Government/public agencies at all levels often - in fact usually - require a contractor to meet certain requirements with regard to hiring practices, compliance with human rights laws, working conditions, non-discrimination, and compliance with labor laws.
Since government entities are by definition public, it is only reasonable that they should insist that private firms comply with all the rules, statutes, and procedures that the government/public agency asks of its contractors. It is also reasonable that they should insure that all potential vendors have an opportunity to compete for the contract. No one can be compelled to submit a bid for a government contract; their terms are spelled out (in great deal I might add) and one can choose to bid or not bid. One may not like all the terms, all the requirements, or the hoops to jump through but that is a business decision that needs to made as it is with any contractor - whether a private firm or a public agency. By law, no potential contractor can be excluded because of their religion (or absence of it). If ones "moral values" include denying benefits to employees based on gender, age, marital status, race, or sexual preference then one can simply decline to bid on contracts let by government agencies or private firms that require that compliance. An individual has a right to their own "moral beliefs" but that does not mean that one is entitled to demand that someone else - especially a public agency - reward them for it. Jim Bernstein Fulton -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Neal Krasnoff Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2003 12:09 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Mpls] Anti-Gay Minnesota Family Council Goes Ambulance Chasing in Minneapolis Eric Meininger, MD wrote: > Excuse me? Since when should the city with my tax dollars not advocate > on my behalf that I and my neighbors should get the same compensation > for my family that others get? The authority of the City is not to "advocate", it is to enforce the laws passed by it's governing council, subject to the superior laws of the State legislature and the Minnesota Constitution. > My tax dollars fund services and we should be able to decide to not > hire contractors that have racist or bigoted employment policies. To exclude a contractor on the basis of his or her moral or religious beliefs is a violation of fundamental liberty: applying a religious test to bid on a government contract, which amounts to a violation of Article I, Section 16 of the Minnesota Constitution. If a contractor wishes to provide benefits to same sex couples, that's their business. But to disqualify an otherwise qualified contractor on the basis of their beliefs is de facto bigotry. > > By the way, bravo to Eva for keeping informed on what the far right is > up to. The farther left you go, the farther right everone else appears. Neal Krasnoff Loring Park REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
