[Wisconsin] State Employees Challenging Payroll Donation Policy - Guidelines Do Not Cover Sexual Orientation

[Dedicated Dad]

 

MADISON, Wis. -- A handful of state employees asked Wisconsin officials Tuesday to enact a rule that would prohibit state workers from donating part of their paychecks to charities that discriminate based on sexual orientation.

 

Opponents of the administrative rule, including Gov. Scott McCallum, said it would prevent state workers from donating money through payroll deductions to the Boy Scouts of America or United Way chapters that don' t have a nondiscrimination policy addressing sexual orientation.

 

McCallum ordered Administration Secretary George Lightbourn last March not to enact the rule.

 

 

"His position hasn't changed," McCallum spokeswoman Debbie Monterrey-Millett said. "If state employees want to be able to give to the Boy Scouts, they should be able to give to the Boy Scouts."

 

State employees are free to make donations privately to any group, but they must follow guidelines to donate part of their paychecks, including that the charities not discriminate. The current rule does not list sexual orientation.

 

The payroll donation rule would require charities getting donations from state workers through payroll deductions to have policies prohibiting discrimination based on race, color, religion, national origin, disability, age or sexual orientation.

 

Chris Ahmuty, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin, said the state is in violation of anti-discrimination laws without the rule.

 

ACLU attorneys filed the petition Tuesday with the state Department of Administration on behalf of eight state employees. The group is ready to file a lawsuit in Dane County Circuit Court if McCallum and administration officials decline to enact the rule, Ahmuty said.

 

The Supreme Court decided in 2000 the Boy Scouts could exclude gays from serving as troop leaders.

 

"That doesn' t mean the state has to provide them with a special opportunity to access employees," Ahmuty said. "The state can't be party to the discrimination."

http://www.channel3000.com/news/1191755/detail.html

[andrews]

Lets limit the rights of employees. That will produce more civil liberties, right....

 

Brad

[sctmom]

You all know where I stand on gay rights...but hey this is absurd!

 

I can't give my money to who I want?

These people need to get a life and do something productive to help those less fortunate in their community.

[Dedicated Dad]

"The state can't be party to the discrimination." Totalitarianism rears its ugly head again. have policies prohibiting discrimination based on race, color, religion, national origin, disability, age or sexual orientationThe inequity of lumping in behavior with innate condition is flagitious and reprobate. The practice of perversion is and will always be a choice, to equate it as an intrinsic state of being is like comparing Down Syndrome with incest. I will never understand how ones conduct deserves special status and why it merits more rights than I have.

[sctmom]

Will someone please enlighten me as to where you get the "facts" that sexual orientation is "behavior / choice" not inborn?

 

[Weekender]

sctmom

 

Leviticus 18:22 "do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable."

 

I don't want to be "preachy" or force my beliefs on anyone else but I believe in God, and I believe he personally created each of us. He would not intentionally create a person who could not help but be detestable to the Him. .

 

1 Corinthians 10:13 "No temptation has siezed you except what is common to man. And God is faithful; He will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear. But when you are tempted, He will also provide a way out so that you can stand up under it."

 

Homosexuality is a sin, sin is a choice, There is always an option.

[sctmom]

Weekender, thanks, I'm familiar with those verses. Some of the posters on here say there is scientific proof of this also. I'd like to read that "proof".

 

[Dedicated Dad]

Im sitting here scratching my head wondering at what point in time did political correctness take on the philosophy that perversion was innate condition. To answer my own question I would speculate some where between the sexual revolution (I should be able to do anything I want regardless of the consequences), Roe v. Wade and the LeVay studies, all contributors to the degeneration of the nuclear family. How far has society digressed to where right is wrong and wrong is right, Mom I have to admit Im a little taken back by your need for someone else to prove a negative for you. Perhaps you could perform your own due diligence, heres a hint though, and it has something to do with the survival of the species and free will. What makes you think it is?

[sctmom]

I HAVE performed my own due dilgence, thank you. And EVERY thing I have read that is scientific fact says it is inborn.

 

Survival of the species? Let me blunt -- do you only have intimate relationships to procreate? I don't really want you to answer that, just ponder it.

 

Roe v. Wade is not about "I'll do whatever I want", it's about a women's choice of what happens to HER body. Completely different discussion.

 

There are some Christian churches that do NOT say being homosexual is a SIN! Major churches and denominations. I just keep reading people one here saying "it has been proven to be a choice." Show me, I really can't find that information.

 

[Stan Riddle]

Not scientific, but just a thought.

 

If homosexuality is genetic, and genetics are passed from parent to child, and homosexuals can not normally procreate, wouldn't the gene have "thinned itself out" by now?

[Weekender]

There are many people who once practiced homosexuality who have chosen not to do so. For some it is a matter of abstention but for others they have found heterosexuality a better choice. I just found a web site called Exodus that deals with this issue. I haven't looked through it thoroughly but it may have some of the information you're asking about.

[sctmom]

Weekender, My sincerest thanks. I was not trying to argue. I was trying to be open minded and look at both sides.

 

Stan, there is a difference between inborn and genetics. One may be born with a physical or mental handicap that is not inherited.

 

I fully agree there are some who try the homosexual life that are just making a choice. For some reason they have some serious problems and this helps them. They feel rebelious? They feel loved in the homosexual community? They want to be different? They want the attention? Those people will make other destructive choices in their life as well -- drugs, crime, etc.

 

[andrews]

Sctmom,

 

There is very little, if any, evidence homosexuality is inborn. The few studies widely trumpeted as such were later shown to be flawed, usually in the size or selection of the sample.

 

How exactly would you prove something is not inborn anyway?

 

The other side of the issue is that even if a tendency is inborn, fulfilling it is still a choice. Given my family's history of alcoholism, some of it probably lies in the genetics, and studies have agreed with that. But that would not negate my role in whether I become an alcoholic or not. Even if I was predisposed to it, I can make the choice to not follow that tendency.

 

The same can apply to any other "lifestyle" choice.

 

Brad

[sctmom]

"There is very little, if any, evidence homosexuality is inborn. The few studies widely trumpeted as such were later shown to be flawed, usually in the size or selection of the sample. "

 

Where have you read that these are flawed?

 

"But that would not negate my role in whether I become an alcoholic or not. Even if I was predisposed to it, I can make the choice to not follow that tendency. "

So does that mean I can just "choose" not to be depressed, even though I inherited it from my family? I do CHOOSE to do something about my depression, i.e. take medication. My depression or someone's acholohism makes them unable to function in society (basically any society), it also effects others in very REAL ways. Does the gay down the street have an impact on my life if he/she keeps to himself?

 

 

[Weekender]

Sctmom, With all due respect, it's not the homosexual down the street who keeps to him/herself that bothers me (although they are still making a bad choice, IMHO). It is the radical, in your face, accept my way as the right way or your a facist, homosexual "rights" activist that I object to. The homosexual agenda is to force people who object to their lifestyle to call it acceptable rather than just tolerate it, which is all they are truly entitled to. I object to anyone that says my children WILL be indoctrinated into something that I deem to be wrong. The moral backruptcy being taught in our school systems is one of the main reasons my wife and I homeschool. The homosexual lifestyle is an abomination physically, emotionally, and spiritually and I will not have it presented to my children as anything else.