Irvine’s Rights Law and the Attempt to Amend It

I have been reading the diatribe from Scott Peotter and the Irvine Values Coalition concerning the Irvine human rights ordinance for months now. I have even had the opportunity to speak with Peotter personally in a class at UCI at which he was a guest speaker. After reading the latest article to appear in The Times (“A Matter of Values, Political Semantics,” Orange County Life, May 4), I felt compelled to write.

He (Peotter) states: “What two people do in their bedroom is their own business. But when it comes out of the bedroom and is legislated over the rest of the citizens, that’s where I have problems with it.” This comment is based on one of the most common homophobic beliefs that homosexuality is merely a behavior. The only bedroom issue the rights ordinance is concerned with is that everyone in the city of Irvine has a bedroom without the fear of discrimination.

One point of the coalition’s propaganda most frequently made is that the rights ordinance establishes special privileges and protections for gays and lesbians. If they believe this, then they must believe that it also establishes special protections for blacks, Mexicans, Asians, women, single people and those physically handicapped, for there are no distinctions made between any of the groups covered by the ordinance. Excuse me; there are some distinctions made. Section III.I-103 (b) of the ordinance specifically exempts religious organizations from upholding the provisions of the ordinance--they are permitted to discriminate.

One of the most personally irritating points made by Peotter and his coalition is their belief that gays and lesbians are a threat to the “traditional” family. An ever-increasing number of gay and lesbian couples are having or adopting children. Many “undesirable” children who have been rejected by “traditional” families have found love, security and a home as adopted or foster children to homosexual couples. Though a family of a mommy and a mommy, or a daddy and a daddy and 2.5 kids is not traditional, it is not a threat. Drugs, alcohol, divorce--these are the real threats to the “traditional” family.

It is time that people like Scott Peotter get over themselves and let us get on with life. Rather than creating communities and a society that are accepting of their diversity, they are promoting anger and hatred and division. As the coalition has garnered support from the likes of (Rep. William E.) Dannemeyer and (Rep. Robert K.) Dornan, I encourage everyone who supports human rights, especially those in Irvine, to support the Irvine City Council. Vote against a small but vocal minority who have allowed their prejudices to threaten the rights of all minorities.

SCHUYLER HOFFMAN

Laguna Beach