The absurdity of the statist-left knows no bounds. Plus, yet more evidence of the big lie.
From CBS Los Angeles:
The next influx of UC students may be asked to state their sexual orientation.
In January, the Academic Senate recommended that upon accepting admission offers from a University of California school students should have the option of identifying themselves as lesbian, gay, bi-sexual or transgender.
The UC Board of Admissions and Relations with Schools had mixed reactions but agreed that the question would allow them to collect important statistical information. They recommended putting the question on the SIR forms instead of college applications to protect students’ privacy.
(ed. note: for what purpose is this information collected?)
The news made the front page of UCLA’s campus paper Daily Bruin and is stirring controversy across UC campuses.
Supporters say the declaration will help campuses better plan for the needs of LGBT students.
Queer Alliance Board member Luis Roman said he has spoken with university officials about the proposal, which he enthusiastically supports, because he believes it will bring badly needed services for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender students.
(ed. note: precisely what needs and services are required for LGBT students above that of the rest of the student population?)
Some members of that community believe it would show that there are many more LGBT students than university officials realize.
“I think the numbers are way bigger than we really imagine or know,” Roman said.
(ed. note: And? )
The sexual orientation question would likely be optional. That may mean that a sizable number of students would not respond or would do so dishonestly — skewing the results, said Raja Bhattar, the director of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Center at UCLA.
(ed. note: Questions: is this implying then that Bhattar thinks the inquiry should be mandatory and if so, how does making it mandatory compel the questionee from being any less or more forthright in his answer?)
The data would be collected from incoming freshmen and transfer students.
High school senior Brian Vo, who was visiting his friend Quincy Vien on campus, said he wouldn’t mind being asked.
“I think it’s fine. They’re just collecting information to kind of cater to the population. It’s not obligatory — it’s voluntary — so it’s up to you whether you want to or not.”
(ed. note: Cater? How about pander?)
That's about as much ridiculousness as can be fit into one news story. Congrats.
It really boils down to a social engineering statistical make-work program.
And with respect to the big lie: Similar to the contraception mandate and the valuable Congressional testimony given by their cute little mascot, Sandra Fluke, who decided to go public with her sex life and thinks that others should pay for the same, the statist-left's desire for the bedroom to be off-limits to inquiry and public policy proves itself to be just that... as it always has been.
With these two examples, the mask is beginning to slip in regards to the amount of privacy and autonomy the political class will allow you to have.
Via Leslie at Temple of Mut: the GOP's "war on reproductive rights" in graphical image form.
I think the “War on Women” is more along the lines of the film, “Wag the Dog“: Since, the president does not seem to have much of a chance of being re-elected, one of his advisers contacts a top Hollywood producer in order to manufacture a war that the president can heroically end, all through mass media.
I can imagine the discussion now: I am sure it went along these lines:
Stanley Motss: The President will be a hero. He brought peace.
Conrad ‘Connie’ Brean: But there was never a war.
Stanley Motss: All the greater accomplishment.