Irvine’s Measure N and the Issues of Human Rights and Privacy

Christina L. Shea’s Commentary (Oct. 22) in defense of Measure N is fraught with the hypocrisy, contradiction and legal ignorance characteristic of the entire campaign by the Irvine Values Coalition to trash Irvine’s Human Rights Ordinance. It is hypocritical, as well as illogical, for Shea to claim that the ordinance is unnecessary because there is no discrimination against homosexuals in Irvine. How absurd! The coalition’s campaign clearly shows--in word and deed--that latent discrimination against homosexuals is all too abundant in Irvine. We dare not imagine how fashionable it will become to openly manifest such attitudes if the “sexual orientation” clause of the ordinance is repealed.

The question of whether homosexuality is behavior-based or an innate characteristic is legally irrelevant. We do not need to decide whether one is born a homosexual or becomes one in order to treat homosexuals as a protected minority.

Protection against discrimination neither implies nor creates “special rights” or “affirmative action requirement.” To reject Measure N is to affirm our collective belief in the right of all individuals to lead lives free from unwarranted governmental intrusion and discrimination. Irvine’s Human Rights Ordinance cannot eliminate Shea’s suspicion and hatred of homosexuals, but it can prevent those attitudes from determining the course of local public policy.

MARK P. PETRACCA

Irvine