If you didn’t know we have an Advisory Council on Diversity and Inclusion. They just released a list of recommendations, and it can be summed up as follows. Add “Gender Identity” to 16 different exiting RSA’s. Create a separate anti-discrimination law for “students.” Add more public transportation. Spend more tax dollars on the New Hampshire’s Human Rights Commission (Enforcement). Add a disabled person to the Commission on Diversity and Inclusion.
Based on this list I’m prepared to suggest the commission already has plenty of disabled persons on it. And the disability is liberalism.
What’s All This Then?
If you missed it, the Commission’s preliminary report alerted us to the problem of ‘residents’ “understanding the concept of whiteness and the role it plays in systems of oppression.” As I pointed out then,
I’m sure they don’t (understand). But no more than these individuals understand or accept the concept of whiteness and the role it played in freeing people of all ages, races, national origin, sex, or religions from poverty, and persecution.
I know its unpopular with the social justice community but a bunch of white guys came up with a system of government where power resides in the people, not The State.
That individual liberty, freedom, property rights, free markets, an independent judiciary, and enumerated or unenumerated natural rights are superior to the will of elites and that only by placing limits on those who would rule could they be protected.
Human Rights Commissions and Diversity and Inclusion Councils inevitably become persecutors advancing the goals of Cultural Marxism. Cultural Marxism’s goal is to end individual liberty, freedom, property rights, free markets, an independent judiciary, and enumerated or unenumerated natural rights, by rotting out the moral center.
And at some point, our constitutional rights will get in the way and something will have to be done.
Serious Problem Solvers
There will undoubtedly be more but for now, we need busses and trains and another layer of anti-discrimination language in state statute. Because for reasons I have yet to understand, the existing prohibitions don’t apply to students.
New Hampshire is one of the only states in the northeast without any state statutory antidiscrimination protection for students. Accordingly, the Council recommends that New Hampshire enact a state statute that prohibits discrimination against students in public schools based on race, color, sex, religion, national origin, mental or physical disability, gender identity, or sexual orientation.
You can’t discriminate for employment, hiring, firing, unions, renting or selling, or business in general. And you can’t discriminate with regard to access to public accommodations.
RSA 354-A:1 says,
This chapter shall be known as the “Law Against Discrimination.” It shall be deemed an exercise of the police power of the state for the protection of the public welfare, health and peace of the people of this state, and in fulfillment of the provisions of the constitution of this state concerning civil rights. The general court hereby finds and declares that practices of discrimination against any of its inhabitants because of age, sex, gender identity, race, creed, color, marital status, familial status, physical or mental disability or national origin are a matter of state concern, that such discrimination not only threatens the rights and proper privileges of its inhabitants but menaces the institutions and foundation of a free democratic state and threatens the peace, order, health, safety and general welfare of the state and its inhabitants.
We’ve got anti-bully statutes for students too, and every district has a policy for those also, but these still (must) fall short of the anti-discrimination needs of students. Or, maybe and more likely it’s about something else.
One of These Is Not Like the Others
As for the ‘only state in the northeast without‘ argument, up to this point that’s actually been better for the Granite State on a wide range of things. But with Democrats running every dank and sticky crevice of government (but for the Governor’s office) we can expect a few of those “differences” to go away. In part thanks to the help of cultural Marxist councils and commissions whose won history tells us that not long from now they will be recommending changes to constitutional rights like speech and religious liberty.
All in the name of Human Rights, Diversity, and Inclusion.
