Most Recommended Stories
Sat. April 21, 2007
1. Avoid making dumb comments to troops' families
2. Explore the future of 'green' living in Salem
3. Students learn about the Earth by teaching
4. 'Guns were yesterday's news, yesterday's worry, yesterday's political cause'
5. Logic behind staying in Iraq doesn't make sense
To read these "Most Recommended Stories" please use the Statesman Journal web-site link provided in the "Link's" section of this blog.
The article on the "Gay Rights" anti discrimination bill awaiting the Governors signature is another example of a minority groups exclusion from our society and its attempt to rectify the situation. In my opinion, no one in America should be exempt from employment opportunities based on their race, ethnicity, or sexual preference. This bill helps to amend some of these employment concerns. However, one rather troubling issue that this bill addresses, is that certain religious organizations are exempt from this legislation. I fully understand that some forms of Christianity perceive homo-sexuality as an abomination, but one would think that a religion which is based on the teachings of Christ would be more tolerant of others. Having studied the bible as a once practicing Catholic and later a born-again christian, the understanding that I took from Christ's teachings was acceptance and love for one's fellow human beings regardless of who or what they are. It is sad that practicing Christians cannot find a place in their hearts and institutions for anyone in need of employment.
As to the "Measure 37" debate over property development in Oregon, this issue continues to "heat up". The concerns over protecting farmlands and forests versus the rights of real estate developers to build home sites on land which they own, will only increase in the months ahead. In my opinion, it will be the faction which possesses the most "political clout" with Oregon's legislators that will ultimately prevail.
Note: The posting on the use of "eminent domain" here in Oregon, which I commented on earlier this semester, has received no new coverage as of this date. I was hoping to make this issue more of a centerpiece for this blog but I have seen nothing lately on this subject. Have a great day.
Sincerely, Mark
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Interesting about the amendement which seems to pretty much allow religious organization to discriminate. I suppose it won't hurt too much, assuming that a gay person would possibly not want to work at a place/organization which in it's teachings is against them. It would almost be like me getting offeneded that I couldn't become a member of the KKK. I'm assuming that that they approved the amendement not because they are right-winged conservtists but perhaps because religion and homosexuality is such a controversial issue which they were not attempting to solve. Well I hope that the bill (even as it stands now) will alleviate any of the job discrimination which homosexuals currently face.
Mark
Interesting post. Personally, I don't think that it's bad that religious organizations are exempt from these legislations. I know this is a touchy subject, but this is one area that I believe there should be a separation of Church and State. If certain things are condemned in a faith, then they should not be forced to accept them. Do you think that they should? I agree with L.M.A., I can see why this is controversial...
I.m.a.,I agree that most gay people would probably not want to work for such an institution in the first place. I further agree that the decision was probably based on the limited number of jobs that these organizations provide and the complexity and controversy over this "hot topic" issue. Thank you for your comments. Mark
af, While I am very in much in favor of anti-discrimination laws, I too agree that a privately funded organization should not be forced to accept people who have life-styles that are abhorant to their beliefs. For example, I am very much for laws that would enable homosexual couples to create a civil union where they could share in each others retirement and insurance plans. However, I am not for the outright marriage proposals being contested in several states. Maybe it is because of my age or religious background but I believe that "marriage" should remain between a man and a woman. For the record, this opinion is coming from a person who has several lifelong friends who are gay.
Thank you for your comments.
Mark
Post a Comment