Do gays need special protection under the law?

[Apos]

—And, to be honest, being transsexual often does negatively impact your performance and it definitely increases your medical expenses (which are often borne, at least in part, by the company).—

I’m not sure why that would be a different case than any person who had more medical needs than normal.

—The reason why employers should, nonetheless, not discriminate against transsexuals (or any of a large number of other such things) is out of recognition that respect for human dignity should outweigh the quest for profit.—

Dignity is one thing. But it’s hardly an argument for “dignity” that employers be forced to pay more for particular employees when cheaper ones are available.

—So, Apos, can you suggest a better way to implement protection from discrimination across the board, without protecting on the basis of individual characteristics such as race or sexual orientation? If so, can you outline a plan to implement that in a reasonable time frame? With limited funds?—

Eh? What limited funds/time are you thinking of? I would suggest exactly what I already said: demand that employers not discriminate on the basis of traits irrelevant to what’s they are asking (i.e. can I perform my job?). I don’t see how that’s any harder than suits based on membership in specific groups: if anything, the principle at stake is clearer

I would also suggest that you be screened by the government to make sure the race, gender, or sexuality of your potential employers didn’t unduly influence your choice of job, where you shop, where you live, who you associate with, and most importantly, who you date. I wouldn’t want you dating a black woman when there is a perfectly qualified Asian man interested in you.

[KellyM]

So, Apos, you think businesses should be free to discriminate against employees who are able to do the job requested of them but whose medical conditions (while irrelevant to the job) will increase the overall cost of administering the company’s defined medical benefits plan?

I trust you are in perfect health and intend to remain that way indefinitely.

[Homebrew]

Here’s a Victory on the job front.

The board of directors of Cracker Barrel restaurants announced Wednesday that it is adding sexual orientation to the list of characteristics covered by the company’s nondiscrimination policy. The announcement ends a more-than-decade-long campaign on the part of gay rights advocates who have been pressuring the restaurant chain because of its policy of firing employees who fail to “demonstrate normal heterosexual values.”

[snip]

Cracker Barrel drew national attention in 1991 when it instituted a company policy that called for terminating employees “whose sexual preferences fail to demonstrate normal heterosexual values which have been the foundation of families in our society.” At least 11 workers were fired as a result. The company’s blatant discrimination–which was legal in the states where it occurred and remains legal under federal law–touched off a wave of protests and boycotts at Cracker Barrel restaurants. Cracker Barrel later revoked the policy, which it once described as a “well-intentioned overreaction to the perceived values of our customers,” but until now had not expressly protected gay employees from workplace discrimination.

(bolding mine)

Not that I would eat there anyway, but this is good news. I’m sure it’s personally good news to a certain closeted Cracker Barrel manager who shall remain nameless.

[Mtgman]

*Originally posted by ava *
As for the first part, my girlfriend wants to be a lawyer. Unfortunately, she has been told many times that it will be extremely difficult for her to do so, since she will recieve discrimination from judges, other lawyers, clients and juries. She knows that she is limited in her career options just because of the way she naturally is at birth. I have another ts friend who is looking for a job right now and running into the same obsticles.

And as soon as this discrimination occurs I think your girlfriend should have legal recourse against everyone but the clients who refuse her services(clients have the priveledge of choosing thier attorney of course). Judges, other lawyers, and juries have a duty to perform their duties fairly, they don’t have the freedom to choose to believe someone else’s arguement simply because of the sexual preference of the presenter. Clients are responsible to no one but themselves as to how they decide which lawyer to use. Corporations with non-discrimination policies which apply to vendor selection processes(typically large corporations) would be in violation of their own policies for discrimination of this type. The individual who performed the selection could be disciplined within the framework of the company for discriminating against a homosexual.(depending on the policy of course)**

And as for the second part, i should have clarified. I ment it more, “if I can’t even be treated civily while simply walking down the street, I don’t expect to be treated civily at my work place.”**

And this is the disagreement. I say you SHOULD expect to be treated fairly in a professional framework, especially in a framework with established policies on discrimination like the legal system. These anti-discrimination policies should apply to homo/hetero discrimination and one should have every expectation to be treated fairly on the job once such laws/policies are in place. ATM these are not universal, but that’s what laws like the one in the OP are trying to change right?

Enjoy,
Steven