Arrow-right Camera
The Spokesman-Review Newspaper
Spokane, Washington  Est. May 19, 1883

Our View: Referendum weak

The Spokesman-Review

If you want to repeal the law that bans discrimination based on sexual orientation, you have one more week to sign petitions for Referendum 65, which would put the new state law to a public vote this fall.

What will you lose if you fail to act? What horrors can you expect if this law is allowed to stand? Judging from what has happened in cities, towns and counties with similar laws that have been on the books for many years, not much.

It’s possible that lives have been altered because people no longer are able to legally discriminate against gays and lesbians when it comes to employment, housing and education. It would be interesting to hear those testimonials:

“”I used to be able to hire only those people I knew to be heterosexuals, and if they fooled me, I could fire them. Now that I can’t factor in sexual orientation, business just isn’t the same.”

“”Who knows whom I’m renting to and what goes on in their apartments? It’s tough being a landlord these days.”

Of course, there’s the argument that such discrimination never was occurring in the first place. State Sen. Brad Benson, R-6th District, recently told Referendum 65 advocates that there is no statistical proof that gays and lesbians suffer from discrimination. Now that the burden of proof has been reversed, will he produce statistics about the number of people harmed by this human rights law? If human rights laws are pointless, what’s the point in repealing them?

This is where the debate turns from what has happened to what could happen. The law needs to be repealed, say its foes, because it will lead to other bad things. This is where the DVD “Sound the Alarm” comes in. This short video has been sent to more than 5,000 churches across the state. It wasn’t produced with Referendum 65 in mind, so its generalized fears don’t speak directly to the human rights law.

The producers say the law is “part of a systematic effort to normalize homosexuality and to take us one dramatic step closer to same-sex marriage and the silencing of our pulpits.”

But the clear language of the law refutes that contention. An amendment to the final bill clearly states that the law “does not create any precedent, basis or right to same-sex marriage and that the law must not be construed as creating any precedent, basis or right to same-sex marriage.” Another amendment states that “inclusion of sexual orientation will not be construed to modify or supersede state law relating to marriage.”

As for “normalizing” homosexuality, the law “is not to be construed as an endorsement of any specific belief, practice, behavior or orientation.” And free speech inside or outside the pulpit is not infringed by the law.

Another baseless fear is that the law will become a gift to litigators. Again, that hasn’t happened thus far, so what’s the holdup?

This campaign is designed to show how the “special rights” (that is, the rights everyone else has) conferred upon gays and lesbians are going to infringe on other people’s rights. Before signing up, ask yourself how you’ve been harmed in the seven years since Spokane has had a human rights ordinance.