Wednesday, November 14, 2007 6:11 AM CST
Council acts to ban discrimination based on sexual orientation
By TIM JAMISON, Courier Staff Writer
WATERLOO --- It took four years of lobbying from human rights activists and a change in state law, but members of Waterloo's gay and lesbian community are now protected by city ordinance from discrimination.
City Council members voted unanimously Tuesday to add "sexual orientation" to the list of classes protected from discrimination in the areas of employment, housing, education, public accommodations and credit practices. Sexual orientation covers residents who are gay, lesbian, bi-sexual, transgender or perceived to be such. The ordinance previously barred discrimination based on race, gender, age, disability, religion, creed and national origin.
"This is not condoning a lifestyle. It's condemning discrimination," said Councilman Reggie Schmitt. "I supported it four years ago. I still do."
Members of the city's Human Rights Commission have been asking the council to adopt the sexual orientation protections for nearly four years, but were not able to gain enough support from the council to bring it up for a vote.
But Iowa legislators this year approved a measure granting civil rights protection based on sexual orientation which Gov. Chet Culver signed into law in May. The Attorney General's Office issued an opinion last month stating cities in the state were required to enforce those protections for their residents.
"(It) is not about morality or the pros and cons of sexual identity," said David Meeks, executive director of the Waterloo Human Rights Commission. "The vote today is the city of Waterloo's adherence to the language in the Iowa Code ... and financial assistance to the city of Waterloo Human Rights Commission to enforce those provisions."
Human Rights Commission Chairman Jerome Amos Jr. put it to council members more succinctly.
"Do the right thing, and do it now," Amos said.
But the measure, as it has in other Iowa cities that adopted similar protections, did face opposition.
"It's very dangerous to award protected status for a changeable behavior," said Jeff Jones, noting courts have traditionally included religion as the only protected class which can be altered by the individual.
Jones and several other speakers said the ordinance could put businesses in awkward positions if they were prevented from firing overtly homosexual or cross-dressing employees who chase away customers.
Resident Marcella Gruver said the gay and lesbian community has not shown a history of discrimination by virtue of their economic and educational success; have proven to be politically powerful; and are not trapped in their situation as "gayness is changeable." And therefore, she said, they do not require special civil rights protections.
"They do not have the right to make everyone else agree with them," she said.
John Thompson also opposed the ordinance saying he was molested by a homosexual as a child.
"I think all homosexuals are sick and they need help," he said.
Speaking in favor of the ordinance was Michael Dean Brockway, a longtime resident of Waterloo who was beaten by strangers because he is gay.
Brockway took the mayor and council members to task for not acting more quickly on the ordinance, which has been in effect in Cedar Rapids since 1999 and is approved in Ames, Iowa City, Bettendorf, Davenport, Decorah, Dubuque, Des Moines and several other jurisdictions.
"The City Council is completely out of touch with the rest of the state," said Brockway, noting the measure conveniently found its way to an agenda following the municipal election.
Schmitt lashed back. "Mr. Brockway, you did so much council bashing I couldn't tell if you were for or against this," he said.
While the change in state law may have driven the ordinance change to an agenda, several council members said they supported it on its own merits.
"I think it's time; it needs to be done," said Councilman Eric Gunderson. "We need to give rights to our citizens regardless of who they are or their sexual orientation."
Councilwoman Carolyn Cole said she was surprised the ordinance wasn't on the books when she took office in 2004.
"I do feel very strongly that it's time to do this," she said. "It is the right thing to do."
The Cedar Falls City Council rejected a similar measure in 2001 and it has not returned for another vote.
Contact Tim Jamison at (319) 291-1577 or tim.jamison@wcfcourier.com.
More Stories from News » Breaking News
If you would like to comment on this story, please log in with the form below. If you are not a registered user, please
CLICK HERE to sign up.
Due to the amount of spam and negative comments received, the Courier implement a registered-user system for participation in the comment portion of our site. In doing so, the Courier reserves the right to ban any user(s) at any time without notice if we feel they are not following the terms of agreement.
If you are not a registered user, please
CLICK HERE to sign up.

DISCLAIMER: The Courier provides our story commenting feature in order to solicit feedback, debate and discussion on topics of local interest. Please keep in mind that civility is a necessary component of productive conversation. All blatantly inflammatory or otherwise inappropriate comments (i.e. vulgarity, marketing, etc.) are subject to rejection and/or removal. Comments will appear if and when they are approved. For a more in-depth explanation of our policy, please see our
Rules of the Road. Thanks for reading, and thanks for participating.