The Straight Line: True equality
As many of you may know, I have been running for the position of Utah State Democratic Party Secretary. During the course of the campaign I’ve heard and read a number of statements from people that make me wonder what we all mean when we say “equality.”
To me, equality means that we are all subject to the same legal requirements and equally enjoy the rights and privileges associated with being a part of this community and this society. In that regard, it is obvious that we don’t live in an equal society as we have an entire segment of our population (the LGBTQ community) that is denied such basic and fundamental rights as marriage, adoption and other benefits associated with family status.
What has struck me as a bit off, of late, are comments I have heard or read and emails that I have received regarding my campaign. I’ve been told by people that while they like what I have to say, they would prefer to support a woman for the position. I understand the sentiment; all it takes is a quick peek at our government, especially the legislature, to see the gross under-representation of women in our political system. But does that mean that a woman, any woman, is inherently a better selection for a position? I wouldn’t vote for someone on the basis of them being female any more than I would on the basis of them being male. Discrimination is still discrimination, even in reverse.
On June 13, State Representative Jackie Biskupski announced her resignation from the State Legislature, triggered by her purchase of a home outside of her district. Currently, Rep. Biskupski is the only openly gay member of the Utah legislature. Yesterday I noticed several online discussions regarding House District 30 and potential replacements for Rep. Biskupski. In those, there seemed to be an overwhelming belief that the HD30 seat belongs to the LGBTQ community and that there needs to be an openly gay person chosen to replace Rep. Biskupski.
If we are truly striving for a society based upon equality, why would the new Representative’s sexual identity or orientation matter? Are the positions and actions of the candidates not more important than their orientation, gender or identity?
Again, I understand the position that the LGBTQ community is grossly under-represented – a position with which I firmly agree. What I don’t accept is the position that a person is qualified for this position on the basis of being openly gay. How many people over the past several years have been outed as gay but have promoted or endorsed extremely anti-LGBTQ policies at various levels of government? Are the contributions of a senator like Ben McAdams in some way diminished because he’s a straight male?
Inasmuch as it is improper to refuse to hire or vote for or rent/lease to a person on the basis of gender identity or orientation, is it not just as improper to use that same basis as a reason to hire, vote for or rent/lease to a person? It’s still discrimination.
I am a firm believer in equality, and I will continue to fight for it with my last breath. But if we are to demand equality, we must also practice it. Mathematically it is very improbable that there will ever be a pure balance in representation relative to the population, in terms of gender, gender identity, race, religion, or orientation – let alone all of these factors. What is important is that everyone has an equal opportunity, and that all of our rights, beliefs and identities are equally represented. That is what true equality means.