"HOMOSEXUALS SHOULD BE EXECUTED"

David Popescu was invited to participate in a federal candidates' discussion at Sudbury Secondary School of Greater Sudbury, Ontario, Canada. The school is well known for its performing arts classes and takes great pride in its inclusive, open atmosphere.

According to the Toronto Sun, during the question and answer period following the 2 hour discussion a young man asked Popescu what he thought of homosexual marriages and he said "I think homosexuals should be executed. My whole reason for running is the Bible and the Bible couldn't be more clear on that point."

Candidates and teachers looked on in stunned silence as students starting calling for him to be "cut off." Despite their outrage, the discussion moved to other topics.

Principal Paul Camillo emphasized the school's inclusiveness in his closing remarks but did not condemn the statement.

In an interview he said, "We're here today to hear what the candidates have to say. As an inclusive school, we respect all other opinion although we may not agree with them -- and I know there were definitely some things said today that we don't agree with."

Gary Kinsman, an advocate for the Sudbury Gay and Lesbian community said while Popescu's extreme views are well known, he has never said something "so extreme."

"He's not simply saying that lesbians or gay men are mentally ill or somehow deviant or criminals. He's saying we should be subject to the death penalty. I think sometimes violence and hatred towards gays and lesbians gets dressed up in sort of a religious guise and is somehow tolerated. I just don't think it should be tolerated at all."

Within hours deputy police chief Frank Elsner said that the Greater Sudbury Police Service were "...actively conducting a criminal investigation in this matter." They plan to share their evidence with the provincial Attorney General's office, who will then decide if a hate crime was committed by Popescu and whether or not a criminal charge would be warranted.

If you think that this kind of thing wouldn't happen here, please read my June 6th posting, "Religious" Right Advocates Murdering Gays!"

GAY MAN APPEALS LOSS OF LAWSUIT FOR DISCRIMINATION

Brian Prowel is, by nature, an effeminate man. He crosses his legs, swings his foot, files his nails if one has a snag and has a high-pitched voice. He is also openly gay.

After years of being harassed at work with taunts, innuendo, scribblings on the bathroom walls and a myriad of other degradations, he filed a federal lawsuit on Feb. 23, 2006. He claimed sex discrimination by management and co-workers at Wise Business Forms Inc. in Butler, Pa. because he did not live up to their stereotypes of how a man should look and act.

According to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, U.S. District Judge Terrence F. McVerry said that the behavior Mr. Prowel was subjected to was "reprehensible" but dismissed his claim, saying that he was discriminated against not because of his sex but because of his sexual preference -- something that is not covered by federal law.

In 1989 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that gender stereotyping is prohibited by Title VII of the Civil Rights act of 1964. That ruling said, in essence, that employers "can't make women act feminine, and they can't make men act masculine."

This is the basis of Brian's appeal. His attorney, Timothy P. O'Brien, said that making fun of Mr. Prowel for being effeminate, calling him "Princess," and giving him a tiara all "smack" of gender stereotyping. Mr. O'Brian believes that whether the harassment was based on gender stereotyping or sexual preference, it is still a decision to be made by the jury and not a judge.

Susan Frietsche, senior staff attorney with the Women's Law Project in Pittsburgh, wrote a lengthy friend-of-the-court brief on Mr. Prowel's behalf saying that women continue to be subjected to horrific harassment when they work in positions that don't conform to gender stereotypes.

Ms. Frietsche also wrote:

"If the reasoning of the district court in this case is upheld, however, employers who seek to lock women out of these well-paying fields could evade Title VII liability through the simple expedient of lacing their gender discrimination with enough anti-lesbian slurs."

This situation is one more compelling reason why the Federal Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) MUST be passed!

"PROVIDER CONSCIENCE" HAS NO CONSCIENCE

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has recently proposed expanding protections for health care workers' religious beliefs by enacting new "provider conscience" regulations.

Under the new proposal, ‘‘no individual shall be required to perform or assist in the performance of any part of a health service program or research activity funded in whole or in part under a program administered by the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare [Secretary of Health and Human Services] if his performance or assistance in the performance of such part of such program or activity would be contrary to his religious beliefs or moral convictions.’’

Under the original HHS regulations, most of which were adopted in the 70's, the concern was to protect health care workers from being forced to participate in abortions or risk being fired. This new proposal doesn't keep such a narrow focus.

Because of its very broad scope it would, instead, allow any health care worker (from doctors and nurses to assistants and janitors) or health care institution (from mega hospitals to community free clinics) to refuse medical help and/or proceedures to anyone if that worker/institution deems that person to be "contrary to his (their) religious beliefs or moral convictions.’’

Jennifer C. Pizer, Lambda Legal senior counsel said in a statement, "Existing law already protects workers against religious discrimination. The law requires 'reasonable accommodation' of religious beliefs -- and that's a fair approach because religious freedom matters a lot. But the changes that HHS proposes are so broad, vague, and confusing that they risk inviting health workers with antigay beliefs to refuse treatment and otherwise to discriminate against very vulnerable patients."

This proposal would not only open the door for blanket discrimination against gays, it would also, according to 13 state attorney generals, limit access to abortion and birth control for victims of sexual assault. In spite of these concerns, HHS secretary Michael O. Leavitt is intent on putting this new expansion into effect.

It seems that the Bush administration's bureaucrats are trying to rush through a multitude of damaging administrative changes across the board before they're all kicked out of office.

Resources for this article were: The Advocate and Health Industry Washington Watch