Posts Tagged ‘requirement’
O.K. first of all, get up to speed on Senate Bill 242 from Leland Yee, PhD,the State Senate’s Assistant President pro Tempore, representing areas of San Francisco and San Mateo Counties. This whole issue of language discrimination got kicked into high gear last year with some idiotic move from the Ladies Professional Golf Association (LPGA), which apparently isn’t a pure sport – it’s “sports entertainment,” so there’s a high premium on having stars that speak English.
Anywho, Senator Yee’s bill to prevent language discrimination made it out of committee, so that put into the news, so that got some people down south a little riled up.
Listen for yourself (you might need to right click and then Save As…) to the message a caller left at Leland’s office:
“Hi. I just read an article, here in L.A. about Mr. Leland Lee (sic), about the English (sic) and all the language (sic). You know what? This is United States of America. If he don’t (sic) like it, tell him to go back to China. He’s an immigrant. This is the United States, we speak English.
“I had an emergency the other night. I use a radio. And the illegal immigrants kept talking, talking, and talking in Spanish and it was a serious emergency I had.
“English is our language – don’t like it, leave our country. Nobody’s begging you to stay. Stop coming to our country and try (sic) to change eveything to fit what YOU want. We created it, we like it the way it is, if you don’t like, YOU pack your bags and YOU go home.
Have a great day, Loo-eee…, Leland, which is a white name.”
So there you have it.
See the deets of SB 242 after the jump.
Oh man, remember what the “bungling” Ladies Professsional Golf Association did last year when they double bogied by trying to introduce a learn-English-or-you’re-off-the-tour requirement? Depending on your punta de vista, the rule was straight up racist, mildly racist, or not racist at all.
But then, with a quickness, San Francisco and San Mateo Counties’ very own Senator Leland Yee, PhD reacted and the LPGA dropped the idea. That’s your history lesson of the day, but it’s relevant in light of new Senate Bill 242, which will add language to California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act.
The Senate’s Assistant President pro Tempore:
So let’s say the WPGA (I just changed their name, how about that!) decides to try to go after the Seoul Sisters again, this new law could have the potential to take California courses off of the tour. Ouch.
Is this the future of the LPGA? The Hooters Golf Team might average 30 over par, but it seems golf is now part of the “sports entertainment world” so putting the ball in the cup is only just one measure of success. Read on:
Here’s the thing, when you go around talking like this:
“According to Libba Galloway, the deputy commissioner of the tour: “We live in a sports entertainment environment…For an athlete to be successful in the sports entertainment world we live in, they need to be great performers on and off the course, and being able to communicate effectively with sponsors and fans is a big part of this.”
…then people might get the idea that women’s golf isn’t a real sport, right? If you’re somebody’s agent and you tell a golfer that she’ll make more money if she becomes more fluent in the world’s current lingua franca, or if she expresses a manic depressive-ish, dramatic range of emotions, or if, well just take a look at this cosmetic surgery brochure, just take a look… well then that’s your right. But that shouldn’t be the right of the ridiculous LPGA.
Bill would Protect Language as a Civil Right
Yee introduces bill in response to discriminatory policy proposed by the LPGA
While speaking one’s native language is protected in cases of employment and housing under state law, such protections are not provided under the state’s civil rights act, which prohibits discrimination within business establishments.
As a result, Senator Leland Yee (D-San Francisco/San Mateo) today introduced legislation to add the use of any language to the list of protections under the Unruh Civil Rights Act. Currently, the Act prohibits business establishments from discriminating on the basis of sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, marital status, or sexual orientation.
Read on, after the jump.