Delicate issues must be debated

SBT VOP
12/31/04

In a free society that recognizes the importance of individual rights, it is highly desirable to have free and open discussion about controversial issues. The question of whether sexual orientation should be added to the South Bend ordinance involving the protection of citizens against discrimination certainly falls into this category.

However, for discussion to be fruitful, it is necessary to separate facts from opinion. In his article on this subject (Voice, Dec. 8), Chuck Strantz correctly cites the appropriate South Bend statute and agrees that race, color, sex, disability, national origin, or ancestry should not be the basis for discrimination because these people have no choice in the matter. He argues that sexual orientation is a deliberate choice that should not be protected by law. This alone could be the subject of serious debate, but leave that to another time.

One interesting omission occurs here. Strantz omits one category of a protected class contained in the statute, religion. There seems to be little room to argue that religion is not a choice. Therefore, logically, Strantz must argue that religion should be removed form the protected class or that sexual orientation should be included.

I would suggest that Strantz cannot have it both ways.

William Eagan, South Bend