'Gay men are not a protected class under the Constitution. '

[JackBeck]

If gay men are not protected under the Constitution, can someone let me know which group of Americans the Constitution was written to protect?

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_10459273

Gay attack swept under the shrug

By Susan Greene
Denver Post Columnist

(snip)
A Denver cop not only refused to press charges, but he wouldn't investigate the hate crime or even bother to take the attacker's name.

In the end, the bad guy slipped away, the officer was slapped on the wrist and now Daivari has lost his civil-rights case because the city says Daivari, as a gay man, has no constitutional right to require an arrest.

(snip)

"Officers must use discretion in deciding when and where (to take reports)," Eckhardt argued in denying Daivari's claim that police inaction was a result of Daivari's "outwardly homosexual appearance, his failure to conform to male gender stereotypes."

U.S. District Judge Zita Weinshienk dismissed the case Thursday, holding that no rights were violated. Gay men are not a protected class under the Constitution.

[liberalmuse]

1. Oh my god.

That cop needs to be fired.

[JackBeck]

12. I'm a huge fan of the education angle.

I would love to see that cop get schooled in some sensitivity training, even if they claim it's already provided.

When I was gay bashed, I begged the cops and my lawyer to avoid prosecuting these kids if they ever caught them. I wanted them to do community service in a queer positive environment, so that they would be out of the system and hopefully gain a better understanding of the differences that exist among us.

[Orrex]

2. Answer

If gay men are not protected under the Constitution, can someone let me know which group of Americans the Constitution was written to protect?

White male land-owners, at least initially...


Pretty sickening story.

[JackBeck]

9. It was more rhetorical, since I already knew the answer.

I was sort if baiting the strict constructionists to see if they'd bite.

:P

[Orrex]

10. Doh! Color me bamboozled!

:hide:

[JackBeck]

13. Meh. Nuance and sarcasm are a hard sell.

Could very well be my fault. It's the interwebs.

No judgment from me, you've always been solid. No flames from me.

:pals:

[Orrex]

14. None taken, but thanks for your concern!

Right back atcha!

:hug:

[sakabatou]

3. O.O

To the Denver police:

[JackBeck]

16. That's quite a mess! n/t

[CoffeeCat]

4. This is disgusting...

This man's rights were violated. This human being's rights were violated.

It's the police who are discriminating--because the man is gay.

The man who had the crime perpetrated against him, is just asking that the police do their job.

So, it's ok for the police to do their job only when they feel like it?

That's the real crime.

[AtomicKitten]

5. At what point did the Constitution become a "goddamn piece of paper?"

* Junior

:mad:

[silverweb]

6. Really?

What part of "any person" escapes constitutional protection?

"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

I hope the case goes straight to appeal.

[Skittles]

7. why am I thinking Taliban?

[JackBeck]

19. Could be because the the right wingers in America are the American Taliban.

:think:

[Skittles]

20. DING! DING! DING!

I fail to conform to female gender stereotypes in many ways - I'm guessing that could put me in danger, too.

[merh]

8. corporations :(

:argh:

[BlooInBloo]

11. Worthless piece of shit cops.

[Lex]

15. a "protected class" is a particular legal thing

and a "protected class" gets particular scrutiny under the law if discrimination is alleged: race, religion, gender, national origin are all protected classes under the law.

Gays are not legally classified as a "protected class" in that same way.

[JackBeck]

18. Absolutely, Lex, our community continues to be left unprotected.

Sometimes we find ourselves protected on the State level, but ultimately our Federal government leaves us completely without protection, while other groups enjoy that legal protection.

[Lex]

24. of course the judge is just using the "protected class" BS

to cover it all up

pathetic

[unblock]

21. since when must one be a member of a "protected class" to get service from the police?

as a straight, white, american-born male, i'm not a member of a protected class. but if i get beaten up, i certainly can demand the police investigate.

[Lex]

22. I was only specifically addressing the definition of "protected class"

not whether if you get beaten up you should expect proper police investigation. Of course everyone should get that.

[curious one]

17. Are gay men human being? Answer is yes. Those that are blind with ignorance will do what they want

until they are punished by law. Hopefully we will have a society without prejudices against anyone, any race, and any group.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

23. WTF?

Again, :wtf: Judge Zita needs a lesson in law and much more than a slap on the wrist.

[JackBeck]

25. Isn't it amazing?

That has got to be the nuttiest ruling I've ever heard.

Must have gone to the Scalia school of Constitutional right-wing interpretations.

[Canuckistanian]

26. "failure to conform to male gender stereotypes"?

Is that a crime these days?

Jeeeeezus......

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

27. Sloppy writing. Not "constitution," but civil rights law. And that is correct.

"Protected class" is a legal term. Protected classes are certain groups identified in civil rights legislation. For instance, black, female, older, and disabled are legislatively "protected classes."

Gays are not.

The judge's ruling is an interpretation of statute.

The statutes should be changed.