Susan's Place Transgender Resources

News and Events => Opinions & Editorials => Topic started by: Hazumu on January 20, 2008, 01:54:34 AM

Title: {OpEd}Arguments against HB89 don't hold up to scrutiny
Post by: Hazumu on January 20, 2008, 01:54:34 AM
Gary Watts

Salt Lake Tribune (http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/ci_8020076)

"    Sen. Buttars' opposition to the proposed legislation is based primarily on his belief that to specifically include gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender individuals in the proposed statute as a protected "subgroup" would start us down a slippery slope that would have every "subgroup" (he specifically mentioned those with tattoos) asking for similar protection.
    That argument loses some of its credibility when we recognize that similar protections for valued subgroups are already in place and have wide public support. I will cite just three for your consideration.
   
    * We double fines for speeding in road construction areas.
    * We impose 20 mph speed limits in and around our schools.
    * We enhance penalties for attempted assassination of elected government officials.
    Why? Because we recognize that citizens we value highly, i.e. our construction workers, our school children and our elected officials, are at increased risk because of whom and where they may be. "
Title: Re: {OpEd}Arguments against HB89 don't hold up to scrutiny
Post by: tekla on January 20, 2008, 01:17:37 PM
We double fines for speeding in road construction areas.  - largely a revenue enhancement device.

We impose 20 mph speed limits in and around our schools. - But not around colleges, odd, perhaps some kids are worth more than others. 

We enhance penalties for attempted assassination of elected government officials. - funny how they are exactly the people who write and enforce the laws. 

Why? Because we recognize that citizens we value highly, i.e. our construction workers, our school children and our elected officials,
- I doubt if they are all valued at the same level.  One good construction worker is worth more than most elected officials in total. 
Title: Arguments against HB89 don't hold up to scrutiny (commentary)
Post by: Natasha on January 20, 2008, 01:23:41 PM
Arguments against HB89 don't hold up to scrutiny (commentary)

http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/ci_8020076
01/19/2008

As a proponent for the legislation, which makes it illegal to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity, I listened carefully to the arguments offered by Sen. Chris Buttars and Gayle Ruzicka, president of the Utah Eagle Forum, against the proposed bill.
Title: Re: Arguments against HB89 don't hold up to scrutiny (commentary)
Post by: tekla on January 20, 2008, 01:30:01 PM
The Eagle Forum is Phyllis Schlafly's group, 'nuff said.