RECENT  POSTS:  » GLAAD: Q&A with former 'ex-gay' activist Yvette Schneider: 'I’ve never met an 'ex-gay' man I thought was not still attracted to men' » Head of Virginia's anti-equality org: 'open season to discriminate against anyone who believes that children deserve a mom and a dad' » Force behind Virginia's marriage ban ably demonstrates animus behind it » NOM to show rest of world its impressive ability to exacerbate loss » Bryan Fischer: Marriage equality supporters are like baseball's legendarily winning team » On NC's Attorney General and the bipartisan hunt for a 'culture war' off ramp » Read: 4th Circuit strikes down Virginia marriage ban » GLAAD: Change is possible: Former 'ex-gay' activist Yvette Schneider 'celebrates the worthiness and equality of all people' » Man who stands in way of Texas equality works to stunt economic windfall as well » Miami-Dade Circuit judge rules state marriage ban unconstitutional; stays ruling  

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


Parshall's ENDA ('Exotic' Nonsense Demeaning Actuality)

by Jeremy Hooper

"exotic new value systems"

The above is how Craig Parshall (pic, l.), National Religious Broadcasters executive and husband to extremely anti-gay talk radio host Janet Parshall, recently Craig-Parshalldescribed the protections contained with the Employment Nondiscrimination Act (ENDA). At a Senate hearing, he said this.

Let's think about the phrase for a second, shall we? In terms of "value systems": What we are talking about with ENDA is the right for employees to work without fear that their sexual orientation is going to be a factor in the paycheck-collection process. Not non-profit religious institutions, mind you, as they are exempt. And not businesses of under 15 people, since they are also immune. We are talking about for-profit American businesses and decent, tax-paying Americans who simply want to work, contribute, and earn without fear of LGBT-hostile retributions. These are the "values" at play.

Now let's look at "new": What is new about protection vulnerable groups? We already protect people on the basis of race, gender, and yes -- RELIGION! What LGBT people are seeking in for the inclusion of sexual orientation and gender identity, categories that make up a demonstrably sizable portion of unfair employment matters. The conceit of the protections is in no way "new." LGBT people are in no way "new." The idea that this is a fair-minded country should not be "new" either.

And now for the most bizarre of Mr. Parshall's words: "exotic." This implies that LGBT-centric protections are outrageous, extraordinary, foreign, outlandish, etc. This is a convenient idea for Mr. Parshall, someone who, along with his wife, has made a large portion of his living out of bashing LGBT rights for sport. But for those of us prefer to live among and around ALL of our neighbors rather than living in hostility towards certain groups, the LGBT population is in no way "exotic." It is a population that has been fully domesticated. We don't even bite (unless asked).

If you ask us, the "new value system" that America should have unapologetically branded "exotic" was the rising tide of religious extremism that arose in the '70s and '80s in order to completely hijack "morality" in this nation. But we the people didn't -- we instead chose to sit back and let self-appointed moral authoritarians hurt and dehumanize at will. The slurs, abuses, and decades of unreasoned time-wasting is nothing less than shameful. It's time to ENDA the nonsense.

But then again, we're Parshall partial.

*Parshall's quote and Focus On the Family's support for the same: Lawmakers Consider Special Rights for Homosexuals [FOF]

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

Your thoughts

Funny that their anti-ENDA rhetoric is based on supposed "religious freedom." Some justify race bias on the same Bible which these people use to demonize gays - What about THEIR religious freedom?

When the current employment nondiscrimination measures were put in place, what reasoning was used to discredit them?

Posted by: PINGAS | Nov 9, 2009 10:10:45 AM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy

Related Posts with Thumbnails