If gay is the new black, is orange the new brown?
Check this out! If you're a Federal employee who just happens to like a little buggery on the side (in the time-honored prep school tradition), that's cool. In fact, if you're a Federal employee who attends Gay Pride parades, goes to the bathhouses, looks for dates at Dupont Circle, and goes out clubbing until 3AM in a mesh shirt and a banana-hammock, that's cool too. You just better not be, you know, gay.
Gay and lesbians in the entire federal workforce have had their job protections officially removed by the office of Special Counsel. The new Special Counsel, Scott Bloch, says his interpretation of a 1978 law intended to protect employees and job applicants from adverse personnel actions is that gay and lesbian workers are not covered.
Bloch said that the while a gay employee would have no recourse for being fired or demoted for being gay, that same worker could not be fired for attending a gay Pride event.
In his interpretation, Bloch is making a distinction between one's conduct as a gay or lesbian and one's status as a gay or lesbian.
"People confuse conduct and sexual orientation as the same thing, and I don't think they are," Bloch said in an interview with Federal Times, a publication for government employees.
Bloch said gays, lesbians and bisexuals cannot be covered as a protected class because they are not protected under the nation's civil rights laws.
"When you're interpreting a statute, you have to be very careful to interpret strictly according to how it's written and not get into loose interpretations," Bloch said. "Someone may have jumped to the conclusion that conduct equals sexual orientation, but they are essentially very different. One is a class . . . and one is behavior."
My head hurts.
§ 5 Comments
[ You're too late, comments are closed ]


The logic is rather tortured,
The logic *is* rather tortured, but I'd be interested to see the statute - maybe there is some compelling language there. It seems a strange distinction to make.
I wrote about this guy when
I wrote">http://www.phildennison.net/archives/000145.html]wrote about this guy when he first took the job. He's been planning this from day one -- his first action in office was to remove all language relating to workplace proection for gays from the agency's website.
Statute or no statute, there is an unrescinded Executive Order from Clinton, EO">http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=1998_register… 13087, forbidding Federal agencies from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation.
So if I were to blow a guy at
So if I were to blow a guy at a Turnpike rest area, I wouldn't so much be gay as I would be acting gay?
GL, that's right. It's who
GL, that's right. It's [em]who you are[/em] that will damn you, not [em]what you do[/em].
Hmm... as I write that down like that, it strikes me that Mr. Bloch is acting in a profoundly unAmerican fashion. Has he not read his Tocqueville? Or his Bible?
It certainly doesn't follow
It certainly doesn't follow the standard hate the sin/love the sinner dogma.