More than two weeks have passed since tranny Gretchen Diez has been catapulted to stardom (political and otherwise). The new darling and heroine of the LGBTQ+ community has even expressed the possibility of entering into the world of politics in order to push the agenda of her fellow LGBTQ+ members. There is nothing inherently wrong with gays, lesbos, trannies, queers or whatever sexual orientation one identifies with in running for public office. As long as they meet the minimum requirements defined by law, they do have the right to run in the elections. Yes, perhaps it is a good idea for Diez to run in order to raise awareness and promote equality towards trannies like herself. Perhaps this much talked about SOGIE bill (Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity and Expression) can even serve as something she can latch onto in order to further her political agenda. But what is this SOGIE bill and what is it really all about? Diez should be able to defend it well because if she doesn’t she might end up looking like Alma Moreno in that infamous awkward interview with Karen Davila.
Opposition senator Risa Hontiveros has been advocating for this SOGIE bill. Recently, her Facebook page posted a summary of what she calls “Facts vs Fake News” (please see below). She seems to be trying to water down a big criticism of the bill that has stubbornly stuck to it like shit on a shoe. Sen. Hontiveros calls out critics of the bill as using the “special rights card” and says that doing so is very dangerous. The question is – why is it dangerous? Doesn’t giving special rights to a particular group of people open the doors to the possibility of putting non-recipients of this “special rights” at a disadvantage? Doesn’t playing favorites with a particular class of people, in itself, a form of discrimination already?
Let us look into some of the claims made by Sen. Hontiveros’ Facebook post.
“It will not penalize people who practice religious freedom”. Oh? Okay, let us take the Masterpiece Cakeshop case in Colorado where the baker was sued for refusing to bake a cake for the wedding of a gay couple based on his religious beliefs. Under the SOGIE bill, the baker will be considered as having practiced a discriminatory act and will be subjected to penalties under the bill. The SOGIE bill does say:
While a baker could perform a service and provide a product such as wedding cakes for anyone, except for those whose gender identity expression is against the baker’s religious beliefs, the fact that he is implementing an exception because his religious beliefs do not embrace a gay couple’s gender identity expression can certainly put him under legal threat if the SOGIE bill were to apply in Colorado. Now granting that our laws do not allow same sex marriages yet, the principle can be applied to anything applicable to LGBTQ+ issues in the Philippines. For instance, can the UCC Shalom Center in Ermita refuse to provide a 3 hour short time room rental for a couple of gays in need to exercise their right to the “expression of their gender identities”? Under the SOGIE bill, if they refuse to rent out a room to anyone in the LGBTQ+ community because the UCC Shalom Center does not agree with their intended “expression” based on their religious beliefs, the center can be penalized.
Also, under the SOGIE bill boys who identify as girls may compete in sports under the girls category since the SOGIE bill will outlaw the prevention of a child from pursuing his or her interest based on his or her gender identity. The bill says that discriminatory acts cover:
Suppose that a biological male student athlete decides to compete in competitive sports for women like women’s basketball or swimming or boxing or even weight lifting. Under the SOGIE bill the refusal of allowing the student to compete in women’s category of any sports would be an act of discrimination. Wouldn’t this bill pave the way for putting girls at a disadvantage in competitive sports as males and females do have different physical attributes and in many cases, biological males actually do have an advantage over females? If playing competitive sports is in the best interest of a child because of the reward of, say, a scholarship or any other benefits such as monetary and other accolades, wouldn’t the SOGIE bill contribute to putting females at a disadvantage? By giving this special protection to trannies like Diez in something like competitive sports, how many biologically born girls would be deprived of scholarships or any other rewards?
Now if you have read this far and haven’t figured it out yet by now, yup! I am an asshole. Using terms like trannies and lesbos certainly qualify me as one according to many people especially those belonging to the LGBTQ+ community and the holier than thou sanctimonious liberals. Under the SOGIE bill, assholes who blurt out terms like trannies and lesbos may be prosecuted if some tranny or lesbo ever gets offended with my crass use of such terms. Why? Because the SOGIE bill says acts including the following are considered discriminatory:
Thing is, any dime a dozen liberal in this entitled snowflake generation may feel insulted, annoyed, and offended at a drop of a pen for any remarks that challenge, criticize or even joke about someone’s or a group’s gender identity. But since when has moral superiority trumped freedom of speech? I must have been busy watching Chicks with Dicks when they amended the Constitution striking out section 4 of the Bill of Rights that states: “No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech,…”.
As an old, fat and bald dude, hell, I want to be protected too! Do you know how many times I’ve been ridiculed and discriminated against? So why the trannies and not ugly guys like me? Think about this, suppose a tranny walks into a bar and tries to strike up a small chit-chat with me. Suppose I tell the tranny that I think trannies are ugly. Sure, I may be an asshole for saying that but under section 4 of the Bill of Rights, unless they have changed it, I am within my right to say what I think. But under the SOGIE bill I would commit a discriminatory act because I offended the tranny based on her gender identity. So what really is the difference? Is it worse to offend somebody based on their gender identification than based on their physical appearance? So again, why give special protection to trannies and not ugly old fat dudes like me?
At the end of the day (yes, I’m using the most hated cliché here), I think giving special protection to another offended group of people may not be the best way to fight an injustice like discrimination. In fact, doing so is, in principle, a form of discrimination too! The SOGIE bill, in its current form, is not really about equality but providing special protection and rights. Strong advocates of the bill may be unwittingly contributing to the totalitarianism espoused by the liberal left. No one is trying to deny trannies their right to pursue what is in their interest but the government should not force others into sacrificing other people’s rights just for the special protection of an “offended” group of minority. If not through legislation, then what? How about the free market? You don’t like a baker who doesn’t bake wedding cakes for gay couples? Then don’t go to that bakeshop! You don’t like the Farmer’s Market Shopping Mall for not allowing trannies like Diez from using the female restroom? Go to another mall that allows it! Forcing one’s values on someone else rarely wins any brownie points. Forcing the approval of the SOGIE bill, in its current form, may very well end up hurting the LGBTQ+ cause as a result of public resentment.
(Top photo taken from ABS-CBN.com)
- Protecting Trannies but not Ugly Fat Dudes? What gives? - August 30, 2019
- Boycotting Delimondo is the Answer to Historical Revisionism? - September 27, 2018
- Taxes suck but people’s government dependency suck more - September 11, 2018
- Are Yellows Even Capable of Arguing Intelligently? - March 17, 2018
- Population control? Education? Infrastructure? Let us get our priorities straight! - August 11, 2017