The Tolerance Police are on the march again, it would seem.
This time, it’s in San Antonio, Texas. And if you think the Texas Abortion debate was heated, just wait until this one hits full stride. Because they are planning to censor who is “fit” for to work for San Antonio. (Maybe those who aren’t can be provided some sort of a colored armband? But I digress)
No, this isn’t a law forbidding anyone from exhibiting chronically bad judgment (e.g. Weiner) from taking office. This isn’t an exclusion of felons (although I hope such provisions already exist).
This is a proposed law excluding people who are insensitive. If you aren’t hip enough to sashay with the metrosexual march of progress, then don’t apply for the job.
A few excerpts:
“Think it’s hot in Texas these days? Just wait a few weeks, until the San Antonio City Council ends its summer hiatus and resumes work on a proposed change to its nondiscrimination ordinances that apparently will discriminate against all who take the Bible at its word and follow it.”
“That’s because the change relates a penalty for those who ever exhibit a ‘bias,’ which clearly could include adopting the Bible’s condemnation of homosexuality, with a permanent ban on participation in city government, business or employment.”
“Opponents of the plan, which would add ‘sexual orientation’ and ‘gender identity’ to the nondiscrimination ordinances, charge it is a violation of constitutional Article VI, paragraph 3, which states, ‘[N]o religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.'”
And it gets better —
“The new ordinance would state: “No person shall be appointed to a position if the city council finds that such person has, prior to such proposed appointment, engaged in discrimination or demonstrated a bias, by word or deed, against any person, group or organization on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, veteran status, age, or disability.”
“Anyone in office who demonstrates a bias would be considered guilty of “malfeasance” and removed from office.” [emphasis mine]
Read more: WND.com