Homosexuals and Big Business
May 21, 2014

The price Michigan pays for its intolerance toward gay people By Chris Osborn, Detroit Free Press, May 1, 2014, p. 10A.
Big firms target LGBT discrimination By Zlati Meyer, Detroit Free Press, May 1, 2014, p. 2B.
Execs want Mich. anti-bias laws for gays By Ingrid Jacques, The Detroit News, May 1, 2014, p. 1A.
State's automakeers conspicuously AWOL at turning point for gay rights By Brian Diskerson, Detroit Free Press, May 4, 2014, p. 19A.

Here is the essential argument made in all of the above newspaper articles: Big Businesses in Michigan support a ban on anti-gay discrimination because it will create a welcoming climate and smart gay people will come to our state to work and thus bolster our economy. The argument does not convince anyone. The fact that it was made in four different articles over the course of four days might convince a few politicians that it is a serviceable talking point. Boss, check out these here clips!

Chris Osborn, about to graduate from the University of Michigan when he wrote his opinion piece, claims "I cannot live in a state that does not offer me security in employment . . ." and goes on to offer reasons why he would be perfectly secure right here in Michigan:

Chris Osborn majored in economics. He will probably end up working for a big company and will go where they send him, even if it is to a state with no ban on anti-gay discrimination.

I honestly don't think "anti-gay" discrimination is much of a problem in Michigan. There are some jobs where it makes sense. A gay male bartender in an establishment patronized mostly by heterosexuals might drive away business. Maybe, maybe not, but the bar owner should decide, not the state. Some religious organizations are very friendly toward homosexuals, some are not. The organizations should set their own policies, not the state. Of course, we teach children not to tease or bully classmates who are different, but honestly, if I had any sons, I would not want them in a classroom with a flaming queen up front serving as a perverse role model. They can watch the Rocky Horror Picture Show when they're older.

The only way the proposed legislation would help big businesses would be by putting smaller businesses at greater risk of frivolous lawsuits. It would give the somewhat mal-adjusted young gay male who fails to get a job as a waiter in a family restaurant in a small town in the Upper Peninsula a huge amount of leverage. He could rake in tons of cash, his lawyer could rake in tons of cash, big city editorial writers could revel in self-righteous triumphalism, all while the restaurant in question goes out of business. What a victory for justice!

Homosexuals should look after their own. You should invite the young man to move to Ann Arbor or Ferndale. Fix him up with a job as third assistant apprentice executive coffee boy for AT&T, or whatever. It would be a human response to a human situation.

If you want to spend the next three years writing a dissertation supposedly proving that in all ways, socially, morally, and logically, any kind of discrimination against gay individuals is exactly equivalent to discrimination based on race, go ahead. I won't read it. What would be the point?

Discrimination is part of life. That is a fact. I don't mind the fay little dude at Timmie's. I don't like the queer clerk at Wal-Mart, not that it matters much. If you want to take away my right to discriminate in some area, you need to give me a really good reason.


The Ingrid Jacques article in The Detroit News contains this disquieting paragraph:

And while the initiative does not bear the imprimatur of Gov. Rick Snyder, his administration has been quietly working to build support for expanding workplace protections and he is expected to back the legislation when it it's drafted.
I hope that is not true. It could cost Rick Snyder the election.


This just in:
Time for state to stop discriminating By Jim Murray and Jeff Noel, Detroit Free Press, May 18, 2014, p. 18A.

When I tie my shoes, I start by looping the right end of the lace over then under the left end. That is the right way to tie shoes. In the State of Michigan, a person can be fired or denied housing if he or she starts by looping the left end of the lace over then under the right end. Therefore we should ammend our laws to protect individuals who tie their shoes the wrong way.

That's about all the sense there is in the Murray-Noel op-ed piece. I wonder, if I worked for AT&T, could I get fired for pointing out that Jim Murray is making a fool of himself by putting his name to such an idiotic article?

Copyright © 2014

To link to this article, try copying and pasting:

<a href="http://m3peeps.org/04/habb.htm">Homosexuals and Big Business</a>

Contact Information

[Go to m3peeps.org main index page]