Voting on Measure N to Test Fear, Prejudice

Last year Irvine enacted a human rights ordinance that protects, among others, gays and lesbians. It would be a terrible mistake if residents voted Nov. 7 to weaken that ordinance by deleting all references to sexual orientation. Voters in Irvine should reject Measure N, which is rooted in baseless fears and prejudice.

If anyone wondered whether it was necessary to include sexual orientation in the first place, the strong anti-homosexual attitudes that have been displayed by those seeking to weaken the ordinance is evidence in itself for the need to keep it intact.

The election, which has drawn widespread interest, has nothing to do with whether homosexuality is a chosen trait or an inborn way of life. Nor does it have anything to do with religious beliefs, although some misguided Christian fundamentalists are trying to make a person’s position on the measure a test of his or her proper religious convictions.

The election, in a word, is about discrimination. And there is nothing religious in the sentiment to discriminate against any group in jobs or housing. But discrimination will be the message conveyed if residents vote yes on Measure N.

If, as proponents claim, the rights of homosexuals are already fully protected by law, do not the same laws also cover all the other categories--like race, religion and national origin? Why then, not seek to strike the entire ordinance, instead of just singling out sexual orientation for repeal? Moral judgments, not legal ones, are being made.

It is ironic that a city ordinance intended to unite the community is being used by some misguided residents and crusading outsiders instead to divide it with appeals to people’s baser fears.

No one’s rights are safe unless everyone’s rights are secure. Proponents of Measure N like to argue that homosexuals are not a bona fide minority group. But any group being discriminated against deserves the protection of the law and the support of the community.

In considering how to vote on Measure N, whether you believe homosexuals can change their life style at will is not important. What you think of the homosexual life style, even if you find it abhorrent, is really of no consequence either. The issue is that everyone has the right to seek jobs, and housing, without being subjected to prejudice. Nor can the community pick and choose what people it wants and does not want--and, by protecting some groups and excluding others, whom it may discriminate against.

Irvine’s human rights ordinance was an attempt to oppose such discrimination. And to send a message to all minorities that they are wanted, needed and, indeed, are welcome in the city. A no vote on Measure N will endorse that message in the strongest terms possible.

ETHICS:

The proper authorities should determine whether Sen. Alan Cranston violated ethics rules in meeting with a federal official about the failure of Lincoln Savings & Loan Assn. of Irvine. But clearly his behavior was not senatorial. M4