Activism and Politics => Discrimination => Topic started by: Butterfly on October 01, 2009, 02:57:00 AM Return to Full Version
Title: Testimony in opposition to H.R. 3017, "Employment Non-Discrimination Act"
Post by: Butterfly on October 01, 2009, 02:57:00 AM
Post by: Butterfly on October 01, 2009, 02:57:00 AM
Testimony in opposition to H.R. 3017, "Employment Non-Discrimination Act"
By Tony Perkins, President, Family Research Council
September 29, 2009
http://www.frc.org/testimony/testimony-in-opposition-to-hr-3017-employment-non-discrimination-act (http://www.frc.org/testimony/testimony-in-opposition-to-hr-3017-employment-non-discrimination-act)
The Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA; H.R. 3017), which would prohibit employers from considering "sexual orientation" and "gender identity," is based on false premises and is wrong in principle. Those are reasons enough to oppose it, regardless of its practical consequences.
The false premises are that homosexuals are "born gay" and "transgender" people are "born in the wrong body." Pro-homosexual activists would have us believe that makes "sexual orientation" and "gender identity" immutable characteristics that are therefore worthy of civil rights protection, just like the immutable characteristic of race. However, the evidence does not support the theory that homosexuality is biologically determined,[1] while "transgender" people have a mental illness ("gender identity disorder") which can and should be treated using gender-affirming therapy, not self-mutilating surgery.[2]
By Tony Perkins, President, Family Research Council
September 29, 2009
http://www.frc.org/testimony/testimony-in-opposition-to-hr-3017-employment-non-discrimination-act (http://www.frc.org/testimony/testimony-in-opposition-to-hr-3017-employment-non-discrimination-act)
The Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA; H.R. 3017), which would prohibit employers from considering "sexual orientation" and "gender identity," is based on false premises and is wrong in principle. Those are reasons enough to oppose it, regardless of its practical consequences.
The false premises are that homosexuals are "born gay" and "transgender" people are "born in the wrong body." Pro-homosexual activists would have us believe that makes "sexual orientation" and "gender identity" immutable characteristics that are therefore worthy of civil rights protection, just like the immutable characteristic of race. However, the evidence does not support the theory that homosexuality is biologically determined,[1] while "transgender" people have a mental illness ("gender identity disorder") which can and should be treated using gender-affirming therapy, not self-mutilating surgery.[2]
Title: Re: Testimony in opposition to H.R. 3017, "Employment Non-Discrimination Act"
Post by: sarahb on October 01, 2009, 06:10:05 AM
Post by: sarahb on October 01, 2009, 06:10:05 AM
People like that don't understand that we do have "gender-affirming therapy" and it fails. We go through our whole life hiding who we are and trying to affirm our birth gender by acting more masculine/feminine, and doing things normally associated with our birth gender in the feeble attempt to feel comfortable with our birth gender. It doesn't work. It only makes it worse. That is a silly argument!
~Sarah
~Sarah
Title: Re: Testimony in opposition to H.R. 3017, "Employment Non-Discrimination Act"
Post by: jesse on October 01, 2009, 06:20:23 AM
Post by: jesse on October 01, 2009, 06:20:23 AM
i agree sarah he knows not what he speaks of and as far as painful heart attack in his sleep i think he should be fully awake and swallow his tounge while hes at it
jessica
jessica
Title: Re: Testimony in opposition to H.R. 3017, "Employment Non-Discrimination Act"
Post by: Renate on October 01, 2009, 07:01:49 AM
Post by: Renate on October 01, 2009, 07:01:49 AM
I would just like to point out for our side the dangers of trying to insist that transsexuality (or homosexuality) is biologically determined.
This may well be the case and some indications point there, but there is no proof yet.
I believe it is better to say that transsexuality (or homosexuality) is a condition of unknown causes,
that can present itself very early in life, that does not respond to coercive therapy and is immutable.
As such, it deserves full protection under the law of any other immutable characteristic.
This may well be the case and some indications point there, but there is no proof yet.
I believe it is better to say that transsexuality (or homosexuality) is a condition of unknown causes,
that can present itself very early in life, that does not respond to coercive therapy and is immutable.
As such, it deserves full protection under the law of any other immutable characteristic.