COLUMN RIGHT/ JOSEPH FARAH : Job Bias Law Takes a Walk in Purple Zone : Some cities may prohibit discrimination in hiring on the basis of appearance.

Here’s a little common-sense test:

-- Imagine you run a small Jewish deli and you have an opening for a checkout cashier. In walks an applicant with a swastika tatooed prominently on his arm. Do you hire him?

--Pretend you own a fast-food restaurant in a predominantly black neighborhood and you need a short-order cook. The most technically qualified person seeking the job is a skinhead fond of wearing a T-shirt emblazoned with the words “White Power.” Does he get the job?

--Now let’s say you’re a newspaper editor looking for someone to cover the police beat. An experienced professional journalist wants the job, but he shows up for the interview wearing a dress. Does he get a chance to be our ace crime reporter?

If you live and work in the California cities of Santa Cruz or San Francisco, the answer to all three of these questions had better be yes or you could be in for serious trouble in the coming months. Next Tuesday, the Santa Cruz City Council is set to approve an ordinance banning discrimination based on the way people look, and the San Francisco Board of Supervisors may not be far behind.

Of course, not all of the potential job-discrimination dilemmas employers find themselves in are as clear cut as those outlined above. For instance, many people will sympathize with Cooper Hazen, one of the complainants who inspired the Santa Cruz ordinance. Hazen’s employer had tolerated his purple hair, five earrings and nose ring, but when the psychiatric aide came to work with a post in his pierced tongue, that was the last straw.

Hazen was quoted by an Associated Press reporter as saying: “Thith ith wha gah me thierd.” (Translation: “This is what got me fired.”) Just think, say the proponents of Santa Cruz’s “lookism” ordinance, if the law had been in effect, Hazen would still have a job today. Yes, indeed, wouldn’t that be a step forward for mental health.

Now, just in case you’re inclined to shrug off these proposals as the latest distraction from the land of fruits and nuts, keep in mind there’s precedent here. Santa Cruz Councilman--er, Councilperson--Neal Coonerty says he got the idea for the sweeping anti-discrimination law from existing ordinances in Washington, D.C., and Michigan.

But there is no question that the latest California proposals go further than any other anti-bias laws. For instance, the Santa Cruz ordinance would not only ban discrimination against homosexuals, lesbians and bisexuals, it would also protect as a special class of citizen “transgendered individuals,” which, presumably, means transsexuals.

In fact, since the law would ban discrimination for any “sexual orientation”; pedophiles, necrophiles and those who prefer bestiality will all get consideration when it comes to employment and housing applications. Can affirmative action be much further down the road?

There is literally something for just about everyone in the Santa Cruz package. By banning discrimination for reasons of height and weight, almost everyone is eligible for victim status. This law is a gold mine not only for Gloria Allred-style lawyers, but for the new sensitivity fascists who believe that only the long arm of government can save us from ourselves.

Is a law banning discrimination for reasons of personal appearance really necessary? Has there been a rash of unfair, unjustified terminations by employers based on looks? Are landlords throwing people out of their homes because they are ugly?

Not exactly, admit those pushing such laws. They are needed, they say, for their “educational value” and as expressions of community sentiment.

But what do laws like this really accomplish? They force government into every facet of our lives. They make rational judgments suspect. They intimidate business people. They paralyze routine commerce. They create new bureaucracies and, thus, new non-productive government jobs that can be used for political patronage. They destroy self-reliance and create dependence. They kill the logic of market-based decision-making. Worst of all, laws like those proposed in Santa Cruz defy simple common sense.

Silly as these laws are, they’re no laughing matter, so you had better wipe that smirk off your face. Remember, the “lookism” police are watching.