The New Jersey state legislature is considering expanding anti-discrimination laws to include transgendered individuals.

Link

(This site won't let me quote from it directly, but it provides the background. It also includes a link so you can watch a television commercial about the issue, said to be the first one in the history of American broadcasting dealing with transgender rights.)


To be debated:

Should current anti-discrimination laws be expanded to include the transgendered?

Should current anti-discrimination laws be expanded to include the transgendered?
Obviously, yes. I can think of no reason other than sheer bigotry to oppose such a move.
Actually, I have to note that it seems to me we have made a big mistake in the way our anti-discrimination laws are worded by enumerating protected classes rather than simply stating that firing/refusing service/etc for reasons other than those relating to the actual job performance/health concerns/other legitimate concerns are to be forbidden. The way our laws are written means that people have to fight the same battles over and over again.

I think you make a good point. Unfortunately, the exact opposite approach seems to be more popular these days; that employers can demand anything from their employees that is not specifically illegal, and that they can fire anybody for any reason which is not specifically excluded by law. For this reason, although it may not be the best way to deal with discrimination as a whole, eliminating specific classes as a whole, one at a time, is better than nothing.

Should current anti-discrimination laws be expanded to include the transgendered?

Absolutely. Why not? They are people. They haven't done anything wrong. This question only leads to the inevitable question of why they have to be so specific. The Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause should be anti-discrimination enough. People, regardless of sexual identity or sexual preference, shouldn't be discriminated against. It's not that hard of a concept if you ask me.