Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace of Order
Woah. First, hey, nice to meet ya.
Second off...I gotta ask: even though they're a small percentage of the population, why wouldn't you want to make laws protecting them?
- We have laws that protect consumers with x amount of debt from being hassled by collection agencies.
- We have laws that protect disabled persons from workplace discrimination.
- And we have laws that protect religious minorities, like Muslims and Unitarians, from religious discrimination.
So, even though all of the three above groups of people (consumers in debt, disabled persons, and religious minorities) are a small percentage of the US population, we as a society are compassionate and extend protections to them that they cannot achieve in and of themselves. Saying that transgender individuals aren't worthy of legal protection and recourse not only sounds un-compassionate, but it sounds hateful. As a gay man, I'm also in the minority of Americans, but I still firmly believe I should be protected from hateful/harmful attacks by other people.
Wouldn't you agree?
|
Yes I do agree. And I'm glad you brought it up. Most places of employment here recognize "Sexual Orientation" as something that can be discriminated against, and many of them follow through with sexual orientation descrimination. I'd rather these companies do it on their own LIKE these are, than doing it only because they're required to by law.
However, in order for a law to be passed, it needs a purpose. - Five transexuals in South Dakota who want a law passed, will never get one no matter how much they wish for it, because they don't represent the number of people needed to promose a said law. Not to mention, like I said, it's virtually non existant here. I highly, highly, highly, HIGHLY doubt that we have ANY transexuals in this state.