MA Anti-Size Discrimination Law: Your Help Needed!
Spreading the good word via Sheana at seeworthy.org:
The state congress has recently moved up the hearing date to June 13th, and we need folks to testify about how important it is that this become law. Besides going to testify, there are some other important ways to help out. Under the cut is a letter from Beth Kenny, an intern at Fat Legal Advocacy, Research and Education (FLARE) about how to help, including a sample letter that residents of the state (or anybody, I suppose?) can send to their representatives and senators.
This is a solid opportunity for some grassroots activism, and is our chance to bolster our cause!
Update: The hearing has been pushed back to September - but writing letters is still an important thing to do.
MeMe Roth Shows How Far We Have To Go | Beth Ditto on the Cover of NME
Posted by paul on June 1, 2007
This is a very, very bad idea. Anti-discrimination laws force us to take legal action based not specifically on the action that was perpetrated, but the reason for that action. That means it's making a law against a thought crime, and that is utterly unacceptable.
I do believe we should require our governments to not discriminate, all people should be equal under the eyes of the law. But anti-discrimination laws are meant to regulate private businesses and individuals. That's wrong.
Please do not support this.
We're agreeing to disagree on this one, but you've made your point extensively in the forums and other threads so no retreading the issue here.
I see the pitfalls of anti-discrimination laws, but I don't buy the "thought crime" argument. The law has a long tradition of trying to judge intentions. If I run over someone with a car on purpose, I'll be treated very differently than I would if I ran over someone by accident.
Likewise, there are plenty of laws that regulate the way private citizens and corporations can do business, and there always have been.
Michigan's law against discrimination based on size has been on the books for decades and, so far as I know, has never been cited as a source of legal abuses.
I actually think that we in the fat acceptance movement should support this bill wholeheartedly. The discrimination that exists out there is quite real.
I'll have to check the forum, but I'm somewhat amazed that you'd be opposed to this; I'll respect Paul's wishes and go read the forum instead of getting into it here, though.
Paul, thanks for posting! I honestly felt a bit guilty spamming everywhere with the post, so I didn't want to terrorize your forums with it, too! This is all very exciting stuff; makes me quite sad that I'm no longer in Mass now to help out! But, I suppose letting folks know about it is the next best thing.
And you know, it reminds me of when I met with the head of institutional diversity at Smith College when I was an undergrad (I think this was my junior year, so two years ago?). We were trying to get her on board with getting Smith to implement an institution-wide ban on size-based discrimination, like they already had for sexual orientation. She actually asked me for "proof" and "research" on discrimination against fat people (wait for it...), and then proof that it was happening at Smith. And she explained to me, essentially, that there's no need to add it to the policy if nobody's being discriminated against. I was aghast! How on earth did she expect me to present evidence of someone fighting against discrimination at Smith when it wasn't outlawed... thus nobody had any reasonable expectation that if they did fight, it would result in anything.
Ahhh, it'd be *so* sweet to have this pass, and then be enforced in the schools. So, so sweet.