tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10217302.post1668966229430140730..comments2024-03-21T03:45:48.679-05:00Comments on Enter the Rainbow: "Thou Shalt Fire the Lesbian"Andy B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/05944614269873479581noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10217302.post-77206338286740973902015-03-25T23:25:27.263-05:002015-03-25T23:25:27.263-05:00As an attorney, I have spent a significant amount ...As an attorney, I have spent a significant amount of time reviewing the ordinance. While I tend to be libertarian on such issues, the legislation adopted by the city suffers from fatal flaw of most legislation written by special interest groups in that the devil is in the details. The language of the legislation is broad enough that it could force a congregation that allows non-members to use its church for weddings for a fee to be forced to offer that option to a gay or lesbian couple who wants to marry. No church should be forced to Ethan if it feels it is against their beliefs. Further, the ordinance defines sexual orientation to include the practice of hetrosexual activity. Thus, if an unmarried hetrosexual couple wants to live together in an apartment, the ordince could be construed to prohibit a landlord from denying an apartment to them. Further, a creative attorney could argue that no employer could terminate a straight man who engages in adultery because that man is practicing his heterosexuality. I have seen courts adopt such extreme interpretations with other legislation.<br />Finally, the ordinance does not merely prohibit discrimination, it criminalizes it, which is unique to the ordinance. Under the Missouri Human Right Act or title 7 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, neither of which include sexual orientation or gender identification, a person who violates the legislation can be held civilly liable, but they cannot be punished criminally. However uner the city ordinance, you can be criminally.<br />While I can provide a much more in depth legal analysis, suffice it to say that if it remains on the books, it is quite likely to be declared to violate the U.S. And/or Missouri Constitution.Warren Hnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10217302.post-87800269251262348662015-03-25T21:14:23.869-05:002015-03-25T21:14:23.869-05:00Since I don't live in Springfield, I'm not...Since I don't live in Springfield, I'm not familiar with this ballot issue and it's the first I've heard of it. Regardless, the wording of the ballot question is atrocious. Being a former computer programmer, this reminds me of computer code. How could any average person make an intelligent informed vote based on this wording? I have no doubt that the text, when decoded against the original ordinance, is technically accurate. But a ballot question should be simple and understandable to Average Joe/Jane. It seems like the question was meant to be obfuscating (again, while technically accurate - I assume). My meaningless 2 cents…Steve Hhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02949671797870966063noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10217302.post-23214215607450449942015-03-25T19:23:45.455-05:002015-03-25T19:23:45.455-05:00Good article, as was the preceding one.Good article, as was the preceding one.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07446306319306147866noreply@blogger.com