10/24/1977 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Ms. Smith noted all Council members had asked many questions and did a great .amount of reading on the issue, and she noted appreciation for testimony and conduct of those in attendance. She said it had not . been an easy decision to reach, but she had decided it was not a question of approving sexual orientation, but a human rights issue. She felt it was Council IS responsibility to amend the human rights ordinance to include sexual orientation and thus she was going to support it. Mr. Williams moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to a~end the amendment to read in Section 2(2) it shall not be an unlawful employment practice: (f) in any context treated in this section, for a party to consider and make decisions based upon a person's sexual orientation where the person would be, or is, working primarily with individuals between the ages of 12 through 15. He said when Council considered this issue a few years ago, he was never forced to. fully address the concerns. He felt at this time he was forced to address the issue in a way with which he was comfort- able. He expressed real concerns for the kind of personal human trauma that had been expressed in testimony. One of the main things w~ich bothered him was the impact in school systems of a known homo- sexual teacher during the formative years, and he noted he had con- tacted a local psychiatrist, Dr. Paul Wilson for input. Discussion centered around whether homosexuality results from role modeling or whether it's learned early in life. He said there was substantial evidence of the potential for role model of children who have a predetermined orientation which could be sUbstantially reinforced by - role mOdeling of a male teacher during the ages of 12 to 15. He said based on that fact, combined with the fact that most people in the community do not want Council to adopt the amendment, he had introduced this amendment. Mr. Delay felt it very important for Council to keep its sights on the issue and not base its decision on such fears as had been expres- sed by Mr. Williams. He said the thesis for that amendment was nothing but an elaborate cover for a fear or prejudice. He said there was no evidence that at any particular stage or age role modeling was effective in regard to homosexuality. He said this particular amendment to the motion would take a prejudice and turn it into discrimination. He said the result of passing the amendment proposed by Mr. Williams would be that a certain class of persons would have about as many rights, but not quite as many. He felt Council should be acting on rationa~ and not elaborate fears. Mr. Obie felt the evidence presented in testimony at the meeting was very subjective, stating that no evidence for determination of homosexual behavior was a strong point, and he felt the amendment was prudent. Regarding the question of recruitment, he said when people e 10/24/77--8 gOO