LETTER: Are discrimination laws too vague?

Recently, an article in the Daily Inter Lake expressed broad support, from the district administrators, for anti-discrimination rules in Kalispell Public Schools. They mentioned how transgender, lesbian and homosexual students are being mistreated. 

If these kids are mistreated, then there should be rules protecting them. However, the district insists on using vague language to address the situation.

When they say “gender identity,” who are they actually talking about? All kids have gender identity. I can assume they aren’t talking about boys that want to be boys. If they are talking about boys that want to be girls, then they should call it what it is, “transgender.”

When they say “sexual orientation,” who are they actually talking about? All kids have sexual orientation. I can assume they aren’t talking about boys who want to date girls. If they are talking about kids who prefer same-sex relationships, then they should say “homosexual and lesbian” kids.

In our politically correct society, we can’t use certain words because they might be offensive or hurt someone. But when writing laws and rules, political correctness leads to vague rules with broad implied interpretations. The anti-discrimination laws are meant to protect a small minority of people, but when taken literally, they apply to everyone. We aren’t trying to protect everyone.

If the rules and laws are meant to protect certain people or groups, then we need to specify who the people and groups are. Otherwise, the meaning of the rules and laws will have no merit. Laws are meant to be interpreted literally, not figuratively.

If laws and rules can’t be written to specifically identify certain people because it might “hurt their feelings,” then we shouldn’t write laws and rules. We should just make verbal laws, with broad implied meanings so they can be interpreted however people want to interpret them.

If the rules are intended to protect transgender kids, then say “transgender” in the rules. If the rules are intended to protect homosexual and lesbian kids, then we should say “homosexual and lesbian” in the rules. To soften the language in laws, just to avoid offending people, makes the laws ineffective. If people are so sensitive that we must avoid calling them what they really are, then we probably can’t protect them, regardless of what we try to do. —Tom Lacerte, Kalispell