hurrah for discrimination!

So. This is appalling.

EDITORIAL: Discrimination is necessary - Washington Times

Forget the message and opinion of the writer for a second - only a second, I promise - and look at the sentence structure and use of terms like "sex-changers". I'm so glad that the (thank God!) completely gender congruent people who taught this (unnamed) person instilled in him or her such a grasp of the English language. As user osamaobama commented: Amen.

Okay, now back to the argument.

Phrase 1: "States have a sovereign right to set standards governing behavioral - as opposed to immutable - personal characteristics." State sovereignty... so glad that tension has been resolved in the last 150 years since - you know - we spent a few years shooting each other over the issue. Also, characterizing gender identity as a behavioral personal characteristic" without qualification seems a little blind, given the research that points to gender identity as a biological trait. And perhaps I just haven't thought this through all the way, but it strikes me: what is an immutable personal characteristic?

Phrase 2: "Even religious organizations, under the standards cited [in ENDA], are prohibited from making employment decisions based on the worker's sex." Not to be too simple about this, or anything, but as a female, this is something I'm really happy about. Wait, you mean legislature is supporting a movement towards some kind of gender equality? Shit, son. Oh, wait. This actually means (thanks for the translation from plain English to prejudice): "that even parochial schools [oh no, don't hold them to the same standards as the rest of us irreligious heathens!] must hire she-males to teach their kindergartners." Oh no. Not the She-males.

Phrase 3: "ENDA purports to 'prohibit employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.' Clever politically correct wording aside, this is a direct attack on common sense. On some matters, it is good to be discriminating. It is right to discriminate between honesty and dishonesty, between politeness and impoliteness, between right and wrong." Thus, it is honest and right to discriminate against people who won't sacrifice the truth of their identities to comply with strictly defined social gender norms. This argument strikes the bell of historical familiarity. What do we do with these Others? Starve 'em, shoot 'em, burn 'em, gas 'em...

And I haven't even mentioned some of the viewer comments attached to this wonderful piece of journalism. Feel free to check those out on your own.

I should have spent all of this time doing my reading, but instead, I got upset, disturbed, and ultimately had a good ridicule sesh with an awesome friend.

Now: homework.