RECENT  POSTS:  » And now NOM is literally pleading with its (theoretical) supporters » Add 'professional advocate for anti-gay scouting' to list of bygone career choices » NOM to lasso the White House with a rosary. Or something. » NOM's new plan? To beat up its org-crushing loss until it becomes a win. » By the time you read this headline, we'll be ten more seconds beyond stagnant anti-gay 'culture wars' » Video: America cannot wait—to purchase American Family Association radio equipment? Huh?! » Huckabee 2016: 'cause church and state aint gonna marry themselves » EEOC does wonky, under-radar thing that could lay groundwork for definitive nondiscrimination protections » Maggie Gallagher, now that you've lost on marriage, might you lose these deceptive ways as well? » Crowdfunding discriminatory business owners: Perfect statement on anti-gay movement's current affairs  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

10/05/2007

Video: The 'special' way they muddy facts

by Jeremy Hooper

This anti-ENDA video, part of Focus on the Family's "Stoplight" series, has been around for a bit. However, since it (a) just became embeddable on YouTube, and (b) once again exemplifies the duplicity of FOF, we thought we'd show it to you:

Okay, so obviously the whole thing is misleading, at best. But for a clear-cut, easy to understand example of how these guys misrepresent, just listen to what Stuart says beginning around the 1:42 mark. Do you see what he oh-so-cleverly does here? He says that the "The key phrase in the bill says it provides special protections for 'actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity.'" He just casually asks the listener to accept that what he's saying is factual. So if you don't know any better, it 100% sounds like the "special protections" part is included in the bill's language. However, it is ABSOLUTELY NOT! Go read it for yourself. All it does is grant employment protections on the basis of "actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity," in much the same way the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin; the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 protects individuals who are 40 years of age or older; the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 prohibits employment discrimination against qualified individuals with disabilities in the private sector, and in state and local governments; etc, etc. There is absolutely no "special protection" written or implied by the ACTUAL BILL LANGUAGE!

But then again, who the hell looks at a thing like the legislation's actual text when talking about the legislation?!? ::sigh::

ENDA Liberty [YouTube]

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails