The Worldnetdaily has an article about the Senate’s schedule vote on the Employment Non-Discrimination Act and they’re putting their usual absurd spin on it. “It’s back! Job protection for sexual perversion” says the headline on the front page, though the headline on the article when you click on it is “It’s ba-a-ack! Job protections based on sex preference.”
The U.S. Senate is expected to vote Monday evening on the “Employment Non-Discrimination Act,” legislation that supporters say offers basic workplace protections for homosexuals and transgendered Americans, but critics warn it will force businesses to cater to bizarre behaviors and force anyone who disagrees with those lifestyles to keep their mouths shut.
The legislation, also known as ENDA, would forbid employers from firing or refusing to hire anyone because of their sexual orientation or for asserting a different “gender identity” than their anatomy suggests. Supporters say protections in those areas are no different than longstanding bans on employment decisions made on the basis of race, sex, ethnicity, religion or disability.
But others contend there is a vast difference between judging a person on their skin color versus their sexual behavior.
“There’s a reason why we don’t allow discrimination based on race, which is that it’s a characteristic which is inborn, involuntary, immutable, innocuous and in the Constitution,” Peter Sprigg, senior fellow in policy studies at the Family Research Council, told WND in a radio interview. “All of those criteria apply to race. None of them applies to the choice to engage in homosexual conduct or in cross-dressing behavior, which is what gender identity deals with.”
So how about religion? Federal law has long forbidden discrimination on the basis of religion, which means you can’t be fired for being a Christian, Muslim, Jew, Buddhist, Wiccan and so forth. OMG! You mean we have “job protection for religious perversion”? Yep. You can’t fire someone because you believe they worship a demonic God? Nope. Religion is not inborn, involuntary, immutable or innocuous. And no, the constitution does say anything at all about race other than what the government can do, not what companies can do. So much for Sprigg’s absurd criteria.
Of course, Sprigg is also the guy who says he wants to “export homosexuals from the United States” because “homosexuality is destructive to society.” But remember, he’s in favor of “smaller government” and “freedom” (the freedom to impose his religious views on others, of course).