Coalition Aims to Block AIDS Anti-Bias Law in Pasadena

A coalition of health care workers, religious conservatives and individuals from around the region have launched a campaign to defeat a proposed ordinance that would ban discrimination against victims of acquired immune deficiency syndrome.

About 120 protesters, many of whom said they were alerted to the proposal by radio broadcasts on several religious stations, attended a meeting of the Board of Directors Monday saying the proposed ordinance is morally wrong and a danger to public health.

The board was scheduled to give final approval to the ordinance Monday but delayed action until next week to allow more testimony on the issue.

Cathy Kay, an organizer of the protest, said the group will turn out in force again next week and is prepared to fight the measure at the ballot box by calling for a citywide referendum, if it is approved.

‘Hysterical’ Campaign

“This ordinance opens the door one more crack for gay rights,” Kay said. “It just gives more teeth to discriminate against people who do not have AIDS. This discriminates against the healthy people.”

Supporters of the ordinance said the protesters, many of whom came from outside of the city, have launched a “hysterical” campaign that only serves to foster more discrimination against AIDS victims.

“Their unfounded fears make the case that this ordinance is needed,” said Tim Brick, a member of the city’s AIDS Community Coordinating Committee. “The purpose of the ordinance is that facts should speak over fears.

“There is absolutely no health basis for discriminating against people with AIDS,” he said.

Similar Laws Elsewhere

Director Rick Cole said that other cities, such as Los Angeles, have passed similar laws and have not experienced the public health and economic disasters predicted by opponents.

“This ordinance is not foreign, strange or untested,” he said. “It has worked for three years in the city next door, and it has not sparked any mass exodus.”

The AIDS Community Coordination Committee, composed of about 50 church, health care and social service agencies, has hailed the ordinance as a major step toward controlling the AIDS epidemic.

Jim Dionisio, another committee member, said the ordinance would allow victims of the disease to openly seek help without fear of discrimination.

“This type of ordinance is the cornerstone of containing the epidemic,” he said. “This would allow people to come out because they are protected. Would you get tested if you knew you would lose your job or your home?”

If approved, Pasadena’s AIDS anti-discrimination ordinance would make it illegal to refuse housing, employment, medical treatment, or business or educational services to any victim of AIDS.

Other areas that have passed similar ordinances include Berkeley, Los Angeles, Oakland, San Diego, San Diego County, San Francisco, Santa Monica and West Hollywood.

6-Month Jail Term

The ordinance would also provide protection to those who are simply perceived to have AIDS or have been in close contact with AIDS victims, such as family members.

The ordinance would allow the city attorney to take legal action against a violator, who could be jailed for six months and fined up to $1,000.

Religious organizations would be exempt from the ordinance. Exemptions would also be allowed if it could be proved that the discrimination is necessary to protect the safety of the public.

Dionisio said some of the provisions of the ordinance duplicate state or federal laws prohibiting discrimination against the physically handicapped.

But there are important gaps to be filled by local legislation, he said. For example, state and federal laws may not protect family members of AIDS victims from discrimination, while the Pasadena ordinance does, he said.

Quick Response

Brick added that local legislation is needed to allow a quick response to acts of discrimination.

“This establishes a clear and immediate remedy for someone who, frankly, doesn’t have long to live,” Brick said.

But opponents of the measure say the ordinance would establish reverse discrimination. It would put the “rights of the infected above those of the uninfected,” said Missy Hancock, legislative counsel to Rep. William E. Dannemeyer (R-Fullerton).

Dannemeyer, a conservative legislator, is a sponsor of state Proposition 102, which would require doctors, blood banks and others to report the names of those who have tested positive for AIDS to local health officers.

The proposition, which will appear on the Nov. 8 ballot, has been opposed by the American Civil Liberties Union.

‘Moral Decision’

Kay said the ordinance denies landlords and employers the freedom to choose who they rent to or hire.

“I believe it would be wrong to rent to someone who participates in sodomy,” she said. “They have made a moral decision, and I will respect that decision. I hope they respect my decision.”

The freedom of choice issue is critical for health care workers who run a heightened risk of being accidentally exposed to the virus, said Kay, a registered nurse.

“Would you like to do mouth-to-mouth resuscitation on someone who has AIDS?” she asked members of the board. “Put yourself in my shoes.

“If I were to contract AIDS, either I would no longer sleep with my husband or he would contract it as well; and then we would have four orphan children. There should be freedom of choice.”

But supporters of the ordinance called the arguments from Kay and others narrow-minded.

Risk Factor

Dionisio said it was clear discrimination to deny jobs or housing to AIDS victims because there is virtually no risk of contracting the disease through casual contact.

Charlotte Lee, a nurse at St. Luke Medical Center who teaches others how to take precautions in treating AIDS patients, acknowledged there are additional risks for health care workers. But she added there are well-established procedures to protect against accidental infection.

Dr. Edmond Clinton, head of the Pasadena Medical Society, also said that health care workers have an ethical obligation to treat AIDS patients.

Brick said he was surprised at the opposition to the ordinance since it has the support of major community groups and organizations in the city involved in treating victims of the disease.

The organizations include Huntington Memorial Hospital, NAACP, American Red Cross, Pasadena Unified School District, Chamber of Commerce, Las Encinas Hospital and All Saints AIDS Service Center.

“What’s strange is that all the organizations that have been doing AIDS organizing and care are all together on this,” Brick said. “All of a sudden a small religious group is trying to make something of this.”

The coalition of protesters included members of Focus on the Family, a Pomona-based organization involved with family issues, and the Fullerton-based California Physicians for a Logical AIDS Response, which is co-sponsoring Proposition 102.