Yesterday in the context of discussing sexual orientation discrimination, I wrote:
I have also seen it erroneously argued that because gays are not economically impoverished, they are thereby disqualified from any minority status....But even if gays are more affluent than straights (which if you've seen the neighborhoods in which gays disproportionately congregate, they appear to be), so too are Jews more affluent and better educated than Gentiles. And a similar point can be made regarding Asians to Caucasians. So do we then conclude that Jews and Asians are thereby forbidden from any bona-fide civil rights protection on the basis of their religion/ethnicity/race?
Homosexuals historically may not have been treated as badly as the blacks, but could argue that they've gotten it every bit as bad if not worse than women, the pregnant, the aged, the disabled, and most non-racial ethnic groups which are all protected.
So what about all of those non-racial ethnic minorities? Here is a story detailing one such claim brought by Frenchmen. Yes, individuals of French ethnic origin suing because they were discriminated against on the basis of their Frenchness (that's not a word, is it?). Being French is a protected civil rights category.
Do gays have to prove that they've been treated as badly as the blacks in America in order to be qualified for civil rights protection? Or just the French?