Human Rights Office Sued for Refusing to Protect Former Homosexuals; Obama sides

[Natasha]

Human Rights Office Sued for Refusing to Protect Former Homosexuals; Obama sidesteps defending unpopular minorities

Tickertech.com
10/14/2008

WASHINGTON, Oct. 14 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays (PFOX) is suing the Washington DC Office of Human Rights for failing to protect former homosexuals under its sexual orientation anti-discrimination law. "The ex-gay community is the most bullied and maligned group in America, yet they are not protected by sexual orientation non-discrimination laws," said Regina Griggs, PFOX executive director.

The DC Human Rights Act prohibits discrimination based on "sexual preference," "sexual orientation," "gender identity," and "gender expression." The Office of Human Rights maintains that homosexuals, bisexuals, transgenders, and cross-dressers qualify for protection under this Act, but ex-gays do not. PFOX's lawsuit asks the DC Superior Court to direct the Office to include former homosexuals under the sexual orientation law. "Shouldn't ex-gays enjoy the same legal protections that gays enjoy?" asked Griggs.

[NicholeW.]

Ex-gays, like ex-transsexuals, should be ready to get fire from those who haven't had their experiences. Not allowing Donnie McKlurkin to perform anymore at one's political rallies doesn't equate to "firing" him. How the hell does one fire a "one-shot" performer? One simply doesn't "hire" him again.

Besides, doesn't ex-gay mean straight? Or does it mean "only a little bit crooked?" If it means "straight" then I suspect that just as sexual harrassment laws apply to people regardless of gender, so would anti-orientation laws, even when the orientaion isn't mentioned.

Who dreamed this up? The LCRs and the McCain campaign? What a bunch of illogical, meaningless drivel.

Nikki