By Rick Rodriguez
I am for a national language. I am for multilingual individuals right to express themselves in the language of their choice. In the proposed Language Bill SB 242, the government, specifically Senator Yee, is introducing a bill that would make it against the law for an employer to require the use of a specific language unless required as a business necessity or for safety purposes. The contention is prohibiting the use of a language other than English is discriminatory. While I can see that any issue gets blurred when discrimination enters the fray; in this case, a deleterious inference shouldn't be used as the main premise of the argument. The very nature of the contention of discrimination begs the question when will it all end; gender, race, sex, color, etc, and now language! Are we really discriminating requiring a mainstream language (English) to serve as a unifying language of the Masses? Is it not imperative for communication sakes, personal growth, competitive employment factors, and improving society as a whole? Are these acts discriminatory?
San Ramon Valley Times 4/15/2009 "Language Bill" by Rick Rodriguez
Letter to Editor:
"I disagree with your endorsement of SB 242 "Back Language Bill" Times editorial April 9, and I don't believe it will achieve the strong signal that you believe Californians will embrace; the state's diversity. That will only be achieved when terms like "non-Hispanic Caucasians and single largest ethnic group" become relics of the past. You claim that you are for diversity; yet, the terms you use to describe people are divisive. These terms continue to propagate the notion of separateness, and as was the case with the LPGA players, introduce situations inferring ethnocentrism
Moreover, lost in this debate is the tremendous value multilingual individuals contribute to many facets of society. Endorsing a language bill that allows individuals to continue to embrace native languages will undoubtedly lead them down the path of least resistance: not learning the English language!"
Again, my stated purpose is not that I am for any discriminatory contentions. Frankly, I am for individual growth, and it is my belief that this bill will limit or permit individuals to take the easy way out rather than push them toward improving, refining, or being of greater service to society. This can be accomplished by learning the mainstream language (English) while continuing to communicate in their preferred language!
