On the radio program of Family Research Council's head Tony Perkins (no slouch in lying about lgbt employment protections himself), King said if gays weren't so open about their sexual orientation, they wouldn't be discriminated against:
Perkins expressed fear that "someone could come in dressed one day as a woman or a man, the next day they come in dressed as the opposite sex" and an employer would be "helpless to do anything about it."King agreed, saying the legislation opens the door to Christian businesses getting entrapped by the "homosexual activist lobby."
"I can imagine someone coming in and interviewing one day in man's clothes and come back the next day and apply for a job in woman's clothes, and then setting up a lawsuit in a sting operation to harass our religious organizations," he said.
King then told a story about his days in the Iowa Senate, when gay activists came to lobby a fellow Republican lawmaker, state Sen. Jerry Behn of Boone, for protected status for sexual orientation and gender identity.
He said, "Let me ask you a question. Am I heterosexual or homosexual?" And they looked him up and down -- and actually they should have known -- but they said "We don't know." And he said "Exactly my point. If you don't project it, if you don't advertise it, how would anyone know to discriminate against you?" And that's at the basis of this.If people wear their sexuality on their sleeve, then they want to bring litigation against someone that they would point their finger at and say "you discriminate," it is an entrapment that is legalized by the ENDA Act, it appears to, and its a violation of the individual rights of employers to, at their own discretion, decide who they want to hire and who they want to fire. We don't need more federal mandates. And we surely don't need a political statement, and that's what this is, too. This is the homosexual activist lobby taking it out on the rest of society. They are demanding affirmation for their lifestyle. That's at the bottom of this.
What he, Perkins, and some others want to forget (and subsequently wants everyone else to forget) is that our lgbt identities encompass more than sex acts. We have lives, relationships, and families; none of which we should have to hide to suit the mindsets of ignorant folks who think that homosexuality is encompassed by a mere sex act that one takes care of in a secluded place between going to the grocery store and picking up the laundry.
The lgbt community has evolved beyond that nonsense. And if an lgbt wants to put a picture of his/her partner or his family on his/her desk, there should be no fear of reprisal. If an lgbt wants to talk about his/her partner, there should be no fear of reprisal. No lgbt should have to worry about reprisal for doing the same thing that many heterosexuals do on the job.
You see that's what it's about - the ability to be open about our lives and our families without fear, just like everybody else.
What King is saying is that lgbts should place ourselves in a psychological closet so as not to interfere with the worldview that he and others have about such things as family.
Sorry my friend, but it's not going to happen. Closets are for clothes, not for people.
Related posts: