Letters to the Editor

Feedback: Gays don’t need protection

This letter is in response to Diana Buzard’s ‘Heading toward gay genocide?’ (Whidbey News-Times, May 11, 2005).

Rejecting the anti-discrimination bill is not the same as advocating discrimination. It is a rejection of special dispensation for a lifestyle choice.

Yes, I am a Christian, but I also have friends involved in the homosexual lifestyle. They know how I feel about it, but they also are aware that I love them regardless. I do not feel they are threat to me, my children or my faith.

I believe that one’s lifestyle choice should not be figured into one’s qualifications for most jobs, any more than one’s race or gender should ever have any bearing on employment. But I do not want to hear the claim of, “I wasn’t hired because I’m gay,” like we currently hear, “I wasn’t hired because I’m black, white, Asian, female, male.” As soon as such a statement is uttered, any possibility that a person was not hired because they were not qualified is ignored and all attention is focused on the one issue.

As far as the potential for “banishment” or loss of jobs, income, etc., the overall standard of living amongst gay middle-class men is higher than that of straight middle-class men.

Maybe an anti-discrimination measure should be passed for white, Christian, heterosexual men?

Jen Osburn

Oak Harbor

We encourage an open exchange of ideas on this story's topic, but we ask you to follow our guidelines for respecting community standards. Personal attacks, inappropriate language, and off-topic comments may be removed, and comment privileges revoked, per our Terms of Use. Please see our FAQ if you have questions or concerns about using Facebook to comment.
blog comments powered by Disqus

Read the Oct 19
Green Edition

Browse the print edition page by page, including stories and ads.

Browse the archives.

Friends to Follow

View All Updates