Sen. Stuart Reid (R-Ogden) could not support SB262, the sexual orientation discrimination bill, because he holds homosexual activity to be immoral ("With SB262, Utah is at a crossroads," March 12). But SB262 had nothing to do with "homosexual activity." What it would have done is ban housing and employment discrimination against people based on their sexual orientation or gender identity.
That Reid is either unable or unwilling to make that distinction is disturbing enough. That he takes pride in being "authentic" about his myopia is simply breathtaking. One wonders against which other "immoral" groups he would condone such discrimination. Rowdy teens? Used car salesmen? Democrats?
In a perfect world free of bigotry, anti-discrimination laws would not be necessary. Clearly, we're not there yet.
- Why LDS Church's anti-discrimination stance...
- What one word best describes Barack Obama?
- In our opinion: Fix, don't repeal, Affordable...
- What The New York Times gets wrong about...
- 18 of the most heart warming and feel-good...
- Michael Gerson: America has enough problems...
- W. Bradford Wilcox: Yes, women and children...
- Letter: Antelope Island prison
- What The New York Times gets wrong... 82
- In our opinion: Fix, don't repeal,... 71
- Michael and Jenet Erickson: Utah... 50
- In our opinion: It's time to end the... 42
- Mike Lee: Tax reform shouldn't penalize... 38
- In our opinion: Fairness for all in... 37
- Jay Evensen: Will Obama visit Utah? Do... 37
- Why LDS Church's anti-discrimination... 28