| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Culture Wars |
| Ex-’gays’ accuse senators of discrimination |
| 2004-06-23 |
| EFL An activist group is accusing senators of discrimination for passing a "hate crimes" amendment on sexual orientation but refusing to consider a resolution supporting tolerance for ex-homosexuals. The resolution promoted by Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays, or PFOX, says "Congress condemns hate against ex-gays and affirms its commitment to a society that respects all people, including former homosexuals." Last Tuesday, the Senate approved 65-33 an amendment sponsored by Sen. Edward Kennedy to expand federal hate-crime laws to include homosexuals. The legislation is part of the Defense Authorization Act, which Congress must pass this year. If the bill is approved as a whole, a conference committee will reconcile the Senate’s version with the House’s, which does not include the hate crimes amendment. PFOX Executive Director Regina Griggs says she can’t understand why Republican Sen. George Allen of Virginia voted for the hate-crimes amendment but refused to co-sponsor a resolution calling for tolerance for "ex-gays." "Now who could be opposed to that?" asked Griggs, who says her group came to Capitol Hill last month for "Ex-Gay Lobby Days." Rev. Darryl Foster, an African-American former homosexual, asked Allen’s office to sign on to the resolution but was rebuffed. "Allen’s office said that acknowledging ex- gays through the resolution would amount to ’favoritism’ and the senator would not do that," said Foster. Griggs insisted it’s Allen who appears to be "playing favorites" by discriminating against former homosexuals. "Sen. Allen voted for the Kennedy gay hate-crimes law which will cost taxpayers $5 million a year to implement, yet refuses to co-sponsor our resolution, which is merely a statement condemning hate against former homosexuals and costs nothing to implement," she said. "It doesn’t make sense." PFOX says for the past two years, Kennedy’s office has refused to make an appointment to meet with his former-homosexual constituents on Ex-Gay Lobby Days. "Because of his closed door policy to ex-gays, Kennedy’s gay hate-crimes law will not protect former homosexuals," said Griggs. "Sen. Kennedy’s intolerance and ignorance of ex-gay issues, and Sen. Allen’s refusal to consider supporting a resolution for ex-gays, is unfortunate in this age of civil rights." This is getting more confusing than even I anticipated. Isn’t there a "future gay" lobby that would also like to add some riders to this Defense Bill? |
| Posted by:Super Hose |
| #3 ...to even acknowlege ex-homosexuals would be to admit that sexual orientation is not determined by genes or birth and one can leave it. We have a winner. No more entries please. CrazyFool, please pick up your prize at the courtesy desk, and thanks for telling it like it is. You da man. (NOT sarcasm) |
| Posted by: Chris W. 2004-06-23 4:29:13 PM |
| #2 I have to admit I'm confused. Anti-hate stuff for gays I can understand, there's quite a few people out there who like to go after folks that go and do stuff they don't approve of with consenting adults.. but ex-gays? is there seriously some sort of anti-x-gay movement? (with the exception of a minority within a minority I mean) |
| Posted by: Dcreeper 2004-06-23 11:08:48 AM |
| #1 This isn't scrappleface? Anyone suprised? The left only 'tolorates' those who agree with them and to even acknowlege ex-homosexuals would be to admit that sexual orientation is not determined by genes or birth and one can leave it. P.S. I think it is sickening that they add this to a farking defense bill. (And yes, this is done by both sides...). |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2004-06-23 9:16:08 AM |