City Of Hazard, Kentucky Reportedly Refuses To Stop Discriminate Against Gays

[w8liftinglady]

http://instinctmagazine.com/blog/city-of-hazard-kentucky-reportedly-refuses-to-stop-discriminate-against-gays?directory=100011

Hazard, Kentucky came into the national spotlight awhile back after a city-owned public swimming pool employee kicked out two developmentally-challenged boyfriends simply because they are gay. After a 2,000-person petition asking the city to stop its anti-gay discrimination landed on desks of Hazard lawmakers, efforts to evolve to the 21st century began. But once the national media spotlight dimmed, Hazard reversed its tracks and continues to refuse to update its anti-discrimination policy. Details follow.

According to a Change.org news release:

City Attorney Paul R. Collins, who is responsible for changing city rules, reversed his stance, demanding that the Kentucky Equality Federation’s Jordan Palmer produce a Kentucky state law saying the pool could not discriminate based on sexual orientation or gender identity.

Since Palmer was unable to produce a statewide law, Collins backed away from a commitment to create new rules to prevent discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity at the Pavilion in the future. As a result, it will remain legal for public employees in Hazard, Kentucky to continue to deny gay people access to the Pavilion’s public swimming pool if they so choose.

“Unfortunately, Kentucky’s civil rights code provides more protections for smokers than it does for LGBT people,” said Palmer. “It is perfectly legal to fire someone, or deny someone access to public accommodations, because they are gay or lesbian. However, it is not legal to deny someone access to public accommodations because they smoke.”

“The Kentucky Equality Federation hopes the city will change their rules to prevent further discrimination,” said Palmer. “Kentucky used to lead the country by enacting the first civil rights law. Now it is lagging severely behind the rest of the country.”

[meegbear]

1. WHAT?????

IN-FUCKING-CREDIBLE!!

[msongs]

2. if it is a PUBLIC pool any member of the public should be allowed nt

[pennylane100]

3. Is there any federal law that would apply to this situation.

[BillStein]

7. only the ADA

and that only because they were disabled. There's no federal protection for GLBT* people

[mitchtv]

4. nice little pool you have here

It'd be a shame if someone dropped a big turd in it

[pennylane100]

5. Now there's an idea whose time has come.

However I wouldn't want to endanger any innocent children, so clear the pool as it happens.

[mitchtv]

6. you have a point but,

Unusable for some should read unusable for all. SHUT IT DOWN

[nykym]

8. Whatever your chioce is be sure

to have a pack of cigarettes with you at all times. If you're perceived as a smoker first, well you get my drift...

[Evasporque]

9. Fuck heads like this are why protection laws are needed.

So many say we don't need protection laws...well here is a perfect example...