Posted on 01/18/2010 8:56:59 AM PST by wagglebee
(CNSNews.com) - Chai Feldblum, the Georgetown University law professor nominated by President Obama to serve on the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, has written that society should “not tolerate” any “private beliefs,” including religious beliefs, that may negatively affect homosexual “equality.”
Feldblum, whose nomination was advanced in a closed session of the Senate Health Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee on December 12, published an article entitled “Moral Conflict and Liberty: Gay Rights and Religion” in the Brooklyn Law Review in 2006.
“Just as we do not tolerate private racial beliefs that adversely affect African-Americans in the commercial arena, even if such beliefs are based on religious views, we should similarly not tolerate private beliefs about sexual orientation and gender identity that adversely affect LGBT [lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender] people,” the Georgetown law professor argued.
Feldblum’s admittedly “radical” view is based on what she sees as a “zero-sum game” between religious freedom and the homosexual agenda, where “a gain for one side necessarily entails a corresponding loss for the other side.”
“For those who believe that a homosexual or bisexual orientation is not morally neutral, and that an individual who acts on his or her homosexual orientation is acting in a sinful or harmful manner (to himself or herself and to others), it is problematic when the government passes a law that gives such individuals equal access to all societal institutions,” Feldblum wrote.
“Conversely, for those who believe that any sexual orientation, including a homosexual or bisexual orientation, is morally neutral, and that an individual who acts on his or her homosexual or bisexual orientation acts in an honest and good manner, it is problematic when the government fails to pass laws providing equality to such individuals.”
Feldblum argues that in order for “gay rights” to triumph in this “zero-sum game,” the constitutional rights of all Americans should be placed on a “spectrum” so they can be balanced against legitimate government duties.
All beliefs should be equal, regardless of their source, Feldblum says. “A belief derived from a religious faith should be accorded no more weight—and no less weight—than a belief derived from a non-religious source.” According to Feldman, the source of a person’s belief – be it God, spiritual energy, or the five senses – “has no relevance.”
'Identity liberty' versus 'belief liberty'
Feldblum does recognize that elements of the homosexual agenda may infringe on Americans’ religious liberties. However, Feldblum argues that society should “come down on the side” of homosexual equality at the expense of religious liberty. Because the conflict between the two is “irreconcilable,” religious liberty -- which she also calls "belief liberty" -- must be placed second to the “identity liberty” of homosexuals.
“And, in making the decision in this zero sum game, I am convinced society should come down on the side of protecting the liberty of LGBT people,” she wrote.
“Protecting one group’s identity liberty may, at times, require that we burden others’ belief liberty. This is an inherent and irreconcilable reality of our complex society,” Feldblum wrote.
“But in dealing with this conflict, I believe it is essential that we not privilege moral beliefs that are religiously based over other sincerely held core, moral beliefs. Laws passed pursuant to public policies may burden the belief liberty of those who adhere to either religious or secular beliefs.”
The full Senate must now vote on Feldblum's nomination, but a date for that vote has not yet been set.
As an EEOC commissioner, Feldblum would rule on cases involving alleged violations of federal employment law, including gender, age, and race discrimination.
”Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it.”
Mark Twain
Identity liberty??? I'm going to be charitable and assume that this barbarism refer to the freedom to believe that you are whatever you believe yourself to be.
The Freedom to Pretend trumps Freedom of Speech in this New Democratic America!
Yikes! This woman is clinically insane.
Chai needs her field plowed.What an Orwellian scheme! How does she get around that Orwellian bit?
Seems a bit stupid to me.
The enemy of Free Speech. Her denegration of individual liberty is in itself a hate crime.Some one should call her in it.Mark Steyn recently fought the Human Rights Commission of Canada who wanted to censor and fine him for publishing the historical truth about radical Islam and Sharia LAw. We should not be going down that slippery slope.
See a “Belief Crime” law in our future?
I know that; but when utter morons like this say such things publicly they should be HELD to it re. Islam or be made to admit that their target is Christianity( and freedom) only.
This from a person who sounds Jewish( by the last name). Someone has to confront such people- ask them directly- “do you mean Islam should not be tolerated in this country? It believes (this) re. homosexuality. Get him on record.
This infuriates and sickens me. It’s nothing less than cultural suicide that is being promoted.
Yup. She is a real knob gobbler.
ANOTHER letter to my senators bookmark.
You're absolutely right and I'm going to incorporate that into my new tagline. See below.
They can't go after everyone who disagrees with them, but they might try to ruin selected individuals for expressing "intolerable" beliefs in order to intimidate others (like that "human rights" agency in Canada does).
Eleanor Roosevelt said that Communists were just liberals in a hurry. These people are not content with the slow degradation of society and morality accomplished by the schools and the media, but want to hurry up the process--they are degenerates in a hurry.
Well I believe that we shiould be attacking her for hate speech. Her position is hate speech against the 1st amendment. She needs an avalanche of constitutionalist attacks.
Did you ever notice how your dog will cock its head to one side when you make a funny noise in front of it as if to say, “What are you talking about?”
That’s probably what I looked like after I read this article. It’s unbelievable that this person is even getting any kind of consideration. This is way beyond the pale.
Did you ever notice how your dog will cock its head to one side when you make a funny noise in front of it as if to say, “What are you talking about?”
That’s probably what I looked like after I read this article. It’s unbelievable that this person is even getting any kind of consideration. This is way beyond the pale.
This is Mein Kampf Part II.
Ugh, I know I’m going to regret it but I can’t help myself (and this isn’t aimed at you - I see this mistake all the time by other readers).
I realize what you meant to say is “homosexuality is immoral” but the double whammy of using two of the words incorrectly brought out the grammar police in me. So here we go ...
You said “sodomy is unnatural”.
1. Sodomy includes oral sex between married husband and wife. I’m going to guess that virtually all married couples have, at one time or another, engaged in it. They aren’t going to hell for this as part of a monogamous, til-death-do-us-part relationship. Thus, I’m willing to bet a great deal of money that all heterosexual citizens (especially all heterosexual men) are sodomites. Open the dictionary. That’s what the word means.
2. It occurs IN NATURE, therefore it is, by definition NATURAL. Murder is natural (it is also immoral). Lying is natural (it is also unethical). The word “natural” is not a synonym that can be interchanged with other words indicating perceived acceptability or morality.
I see people making this mistake all the time on here. The correct phrase is “homosexuality is immoral” or “homosexuality is a sin”. If you say “sodomite lifestyle” or “unnatural” it’s no different than inner-city Ebonics where the meaning of words is disregarded. It’s as if someone insisted the color of the sun is green. Words have specific meanings. The meanings of those words are found in the dictionary. (The literal translation of what you wrote could just as likely have read, “Oral sex between males and females of the human race does not occur in nature.”)
Yeah, I realize it’s obnoxious to say this but I’ve seen this error 5,001 times on the site. It’s like someone saying 2+2=5. At some point, you just can’t take it anymore.
*Duck and cover*
“where the meaning of words is disregarded.” - that should have read “are disregarded”. I hit post thinking that it would preview it again didn’t uncheck the “I have already previewed or do not wish to preview this composition” box. Nothing like a verb tense error in a post on grammar. I’m going to go have a cup of coffee and get off the blogs. I can’t focus today.
I wonder this every day.
It gets worse and worse and worse. Will they want us all to get lobotomies?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.