Monday, November 3, 2008

Equal Laws for Equal Rights

Kristina Serge
Persuasive Writing
Diane Varner

First Draft

The objective of this paper is to associate the reader with the reality of LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) rights. Unequal rights and fear in the workplace create unhealthy, unbalanced, and unconstitutional atmospheres. Looking back, there have been injustices towards this group throughout history. Learning about the past can lead to better legislation in the future. The problems today are not readily viewed on mainstream media outlets. Knowledge about the issue breeds more informed decisions. Something can be done, however. By creating laws to protect harassment based on sexual orientation, the workplace can become a safer environment for both homosexuals and heterosexuals.

There is a long history of workplace discrimination. Much that is documented from the time when the Civil Rights Act was passed reflects on conditions in government agencies where they were not satisfactory. An article written in the 1970s entitled “Homosexuality: Morals and Security” discusses that homosexuals working in government positions would lead to the public’s loss of confidence in the agency or other dangers such as blackmail. Another article from the 1970s called “Homosexual Legal Rights” details why many laws were in place against homosexual behavior. There are a total of five arguments: it is a cause of moral decay; it would remove the pressure to seek medical help for their condition; psychiatric help is not a reasonable alternative to punishment; permitting in private would lead to homosexual acts permitted in public; it would relax all moral standards. But, in 1973, the American Psychiatric Association removed it from the list of possible illnesses. From then homosexuality was looked upon as a choice and not something that be cured. There have been many small victories for the LGBT community outside of the government. But, the United States needs to set a better example in its actions as well as its legislation so the rest of the country will feel compelled towards acceptance.

The problem is that nothing is being done to regulate harassment in the workplace. According to an article from 2007 in Workforce Management, “an employee can be fired for sexual orientation in 31 states and for gender identity in 39” (Schoeff.) That is an alarming amount that not many Americans know. The fact of the matter is that not many cases are brought to court. In an article titled “Fighting Back,” the authors say the reason for this is “partially because many victims fear the social consequences of publicizing their abuse” (Kleiman 304.) Same sex harassment happens daily in the workplace with no repercussions. According to Lambda Legal Defense director, Beatrice Dohrm, “Too many harassers have been allowed to argue that they can get away with harassing people of the same sex because they are not attracted to them- that it is simply horseplay” (Romesburg.) Many conservatives believe that creating a new set of federal laws or adding an amendment would be frivolous. Since there are already some laws on the state level, having more would be confusing. But by not having equal protection for every citizen there is a disparity in rights. There are clear ways to go about providing everyone with protection.

There is a lot being done below the federal government level. Some states have legislation against same sex sexual harassment, such as California. This means that employees can win in same sex harassment law suits. According to Kleiman, “87 percent of Fortune 500 companies now include sexual orientation in their nondiscrimination policies” (Kleiman 311.) In many cases, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 can be used to win these lawsuits brought to court. This Title bars sexual harassment without the inclusion of sexual orientation. But, in one of the most famous cases, Oncale vs Sundowner Offshore Services (an offshore oil rigging company) the Supreme Court ruled that same- sex harassment fell under Title VII. This can only happen if the plaintiff can argue that the harassment was based on gender nonconformity. It has worked in cases brought to courts by both homosexuals and heterosexuals. Seven of the nine cases that have been brought to court have won, but there need to be laws to regulate the handling of future cases.

There is one law that can be passed to help end this workplace discrimination. The Employee Non-Discrimination Act (EDNA) is currently being looked at by the House and Senate. One version of the law protects gender identity based discrimination, while another does not. It would protect the LGBT community from unfair hiring and firing practices as well as same sex sexual harassment. There are also advocacy groups that can be supported. They include Lambda Legal, GLAAD, Amnesty International, and the International Lesbian and Gay Association. To get involved go to their websites for more details.

By enacting laws for the workplace, gays and lesbians will be in safer environments. Hopefully it would lead people to become more accepting of homosexual lifestyles. With the right leadership, Americans can be shown how to treat everyone equally. With the right legislation, Americans will need to treat everyone equally.

Works Cited

Kleiman, Lawrence. (2007). Fighting Back. J. Individual Employment Rights Vol. 12(4)

303-312. Retrieved October 29, 2008, from Academic Search Premier.

Romesburg, D. (2002, December 10). November 25, 1997: A Case for Same Sex Harassment

On the Job. Advocate, Retrieved October 29, 2008, from Academic Search Premier.

Schoeff Jr., M. (2007, September 24). Bias Bill Raises Concern About Gender Identity.

Workforce Management, 86(16), 7-8. Retrieved October 29, 2008, from Academic

Search Premier.

Stencel, S. (1974). Homosexual Legal Rights. Editorial Research Reports 1974 (Vol. 1).

Washington: CQ Press. Retrieved Sept 29, 2008, from CQ Electronic Library, CQ

Researcher Online, http://library.cqpress.com

Worsnop, R.L. (1963). Homosexuality: Morals and Security. Editorial Research Reports 1963

(Vol. 2). Washington: CQ Press. Retrieved Sept 29, 2008, from CQ Electronic Library,

CQResearcher Online, http://library.cqpress.com


1 comment:

Amanda Dalton said...

Overall, you provided a clear explanation of what you are going to discuss throughout your paper. Your thesis seems strong and you have many other ideas that will support it in your paper. The definitional argument is very concise and clearly stated. As we talked in class, making the idea aware that everyone, no matter what their gender is or whether they are lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender, should not effect the way they are treated in the workplace, or anywhere for that matter. I felt you explained this very effectively. The amount of sources that you gave really helped with your paper, especially how you found credible sources from the past few decades. Showing how the issue of equal rights need equal laws has been an on-going process, and the sources for different advocacy groups help your argument.

In terms of improvement, I don’t have too many suggestions because I feel it is a pretty solid paper. One idea I might suggest at the end of your paper is to describe the advocacy groups in some detail instead of mentioning the websites. Since our next draft is going to be more in depth, I figured this could be a great way to expand on your overall issue and provide some additional information about the groups that are fighting for equal rights.