stands to benefit from these ordinances.

    email I suggest reading the ordinances...the enforcement would be relatively simple and not hard to carry out.

     
  • AmericanPatriot posted at 12:37 am on Tue, May 18, 2010.

    AmericanPatriot Posts: 159

    isaacusmagnus,
    I give you credit for diligence in presenting your argument for passage of this ordinance.
    After reading your last post, I have to agree with Udink.

     
  • isaacusmagnus posted at 11:57 pm on Mon, May 17, 2010.

    isaacusmagnus Posts: 21

    Employment - http://www.loganutah.org/City%20Council/PDF/10-26_Employment_Antidiscrimination_Ordinance_Draft[1][1].pdf

    Housing - http://www.loganutah.org/City%20Council/PDF/10-25_Housing_Antidiscrimination_Ordinance_Draft[1][1].pdf

    You can read them. They are excellent.

    Items of note...

    Housing - 2.64.030 No Private Right of Action; No Special Rights
    Employment - 2.62.030 No Private Right of Action; No Special Rights
    ...This chapter does not create any special rights or privileges which would not be available to all of the City's citizens because every person has a sexual orientation and a gender identity.

    Housing - 2.64.050 Definitions
    Employment - 2.62.050 Definitions
    G. DISCRIMINATION means any direct or indirect exlusion, distinction, segregation, limitation, refusal, denial, or other differentiation in the treatment of a person or persons because of a person's actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity or because of a person's association with any such person. Discrimination shall not be interpreted to require or to grant or accord preferential treatment to any person because of that person's sexual orientation or gender identity.

    Housing - 2.64.060 Exemptions
    ...This chapter does not prohibit or restrict a religious organization or any nonprofit institution...
    Employment - 2.62.060 Exemptions
    This chapter does not apply to:
    A. a religious organization;

    You would also do well to read it all yourself. It is not full of legal jargon to the point where it's indecipherable. It is transparent and concise.

    This is not special rights for "the gays" or creating a special class. Everyone is protected based upon the added degree of sexual orientation and gender identity. Everyone.

     
  • AmericanPatriot posted at 11:28 pm on Mon, May 17, 2010.

    AmericanPatriot Posts: 159

    boHEMiAN and isaacusmagnus take a deep breath and relax!
    If you wake up in the morning looking to do battle with someone that doesn't like you because you're gay, you're going to find it.
    I didn't say you needed to move somewhere else. I said you should find somewhere YOU'RE happy. That doesn't mean leaving Cache Valley. There are people here who won't discriminate against you because you're gay. They may make fun of you if you like to wear womens clothes. I know I will but I'm NOT your enemy.
    isaacusmagnus you really need to take the gold star off your forehead and read what other people write before you start beating your chest.
    boHEMiAN YOU brought up the gay marriage issue, I didn't. Read what you wrote and try to keep up.
    FYI to both of you. Two of my best friends I've had in my life are/were gay. One died 14 years ago today. It's a death that took 3 years and I wouldn't wish it on anyone.
    Am I homophobic? No. There's not enough time and space to discuss why.
    Splitting hairs on what if you were... married to a monkey? detracts from the issue.
    My spouse has a different skin color than mine isaacusmagnus so I know all about prejudice. There's no point in discussing it because if someone doesn't like it, I don't care. I don't let it destroy or consume my life.
    Why I won't support gay marriage?
    I hate repeating myself but, THERE IS A DIFFERENCE.

     
  • Udink posted at 9:49 pm on Mon, May 17, 2010.

    Udink Posts: 1119

    What passage of this silly ordinance will do is implicitly grant preferential treatment to gays and lesbians. What a joke!

     
  • boHEMiAN posted at 9:40 pm on Mon, May 17, 2010.

    boHEMiAN Posts: 26

    "justice for all"..........
    Acceptance.
    Equality.

    isaacusmagnus is smart!

    The marriage discussion isn't really on the table here. That really isn't the discussion at hand at the moment.

    Where we come from is interesting information/knowledge. What we learn along the way and where we go is most important. "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."~Albert Einstein

     
  • Logan posted at 9:17 pm on Mon, May 17, 2010.

    Logan Posts: 632

    I haven't read the proposed ordinance, but if it is designed to do what isaacusmagnus says, what evidence will be brought to bear to enforce the ordinance? Will an employer who terminates an employee without stating the reason or at least not saying it's because the person is gay be in violation?

     
  • isaacusmagnus posted at 9:04 pm on Mon, May 17, 2010.

    isaacusmagnus Posts: 21

    The protection is more about not allowing a landlord to kick someone out or an employer to fire someone because they find out someone is GLBTA.

    Hiring and approving rental applications is a multi-faceted and subjective situation and should always be considered on a case-by-case basis. That wouldn't change.

     
  • Rawhide posted at 8:49 pm on Mon, May 17, 2010.

    Rawhide Posts: 95

    OK, OK, isaacusmagnus. But what does any of this have to do with telling a landlord who he must rent an apartment to, or telling a business owner who he must hire?

     
  • isaacusmagnus posted at 8:37 pm on Mon, May 17, 2010.

    isaacusmagnus Posts: 21

    Judging people is not the same as discriminating against them.
    Asking people to move because they don't "fit the mold"? Really?
    Asking [or forcing] people to move away because they don't fit in would have resulted in no United States, right? I guess we can start enforcing it now, though. So...anyone that isn't Native American should probably just...go back home, right? I mean, the Norse were here quite a while ago so they could probably stick around if the natives like them, but no one else can stay. We don't care where that home is but we're certainly not welcome here...we don't fit in!

    Do all gay men prance in cocktail dresses? That's news to me...also I want to know when the next showing is...heels just aren't made to handle the way male weight is allocated.
    Angry lesbians? That's actually a new stereotype on me...I've never heard of it before.

    Seriously, however, why aren't their marriages the same as any "hetero-normative" couple? Is an infertile couples' bond any less recognized? An elderly couple with no ability or intention to reproduce? How about a mixed-color relationship? What if one member of the couple is disabled?
    Are they treated any differently because they belong to one of those "SPECIAL" groups that we're supposed to look down our noses at? If we were following certain arguments that have been made...these couples could be allowed something from the government with less privilege but definitely can't be using that word "marriage." Civil unions? That sounds about right for those couples, doesn't it?
    No.

    I'm not accusing you of being judgmental, bigoted or homophobic. I'm just trying to get you to think harder about what you are trying to say, because it is how you are coming off when you say things like: "For gay people to have the same marriage license as a male and female marriage demeans who we are, where we come from." What about when marriages are forced? How about cultures that still arrange marriages and when those marriages are arranged between a middle-aged man and a teen girl? How about when those marriages encourage a forced sexual relationship? We definitely don't want to demean THOSE relationships. They are in the name of where we came from [procreation] and they have meaning and cultural history too, right?

    We don't allow segregation and discrimination based on how individuals practice religion...a non-inherent trait.
    We don't allow discrimination if you moved here [legally or not, you still shouldn't discriminate on that basis] from another state, country or province...a non-inherent trait.
    We are obviously glad to protect both inherent traits as well as choices or behaviors...so I'm going to go out on a limb here:
    If you believe that being GLBTA is some sort of inherent trait: We should NOT discriminate against it.
    If you believe that being GLBTA is a choice or a creed: We should NOT discriminate against it.

    Unless you also believe that you should be discriminated against based on what color of hair your spouse has, how many people you've dated in your life, who you voted for in the last election or how many Coldplay CDs you own...you don't have an argument against protecting yet another community of diverse individuals that obviously need it.

     
  • AmericanPatriot posted at 5:22 pm on Mon, May 17, 2010.

    AmericanPatriot Posts: 159

    boHEMiAN and orion,
    Gay rights would advance if those demanding it would find a terminology that gay and straight people can accept when it comes to "marriage".
    NONE of us would be here without a male and a female. For gay people to have the same marriage license as a male and female marriage demeans who we are, where we come from.
    There is a difference.
    Most people agree on equal rights for gay people but not on the term "marriage". As far as I know gay people won't accept a marriage license that signifies the difference.
    The rabid hatred that came and continues to spew from supporters of California's Prop 8 hasn't helped further gay rights.

     
  • Newman posted at 4:42 pm on Mon, May 17, 2010.

    Newman Posts: 672

    Does person A have a "right" to live in apartment X, even if person B, the owner of X, would prefer to rent it to someone else? Does person A's "right" trump person B's "right?"

    Does person A have a "right" to work in an establishment owned by person B, even if person B would prefer to hire someone else? Does person A's "right" trump person B's "right"?

    "Rights" are bogus if in order for them to be exercised, it requires that another person's "rights" must be violated.

    http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/williams020806.asp

     
  • orion posted at 2:43 pm on Mon, May 17, 2010.

    orion Posts: 5162

    It's high time the easing of rights for all law-abiding citizens take place. "People" rights should not be marginalized in a U.S. that espouses "All men are created equal..." Anything less simply is lip-service.

     
  • boHEMiAN posted at 1:39 pm on Mon, May 17, 2010.

    boHEMiAN Posts: 26

    Little Al??????????????? I don’t see where anyone is being hypocritical. This IS about people standing up for what they believe in and all sides are choosing to do it.
    Straight from Merriam-Webster:
    Hypocrite-
    1 : a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion
    2 : a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings
    What happened in Cal will change AGAIN. It will change everywhere. It may take time but it will change.

    AmericanPatriot, most people don’t want to be where they aren’t wanted and wouldn’t choose that situation. Most don’t want to wear a shirt around saying “hey, look over here, I’m gay”. For most this IS about respect and dignity. Everyone should be respectful no matter they deal with. No one is trying to shove anything down anyone’s throat here even though that may be the negative perception.

    "Adopting the right attitude can convert a negative stress into a positive one."

     
  • AmericanPatriot posted at 1:02 pm on Mon, May 17, 2010.

    AmericanPatriot Posts: 159

    Is this issue about money or forced respect?
    Yes there are people in Logan who look down their noses at people who don't fit their mold. There are people like that everywhere.
    Why would you want to live or work somewhere you're not welcomed?
    I've experienced discrimination in my life and no, I didn't waste my time filing a law suit. I found a place I wanted to be, where I was accepted for who I was.
    I'd prefer not to see my gay neighbor prancing around in heels and a cocktail dress even if it's Halloween. I'd prefer not to have an angry lesbian spewing that she and her "wife" are the same as a heterosexual couple. Gay couples aren't all perfect. Some are wonderful people and some aren't. You don't get a gold star to stick on your forehead if you're gay "because you're special."
    I personally don't care what your sexual preference is as long as you're not trying to shove it down my throat or force schools to teach it as accepted behavior.

     
  • Little Al posted at 1:01 pm on Mon, May 17, 2010.

    Little Al Posts: 3107

    "The homophobia and hated is ramped. " My , What hypocrites you are , remimber what happened in Cal. when you didnt get your way ?

     
  • boHEMiAN posted at 12:32 pm on Mon, May 17, 2010.

    boHEMiAN Posts: 26

    The protesting and all of this other discussion PROVES the need for anti-discrimination legislation. Certainly Quayle and Danies will be wise enough to see it. The homophobia and hated is ramped. A change, protection- needs to be implemented. Let’s roll with the times folks. It’s called progress, education, growth. Be proactive!

     
  • CharlesAshurst posted at 12:06 pm on Mon, May 17, 2010.

    CharlesAshurst Posts: 4075

    I received an email that said "Also, people against the anti-discrimination ordinances protested at the church buildings of both Holly Daines and Jay Monson this Sunday morning."

    If that's the case, seems quite extreme to me. I take it that the fear is, you tolerate gays, God will punish everybody, as per Sodom and Gomorrah. That's just plain old superstition. The laws of physics work better than superstition for predicting consequences of actions. If the goal is to avoid the fate of Sodom and Gomorrah, look to your laws of physics to predict consequences and live by your religion in order to have the character needed to face up to the consequences. Let's see a tad more character and a whole lot less superstition.

     
  • boHEMiAN posted at 12:05 pm on Mon, May 17, 2010.

    boHEMiAN Posts: 26

    isaacusmagnus is wise!
    I enjoy wise dialogue.
    Thanks for taking the time isaacusmagnus.

    I hope you receive an opportunity to speak tomorrow. There will be plenty speaking from "our side" who have civilized, knowledgeable messages to share.

     
  • Little Al posted at 11:24 am on Mon, May 17, 2010.

    Little Al Posts: 3107

    "A private employer does have the right to hire whomever he pleases but it should be based on ability, qualifications and personality of that individual" .

    So then a private employer does have the right to hire whomever he pleases " BUT " only if it pleases you ?

     
  • Omega D posted at 10:58 am on Mon, May 17, 2010.

    Omega D Posts: 517

    A company hiring only non-Morman homosexuals. Love to see it. Would not cause a twist in the panties around here at all.:}

     
  • isaacusmagnus posted at 9:52 am on Mon, May 17, 2010.

    isaacusmagnus Posts: 21

    What marginalized, small or "special" groups are not already protected?
    One of the purposes of the ordinance is to promote equality of opportunity for everyone by protecting them from unfair discrimination in certain areas of activity, including work, education and accommodation.
    What group doesn't deserve that protection? LGBTA? Why? Because you might not be gay and so you don't think they need it? Because you've never been discriminated against and so Logan is obviously already protecting everyone that requires it?

    There is no single "belief" of the LGBTA community. It's diverse. Some individuals are LDS, some are atheist. Some believe in equality and others don't care one way or the other. LGBTA people are men, women, parents, children, uncles, aunts, students, full-time employees, managers, teachers, soldiers and public servants. This "little guy" group still pays taxes, and are fined if they don't. They are served papers just like you are, they serve in the military/national guard and they most certainly run for public office.
    Your "little" or "big guy" groups may already protected. White, hispanic, asian or black? Male or female? LDS, Catholic, Jewish or atheist? Middle-class, lower or upper? Check. Check. Check. Check.
    Technically, though, your sexuality is not protected, it's just assumed that it is. I could fire you from my workplace for being "straight" and you wouldn't be able to do anything about it right now. This ordinance would protect from that, and I wouldn't assume that it's never happened...you just never know.

    Want to know why this is being reviewed again so soon? It was tabled because the Council wasn't sure it was needed here in Logan and they asked for evidence. The City Council asked for proof from the community that was affected and from anyone that felt it was necessary. They received it. They received more than enough.
    I will be there Tuesday. I will share my story if possible. I'm sure others will as well. I encourage you to go. I strongly encourage anyone that might not agree with this ordinance to go. Let's have an open discussion. Let's listen and learn from each other. I surely hope that you'll see that there are SO MANY people affected who are a part of this "little guy" group. I myself am curious to hear the worries on logistics and need. I want to address those. I don't want to force special rights for the LGBT community against Logan's will. The point is that there ARE enough people here that need this so badly, and the Council's job is protect everyone: not just the majority that are already secure.

    What legal links are you looking for? Links to those places already protecting this "little guy" community? Or links to stories of violence, discrimination and hatred? Do you just want Utah links? Logan links? I can find them. I can most definitely show you that this is a very real issue. And for every event that's available to read online or from a police report...there are many more that do not get reported. They are afraid. They are kept silent. They are ignored.

     
  • ControVersialSigh posted at 9:09 am on Mon, May 17, 2010.

    ControVersialSigh Posts: 836

    By "adding to the list" for one it means it gets special treatment above all the other groups that "could" go on the list.

    I'm not in support of ramrodding an agenda item in two weeks or less in Logan, much less become a community law. From my viewpoint a community law has just as much legal weight as State or Federal laws. The same folks come and serve papers at my door, and the money is all the same when I'm fined et al.

    I'm also tired of the LGBTA wording statements that leverage the support of all the other "little guy" groups so they can gain the perceived support to put their "one name" on the law. I believe the LGBTA has either a loose knit idea of what makes them different, or won't explain the gory details of what they truly believe and perhaps forces them to use an underdog mentality to gain support.

    If the laws are so simple, and support this utopian based law, the burden of proof is on the LGBTA to bring documents and research material to the general public as I'm going to tell my representative no, and at least table the item until I can get some time to actually read about what's going on in forums not so media frenzied.

    In this forum, if this is so legally important, I suggest some of the LGBTA supporters post some links to legal websites where I can go read these supposed laws, and I specifically don't want to read from their own websites.

     
  • isaacusmagnus posted at 8:52 am on Mon, May 17, 2010.

    isaacusmagnus Posts: 21

    Why would we need to ban the display of red balloons on Tuesdays? Do individuals get evicted over it? Do they get fired? Are they threatened or hurt by the display of red balloons on Tuesdays?
    No.
    LGBTA individuals are affected daily.

    LGBTA people are not a race...because if they were they would already be protected. They are not disabled, which is also protected. They are not their own class, religion or creed...all of which are already protected. The ordinance is to add these specifications to our existing non-discrimination ordinance for the simple fact that they are not already covered in the current list.
    Please come to the Council meeting to show your support for this much needed ordinance.

     
  • L from Logan posted at 8:49 am on Mon, May 17, 2010.

    L from Logan Posts: 232

    I want equal rights for Videographers! I want it on the books... Equal treatment of Videographers.

     
  • Patches posted at 7:22 am on Mon, May 17, 2010.

    Patches Posts: 284

    Members of Logan's City Council will not pass an ordinance banning the display of red balloons on Tuesday. Why? There's no interest in banning red balloons on Tuesday or any other day. There is an interest, by some, in making sure GLBT residents get a fair shake in housing and employment. There are others who disagree.

    The great thing is that there will be an opportunity for all to give the members of the council their input. Show up at the hearing and have a say!

    Oh, and let's see if there can be a discussion without mentioning the Bible, any reference to bathrooms, or whether we should have an ordinance to protect men who prefer to wear raw animal skins at work.

     
  • Harold Jurnell posted at 10:57 pm on Sun, May 16, 2010.

    Harold Jurnell Posts: 413

    I see the right to associate VOLUNTARILY with whomever you wish as a virtue, consistent with individual liberty.

     
  • WallyFatBoy posted at 10:01 pm on Sun, May 16, 2010.

    WallyFatBoy Posts: 571

    This is a needed move by the City Council. I hope this measure passes. There is too much underground hate in Logan, Cache Valley and Utah. Too much self righteousness.

     
  • isaacusmagnus posted at 9:58 pm on Sun, May 16, 2010.

    isaacusmagnus Posts: 21

    Letfreedomring,

    They have the same rights as every other American citizen, but are those rights upheld? Not usually.
    A private employer does have the right to hire whomever he pleases but it should be based on ability, qualifications and personality of that individual...not on what an unchangeable aspect of their nature happens to be. You cannot hire or fire someone based on their gender, their race or their religion and how is this any different? I may want to hire an employee to work for me, but I would not be able to say "Well, you're a woman, I can't hire you." I would not be able to say "Well, I'm not religious and so since you're LDS I don't want you working here." I would be sued. Why? Because of already existing policies and ordinances protecting against such things.
    Straight or heterosexual people are often discriminated against based on their perceived orientation or gender identity. This is also discrimination that would be stopped and prevented by such an ordinance.

    If we could all "just be nice" then we wouldn't need any anti-discrimination for any group whatsoever. Obviously, that didn't work and so we have added groups to these ordinances as need saw fit.
    Obviously, the need is here and now. The population that needs it is here and lives happily in Logan despite the possible ramifications, whether or not you want to hire them.

    Let freedom ring? I'd say so.

     
  • Letfreedomring posted at 9:42 pm on Sun, May 16, 2010.

    Letfreedomring Posts: 230

    AggieFan72,

    They DO have the same rights!

    However, let me say this... I believe as some others around here that a private employer should have the right to employ whom ever they want to. I also think they should have the right to not employ those whom they don't want to hire.

     
  • AggieFan72 posted at 7:03 pm on Sun, May 16, 2010.

    AggieFan72 Posts: 1

    I have recently become very involved with the GLBTA [Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender and Allies] community in Logan, and discrimination is a problem! First of all, these people are not evil people--they are your friends and neighbors and they are actively involved in this community. I have friends who have been threatened, attacked, evicted, fired, and mistreated because of their sexual orientation or what people perceive as their orientation. I'm not asking any member of Logan to come to a pride event or change their opinions, I am simply asking that a minority of people be given the same rights as the majority. We have done this for many other minority groups, and protecting them has allowed us to progress as a community. Stopping hateful and unnecessary discrimination against GLBTA individuals is the next step to making Logan a safer more progressive community. I only wish that more people could show some compassion to take a progressive step to prevent future injustices and discrimination in Logan. These ordinances are a positive step for Logan.

     
  • boHEMiAN posted at 1:29 pm on Sun, May 16, 2010.

    boHEMiAN Posts: 26

    I was disappointed to observe the protesting on the corner of Mountain Road and Eastridge Drive yesterday evening. Discouraging! I had trouble trying to read the posters/signs that were displayed so I ended up asking my husband to pull over and let me try and figure out what the situation was. There was miscommunication between a man, woman and myself but I soon figured out the protesters “aren’t for gays” and “I am for gays”. The protesters are for “protecting the children”. When I figured out what was going on I put my hands up in the air, smiled, said “carry on” and walked away. I was already late for a dinner gathering. Perhaps I should have taken the time to entertain more conversation BUT what would have been the point?

    Since I didn’t spend time in further discussion I can’t be certain of the protesters full intentions. However, from the statement “we are for protecting the children” I feel I am safe to elaborate with:

    I have a homosexual brother. He is not a pedophile! Nor, do any children need to be protected from him. He has been in a monogamous relationship with the same man for many years. We grew up in a very conservative area back east. My brother has never been truly comfortable with himself or his situation and to this day leads a private and quite life. It breaks my heart to know what a wonderful person he is and that he often times doesn’t feel accepted and completely safe with his truth.

    It isn’t our place to judge homosexuals and assume we understand their situation! Well, in my opinion. I suppose judging is what this fuss is all about.

    I know many other wonderful homosexual individuals from wonderful families. They live wonderful lives and have their own wonderful families.

    There is a homosexual cousin-in-law who has been in a monogamous relationship with the same woman for years. The other woman, to this day, hasn’t admitted her situation to her parents. They are Catholic and she fears sharing the truth, even though it is obvious. The couple owns a house and lives together. To share an example of how homosexuals come from all walks of life, one of these individual’s father use to be head of the EPA. For privacy sake I won’t share with which administration but know it was a conservative one.

    I have another homosexual cousin-in-law who has also been in a monogamous relationship with the same woman for years. They have a child together and are wonderful parents. They have just recently become more comfortable with their situation in the company of the family. Unfortunately it’s due to the passing of an elderly family member who is no longer with us to judge.

    I have 2 very close female homosexual friends. These girlfriends aren’t in a relationship together, we all just happen to be great friends. I’ve know them for many years. They know and have always respected my heterosexuality. We use to work together at a girls residential summer camp with girls ranging in age from 6 to 16. I can assure anyone that no one would ever need to protect their children from these friends. I trust these friends with my life and am honored to share in theirs. Neither of these friends is completely comfortable with their truth and acceptance. One has never shared with her parents and therefore doesn’t choose to spend much time visiting her family. The other feels horribly guilty because of her faith and trust in the Lord Jesus Christ. She was taught that being gay is a sin and struggles with her comprehension and true feelings. When these friends came to my husband and I, just a few years ago, to tell us (individually, it just happened around the same time) that they were gay, they wept. I suppose it was humiliation and shame. Once again, my heart felt broken for these wonderful people.

    My intentions here aren’t to get into a really long story of personal experiences. I just want to share with you a few reasons why I feel homosexuals should be protected from discrimination. These relatives and friends in discussion don’t live here but I want them feel protected wherever they live. I LONG TO SEE THE DAY WHERE PEOPLE CAN ACQUIRE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING FOR HOMOSEXUALITY AND GAIN RESPECT AND ACCEPTANCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    There has been a problem with homosexual discrimination in this community and it worthy of time. Those of you, who are so concerned about the outcome, don’t worry. When this passes we aren’t going to start observing a bunch of pedophilia and PDA (public display of affection) from the gay community. STOP BEING IGNORANT AND EXPAND YOUR MIND! This is annoying. Start using your computer wisely and do some research on topics such as pedophilia, homosexuality, and discrimination. While you’re at it, make sure to get your information from reputable, knowledgeable and educated sources.

    Thanks and enjoy this great day!

     
  • isaacusmagnus posted at 10:32 am on Sun, May 16, 2010.

    isaacusmagnus Posts: 21

    I have been an active member of the USU student club L.I.F.E. for almost four years now. I have personally seen the pain caused by hatred, threats, violence and discrimination among all of the students in this particular community. GLBTA individuals do not wish to break any laws. They do not wish to be treated special. They do not wish for the Logan City Council to join a Pride parade.
    They only wish to be treated with the same respect that everyone else takes for granted.
    If I were evicted from my home based on my real or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity, I might not have any legal recourse. If I were evicted or fired because of my race, class, ethnicity, gender, creed or religion then under the current anti-discrimination policies I would have legal recourse.
    These ordinances do not mention gay marriage. They do not legalize public acts of lewdness or excessive affection. The law remains the same on these standards which are upheld for ALL citizens of Logan and Utah.
    Passing anti-discrimination will make it that much easier for the GLBTA [Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender and Allies] community because they will be able to stand up and know that the City is behind them. The same remains true for those that are harassed for being Spanish, lower class, disabled or LDS.
    This is not asking for special rights. This is asking for the same rights that the majority already possess. I am proud to say that I am a citizen of Logan at this time. The City Council saw that there was indeed need for this ordinance and they are standing up in their positions and fulfilling their duty: To serve and protect ALL of Logan and her citizens, not just the majority.

     
  • Little Al posted at 7:47 am on Sun, May 16, 2010.

    Little Al Posts: 3107

    But people ,We gota keep up with SLC !!! P.C. at its best .

    " The right thing to to " ? Sooo whos gona say whats right ?

    Snap d , What the" HECK " was yor point ? No sam didnt prove your point . Try again .

     
  • bellaswan posted at 12:26 am on Sun, May 16, 2010.

    bellaswan Posts: 2

    I also passed by the group on the corner wich who were protesting, and yes snapdragon62 you are right that pictures speak a thounsand words. But if you were not in the abyss of ignorence you could understand what thoes protesters wanted to do with the picture, if you felt bad that your child saw that picture and asked questions why are you alowing your city counsil to validate and indures exactally what the picture shows? they hoped that when you see that picture you would understand that this type of sexual conduct should be keep privite,and not in our city halls or school halls. if you were not in your abyss of ignorence and if you had taken time to understand what this measure would do, you would know that if you include sexual orentation into an antidiscrimanation law you could find yourself haveing to explane to your children when they see there taecher with there homosexual partner kissing and holding hands at there school function christmas party, and honey you will not be able to say nothing about it. WAKE UP TO REALITY YOU STUPID INDIVIDUAL!

     
  • Snapdragon62 posted at 11:58 pm on Sat, May 15, 2010.

    Snapdragon62 Posts: 4

    Samdman, No need for rebuttal - You just proved my point.

     
  • samdman posted at 9:48 pm on Sat, May 15, 2010.

    samdman Posts: 1

    "SHAME ON HOLLY DAINES" So is everyone a liar or illiterate on Cliffside, or is this an isolated case to Snapdragon62? Either he was driving too fast, or too busy flipping the finger and using profanity far worse than he said, he needed to edit in his comment. There was no profanaty from the demonstrators verbaly or written, the signs simply said "SHAME ON HOLLY DAINES" ,"DO YOU THINK PROTECTING THE CHILDREN IS HATEFULL," and such. So I ask you why not 'Shame on Holly Daines' and do you think protecting children from indecent exposure,the propaganda and inticement of homosexual acts to children hatefull, then please join ranks with Cliffside resident Snapdragon62 because if you look at the issue at hand without prior prejudice and an open heart to the innocence of the children you too would find yourself with those demonstrators against this monstrosity of the "anti-discrimination ordinance" which only purpose is to make sure anyone who does not agree with the homosexual act can't do nothing about it. For example: A business owner cannot fire a gay person because he/she wishes to proffess who and how he/she fulfils his sexual plesures with. A school cannot fire the gay coach or gym teacher because the parents are uneasy of him hanging around the boys locker/shower room or what about the owner of a house who rents his basement to gay tennants who keep fondling each other while his children are present, can't ask them to stop or evict them and so on. So do not fail to act on the truth and stand up against the lies, against this anti-discrimination ordinance and be there on tuesday to honor your heritage, this city, and this state "AND PROTECT THE CHILDREN" "KEEP YOUR SEX LIFE PRIVATE".

    ps sorry for making my comment more of an artircle and don't waist your time on comments you make expecting a rebuttal from me.

     
  • Bullwinkle posted at 9:06 pm on Sat, May 15, 2010.

    Bullwinkle Posts: 221

    Good grief Herm and Jay. Don't you guys have anything more important to do in council meetings than pass another unneeded ordinance? What's next. An ordinance to protect convicted sexual predators?

     
  • Snapdragon62 posted at 7:41 pm on Sat, May 15, 2010.

    Snapdragon62 Posts: 4

    I live on Cliffside and just drove past a group of people with signs saying Holly Daines is going to *Heck because of her support for considering this measure. Their ignorance is evident in a poster they're holding up of two men kissing. I had to explain that one to my young son who was in the car with me at the time - "The posters say they don't agree with what she's said." Then he asks, "So why do they show a picture of that?" Indeed, pictures are worth a thousand words and that one spoke volumes. What a bunch of idiots.

    *Funny thing - I had to edit my comments because I used a profanity (the original word for which "Heck" is in place of), but those protesters can display it for all passing by to see in living color (including my young son). Messed up.

     
  • artsfan posted at 10:02 am on Sat, May 15, 2010.

    artsfan Posts: 15

    Congratulations, Council members for stepping up and doing what's right. Just putting the ordinance back on the agenda and holding public hearings is a step in the right direction. Let's hope that the public hearing is a constructive, objective one that doesn't dissolve into finger pointing and name calling. Again, as I wrote before, Herm Olsen and other supporting council members should be proud of their efforts to stand up against discrimination of any kind.

     

In Touch

Cache Magazine deals.hjnews.com YourCacheValley.com Logan City Police Blotter HJNews.com RSS Feeds


SavvyShopperDeals.com

Online poll

Loading…
Sites You Might Like