HomeMy WebLinkAboutNon-Discrimination Public Comment from Steve Kirchhoff 4-28-14From:Steve Kirchhoff
To:Agenda
Subject:testimony on NDO
Date:Sunday, April 27, 2014 6:33:07 PM
Dear Commissioners,
First and foremost, I extend my good wishes to you all as you begin debating theNDO. You will undoubtedly be assailed by all sides and will face difficult choices. Ihope good sense and positive spirit and forward-thinking prevail in whatever youdecide.
My only comment on the ordinance is that it should not include any exemptionswhatever. It is unlikely that an NDO would be a topic of discussion if LGBTQindividuals were not hounded by religious practitioners, who impute a moralturpitude to persons who identify as LGBTQ. Therefore, exempting, in whole or inpart, religious organizations, who make up a large part of the reason for needing anNDO in the first place, seems to defeat the purpose of enacting such an ordinance.
I would offer a few specific recommendations about the language of the draft NDO:
In the Purpose and Intent section I would encourage you to delete the last fourwords of the second to last sentence, “…and exercise of religion.” Likewise, inDefinitions, number 3), I would encourage you to delete most of the sentence,leaving only the following: “’Employer’ means an employer of one or more personsor an agent of the employer.” Finally, I would encourage you to delete fromDefinitions number 9) sections b, c, and d.
It is unclear to me, probably because I am unfamiliar with federal laws andmandates, why lodges and fraternal organizations and such are allowed todiscriminate on the basis of sexual identity.
Two final notes, one historical and the other contemporary.
The first is a quote from George Washington’s famous letter to the Touro Synagogueof Newport, RI, which he visited in 1790, more than a year before the final adoptionof the Bill of Rights. His letter is a response to a missive received from themacknowledging their gratitude for his visit; and in his letter he conveys a noble andstill-timely sentiment about the limits of religious freedom. He succinctly delimits the
scope of religious freedom by stating that no religion is above another and that allreligions are enjoined to refrain from imposing their doctrines on others:
It is now no more that toleration is spoken of as if it were the indulgence ofone class of people that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent naturalrights, for, happily, the Government of the United States, which gives tobigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, [italics mine] requires onlythat they who live under its protection should demean themselves as goodcitizens in giving it on all occasions their effectual support.
Washington suggests that religions must support the limiting laws of government,which in turn will steadfastly curb the infringement of one form of religious beliefand practice on different forms. For our purposes, Washington’s argumentconstitutes a negative response to religious groups in Bozeman who would use theirbeliefs and practices as the basis for discriminating against certain classes ofindividuals. I think Washington would say “no” to the religious exemptions in yourNDO.
And finally, I wanted to pass along the results of a poll conducted 13 months ago bythe Washington Post. The Post was seeking to understand Americans’ attitudestoward same-sex marriage, and it found that, overall, 58% of Americans favormarriage equality. More importantly, when looking at respondents aged eighteen totwenty-nine, a full 81% were in favor.
This finding suggests that future leaders in our nation will likely reject religiousorganizations’ attempts to mistreat others on the pretext of sincere religious beliefs.The future seems to be on the side of the LGBTQ individuals that your NDO aims toprotect—and is against the wishes of certain religions that still cling mightily to theidea that their own, supposedly “true” convictions exempt them from respecting thelesser convictions of people who differ from themselves.
In both the letter by Washington and the poll results, one finds clarity andconsistency in the American spirit, which cherishes true freedom—the kind that isduty-bound to cherish another’s freedom as if it were one’s own. This spirit reachesback to our Founders and is reflected in the conscience of our up-and-cominggeneration of Americans. I hope you will support this genuine understanding offreedom in your eventual decision on the NDO.
As usual, I wish you all the best as you do the city’s business,
Steve Kirchhoff