# Congress votes to end gender id/gay job discrimination



## Luddly Neddite (Nov 7, 2013)

ENDA Vote: Senate Votes To Outlaw LGBT Workplace Discrimination



> enda vote
> 
> WASHINGTON -- The Senate voted Thursday to approve the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, landmark civil rights legislation that would make it illegal to discriminate against LGBT individuals in the workplace.
> 
> ...



What took so long?

Of all things that is not the business of an employer, this is right up there at the top.


----------



## Stephanie (Nov 7, 2013)

good grief, how many frikken laws do these special people need?

we already have laws on top of laws on discrimination...talk about a waste of our money..Democrats will find a way to milk what they think will buy votes


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Nov 7, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> ENDA Vote: Senate Votes To Outlaw LGBT Workplace Discrimination
> 
> 
> 
> ...



This is an example of the sound, responsible governance the people expect of Congress, in this case protecting citizens from workplace discrimination.


----------



## lakeview (Nov 7, 2013)

Congress spends too much time in session.


----------



## Stephanie (Nov 7, 2013)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > ENDA Vote: Senate Votes To Outlaw LGBT Workplace Discrimination
> ...



oh brother, they already HAD PROTECTION
just another useless frikken law
partisan hack


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Nov 7, 2013)

lakeview said:


> Congress spends too much time in session.



I agree.

125 days a year on only $175K-$200K is asking way too much of them.


----------



## lakeview (Nov 7, 2013)

I'd be willing to pay them more if they'd promise to only come into work 50 days per year.


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Nov 7, 2013)

lakeview said:


> I'd be willing to pay them more if they'd promise to only come into work 50 days per year.



We're stuck with them so I'd prefer they stopped boozing and golfing and just do their jobs. As it is, they're the biggest recipients of welfare in our history. 

Seeing the haters pissed about equal rights is worth a lot.


----------



## lakeview (Nov 7, 2013)

If you're into meaningless political gestures that's cool, I just think that if Congress doesn't have anything important to do they should just go home and chill.


----------



## Katzndogz (Nov 7, 2013)

How long will it be before the first man sues because he wasn't hired as a wet nurse?


----------



## Stephanie (Nov 7, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> How long will it be before the first man sues because he wasn't hired as a wet nurse?



I bet luddy and clay are just waiting,  after all the law just passed


----------



## Nosmo King (Nov 7, 2013)

Boehner says freedom from discrimination will cost businesses too much.  At the very least, he hides his fear of freedom.  The stock Conservative bigot does not disguise their ignorance as we'll.

Why on earth would anyone claiming to love America oppose this bill?  

Perhaps they love America, but they clearly hate Americans!

What the haters fail to realize, among other things, is the popular don't need protection under law, the unpopular certainly do.


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Nov 7, 2013)

ENDA criticisms: we rank the dumbest.



> Thursday afternoon, the Employment Nondiscrimination Act passed the Senate by a 64-32 vote, drawing unanimous Democratic support plus votes from 10 Republican backers. The bill, while far from perfect, would go a long way toward protecting gay, lesbian, and trans people against discriminatory workplace practices&#8212;which is why a coalition of conservatives and libertarians have begun attacking it. As ENDA skates toward an uncertain future in the House, here are its opponents&#8217; arguments (plus my own rejoinders), ranked from most idiotic to most innovative.



And, sure nuff, the first one is popular among the wacko haters here: 



> 1) Gay people are weird, and trans people are gross.



Number 2 is also a fave around here -



> 2) ENDA is unnecessary and unpopular.



Equality is never weird, gross or unnecessary. If its unpopular, tuff.


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Nov 7, 2013)

Nosmo King said:


> Boehner says freedom from discrimination will cost businesses too much.  At the very least, he hides his fear of freedom.  The stock Conservative bigot does not disguise their ignorance as we'll.
> 
> Why on earth would anyone claiming to love America oppose this bill?
> 
> ...



Those who hate equal freedoms and rights as guaranteed by our Constitution also hate our country. They're the same traitors who side with other countries over their own. 

They're welcome to leave but no. They stay here, availing themselves of the very same freedoms and rights they want to take away from other Americans.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 7, 2013)

The dems are going to use this as one of several tools to wind up their base next fall, just as the pubs are going to use gay marriage and abortion.


----------



## Stephanie (Nov 7, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Boehner says freedom from discrimination will cost businesses too much.  At the very least, he hides his fear of freedom.  The stock Conservative bigot does not disguise their ignorance as we'll.
> ...



why don't you go try and make them leave? or you're just billy bad ass on a message board..good frikken grief you and dramatics
 damn sure don't talk of banning abortion..those little babies don't need rights like homosexuals...wonder if they did ban it you would leave this country?


----------



## lakeview (Nov 7, 2013)

After only being on this board for a few days it's already clear that Godwin may have to update his Law to include abortion, it tends to show up just as often as Nazis do.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 7, 2013)

Yup, and Stephanie is in half of them, at least


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Nov 7, 2013)

Stephanie said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



"...them..."

Like you haven't sided with any and every other country that's even mentioned here. 

Just once, take responsibility for what you say and do. 

Just once, don't lie.


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Nov 7, 2013)

Steffy's as a Nazi? 

Well, Nazis are fascists gone rabid, right?


----------



## Iceman (Nov 8, 2013)

The freedoms of normal Americans are continually being encroached upon more and more everyday. The Founders are rolling in their graves at what their nation has become.


----------



## Tank (Nov 8, 2013)

One day as part of diversity training, all people will have to have to try homosexual sex


----------



## MeBelle (Nov 8, 2013)

Nosmo King said:


> Boehner says freedom from discrimination will cost businesses too much.  At the very least, he hides his fear of freedom.  The stock Conservative bigot does not disguise their ignorance as we'll.
> 
> Why on earth would anyone claiming to love America oppose this bill?
> 
> ...



*The Speaker believes this legislation will increase frivolous litigation and cost American jobs, especially small business jobs*, Boehner spokesman Michael Steel said in an email Monday.

Spokesman: John Boehner against the Employment Non-Discrimination Act - Jake Sherman - POLITICO.com

So instead of all the 'haters' talk, why not propose a solution to what Boehner really said?


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Nov 8, 2013)

lakeview said:


> If you're into meaningless political gestures that's cool, I just think that if Congress doesn't have anything important to do they should just go home and chill.



That the republican House refuses to acknowledge workplace discrimination doesnt make the Senates measure a meaningless political gesture, it exhibits republicans contempt for working Americans  which of course is nothing new.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Nov 8, 2013)

Iceman said:


> The freedoms of normal Americans are continually being encroached upon more and more everyday. The Founders are rolling in their graves at what their nation has become.



Nonsense. 

Homosexuals are normal Americans, and it should be repugnant to every American that someone must sustain discrimination in the workplace solely as a consequence of  his sexual orientation.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Nov 8, 2013)

Nosmo King said:


> Boehner says freedom from discrimination will cost businesses too much.  At the very least, he hides his fear of freedom.  The stock Conservative bigot does not disguise their ignorance as we'll.
> 
> *Why on earth would anyone claiming to love America oppose this bill?
> 
> ...



Because theyre afraid  afraid of change, diversity, and dissent; most on the right are terrified, in fact. 

They incorrectly perceive such change as some sort of a threat, when in fact the actual threat stems from fearful conservative reactionaries fighting against the change they fear; and seeking to deny citizens their civil liberties is the means by which most on the right oppose that change.


----------



## Iceman (Nov 8, 2013)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > The freedoms of normal Americans are continually being encroached upon more and more everyday. The Founders are rolling in their graves at what their nation has become.
> ...



No, freedom of association is not nonsense, it is one of the freedoms our nation was founded on. Yes, the founders are rolling in their graves. "Civil Rights" are merely an assault on the rights of free association and private property. 

Sorry, you're just wrong and ill-informed on American history.


----------



## Iceman (Nov 8, 2013)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > The freedoms of normal Americans are continually being encroached upon more and more everyday. The Founders are rolling in their graves at what their nation has become.
> ...



So this is what it comes down to, you want to use the muscle of FedGov to impose your perverse morality on the rest of us.


----------



## Politico (Nov 8, 2013)

Akk these pages of discussion about a 'law' that is not a law yet. For aa political forum you people are clueless on how things work.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Nov 8, 2013)

Congress votes to end gender id/gay job discrimination 

Definitive proof that Luddly does not live in the same universe as the rest of us.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Nov 8, 2013)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > ENDA Vote: Senate Votes To Outlaw LGBT Workplace Discrimination
> ...



How is it sound to make it harder for businesses to make legitimate decisions?


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Nov 8, 2013)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> lakeview said:
> 
> 
> > If you're into meaningless political gestures that's cool, I just think that if Congress doesn't have anything important to do they should just go home and chill.
> ...



Can you give numbers and/or examples of this workplace discrimination?

Didn't think so.


----------



## Politico (Nov 8, 2013)

Businesses can still fire them. You just need to make sure you have them documented on other stuff.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Nov 8, 2013)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > The freedoms of normal Americans are continually being encroached upon more and more everyday. The Founders are rolling in their graves at what their nation has become.
> ...



Actually, by definition, homosexuals are not normal, which is why you think they need special treatment to make up for the fact that they are different. If you were more comfortable with them you wouldn't need a law to make you like them.


----------



## Flopper (Nov 8, 2013)

JakeStarkey said:


> The dems are going to use this as one of several tools to wind up their base next fall, just as the pubs are going to use gay marriage and abortion.


I haven't read the bill so I don't know whether I support it.  However, I would guess the chance of the House passing this is somewhere zero and minus one.  I hate to see congress wasting time and tax payer money on legislation that just isn't going to pass like the 46 Obamacare repeals in the House.  Meanwhile the immigration bill, which has a chance of passing is bogged down in House.


----------



## Flopper (Nov 8, 2013)

Politico said:


> Businesses can still fire them. You just need to make sure you have them documented on other stuff.


These days you really need documentation on anyone you fire.


----------



## Stephanie (Nov 8, 2013)

when all isn't going good for the slimy Democrats/commies

drag out the homosexuals and use them to beat you people over the head with


----------



## Stephanie (Nov 8, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> > Luddly Neddite said:
> ...



Just for us all, shoot and kill your high and mighty horse you ride in on
You are for the KILLING of innocent life so don't come in here wailing over Responsibility...you get more upset over people wearing fur than abortion..
we ALREADY have 100 of laws for homosexuals...You think using the government to force this issue on people then I am for using the government to ban abortion


----------



## Nosmo King (Nov 8, 2013)

MeBelle60 said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Boehner says freedom from discrimination will cost businesses too much.  At the very least, he hides his fear of freedom.  The stock Conservative bigot does not disguise their ignorance as we'll.
> ...


Boehner's argument is it's cheaper to discriminate.  It costs less to suppress people.


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Nov 8, 2013)

All you homophobic anti-Americans need to just relax. Take a few slow deep breaths.

Your fellow homophobic, anti-American Rs and t-potties in the House won't pass this because they don't believe in the Constitutional guarantee of equality for all Americans any more than you do.


----------



## Stephanie (Nov 8, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> All you homophobic anti-Americans need to just relax. Take a few slow deep breaths.
> 
> Your fellow homophobic, anti-American Rs and t-potties in the House won't pass this because they don't believe in the Constitutional guarantee of equality of all Americans any more than you do.




when you start calling for equality for those aborted we'll care about the rest of your high and mighty bs

now go beat your chest and sling more poo


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 8, 2013)

false comparison, Stephanie


----------



## WorldWatcher (Nov 8, 2013)

Stephanie said:


> oh brother, they already HAD PROTECTION
> just another useless frikken law
> partisan hack




*Federally:*
No they don't, LGBT is not covered under current federal employment non-discrimination laws.

*Federally:*
Of 50 States, 60% provide no employment protection to LGBT under law.  (LINK)



>>>>


----------



## WorldWatcher (Nov 8, 2013)

>

BTW - I support the repeal of non-discrimination (Employment and Public Accommodation) laws as applied to private business.


>>>>


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Nov 8, 2013)

Why are rw's so afraid of their own Constitution? 

Why are they afraid of equality for all Americans?


----------



## Katzndogz (Nov 8, 2013)

Equality of perversion.  That's a new one.

Businesses will just become more careful in vetting potential employees such as only hiring those that are known to someone else.   Someone who is trustworthy.   Getting a job will depend more on who you know than what you can do.   Employers already use social media extensively.   The employer will go through facebook, twitter, and find out all about a candidate before they even get in for an interview.  After all, even a gay person cannot say they were denied a job if they never even were interviewed for the job.


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Nov 8, 2013)

Like I said, the anti-American traitors in the House will vote it down.


----------



## Stephanie (Nov 8, 2013)

millions of people losing their insurance coverage because of Democrats...

but homosexuals a small percent is this country is damn way more important folks

just accept it...or they will use government to FORCE it on you like they did OfailCare


----------



## WorldWatcher (Nov 8, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> All you homophobic anti-Americans need to just relax. Take a few slow deep breaths.
> 
> Your fellow homophobic, anti-American Rs and t-potties in the House won't pass this because they don't believe in the Constitutional guarantee of equality for all Americans any more than you do.




The Constitution is a limiting document on government, it does not require equal treatment by private individuals acting in a private capacity.  It requires equal treatment of all citizens by government entities.



>>>>


----------



## Nosmo King (Nov 8, 2013)

WorldWatcher said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > All you homophobic anti-Americans need to just relax. Take a few slow deep breaths.
> ...


That's the argument offered up by bigots in the old South when it was decided that all Americans, no matter their race were to receive equal accommodations in a public business.  If you are open to the public, it was decided and rightfully so, you must BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC regardless of the make up of that public.

If you ran Greyhound bus lines for instance, you could not legally force Black passengers to the back of the bus.  If you ran a lunch counter, you could not legally refuse service to Black customers merely because they were Black.  If you refuse to hire someone based on his or her sexual orientation, your actions should have no legal cover either.

Conservatives are fond of saying "Freedom isn't free".  In this matter, we see that the cost of freedom for all Americans is overcoming the bigotry and hatred Conservatives harbor toward their fellow Americans.

This is nothing new.  Conservatives have ALWAYS provided the obstacles to freedom here in America.  Civil Rights for Blacks, women and other minorities would be a given had it not been for the resistance of Conservatives.  And yet the Conservatives claim to 'love America'.  I makes one wonder what about America they love so much.


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro (Nov 8, 2013)

Nosmo King said:


> Boehner says freedom from discrimination will cost businesses too much.  At the very least, he hides his fear of freedom.  The stock Conservative bigot does not disguise their ignorance as we'll.
> 
> Why on earth would anyone claiming to love America oppose this bill?



Because it's anti-freedom, that's why.  You will, of course, claim that it's promoting freedom by protecting homosexuals in the workplace, but it actually takes away the freedom of the employer to employ whom he wants at will.  These kinds of laws are an overreach by the federal government.


----------



## WorldWatcher (Nov 8, 2013)

Dont Taz Me Bro said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Boehner says freedom from discrimination will cost businesses too much.  At the very least, he hides his fear of freedom.  The stock Conservative bigot does not disguise their ignorance as we'll.
> ...




This is just my humble opinion of course...

But I think one of the real reasons to oppose ENDA is because if codifies in Federal law sex-orientation as a "protected class" and such a designation will ultimately be argued in Civil Marriage cases.


>>>>


----------



## Iceman (Nov 8, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> All you homophobic anti-Americans need to just relax. Take a few slow deep breaths.
> 
> Your fellow homophobic, anti-American Rs and t-potties in the House won't pass this because they don't believe in the Constitutional guarantee of equality for all Americans any more than you do.



LOL, now I am anti-American for opposing this bill?

You are either with the homosexuals or against us! LOL, sounds familiar, who else said something like that?


----------



## Iceman (Nov 8, 2013)

Stephanie said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > All you homophobic anti-Americans need to just relax. Take a few slow deep breaths.
> ...


 What about aborting gay fetuses, could they support that?


----------



## Nosmo King (Nov 8, 2013)

Dont Taz Me Bro said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Boehner says freedom from discrimination will cost businesses too much.  At the very least, he hides his fear of freedom.  The stock Conservative bigot does not disguise their ignorance as we'll.
> ...


If a person is qualified, reliable and performs the assigned duties well, should the employer have the freedom to fire that person because they happen to be gay?  The freedom you're defending is the freedom to discriminate.  The freedom I'm defending is the freedom of an individual to freely be himself.  I put it to you: which is the nobler, more American version of freedom?


----------



## Nosmo King (Nov 8, 2013)

Iceman said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > All you homophobic anti-Americans need to just relax. Take a few slow deep breaths.
> ...


Opposing this bill shows that you are not for equality and freedom at all.


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro (Nov 8, 2013)

Nosmo King said:


> If a person is qualified, reliable and performs the assigned duties well, should the employer have the freedom to fire that person because they happen to be gay?



In my opinion, no, they should not, but if you believe in living in a free country then that means an employer has the right to employ who ever he wants and terminate their employment when ever he wants for what ever reason.



> The freedom you're defending is the freedom to discriminate.



Correct.  You have the right to be a shit bag if you want.



> The freedom I'm defending is the freedom of an individual to freely be himself.



By robbing somebody else of their freedom.



> I put it to you: which is the nobler, more American version of freedom?



The freedom of people making their own choices free of coercion of government authority.  That is the more noble version of American freedom.


----------



## Nosmo King (Nov 8, 2013)

Dont Taz Me Bro said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > If a person is qualified, reliable and performs the assigned duties well, should the employer have the freedom to fire that person because they happen to be gay?
> ...


You have a decidedly warped sense of "freedom"  It seems that freedom, to you, means the freedom to commit actions limiting someone else's freedom.  Freedom to me is much broader.  No employer should have the freedom to exercise his hatred by denying someone employment for no cause other than the employer hates the employee's immutable circumstance.  Yours is the "freedom" exercised by the slaveholder.  Hardly a freedom to be embraced by a free people.   

Now, you may think that anti-discrimination statutes are coercion.  But they are actually the way we can make the whole of the country free.  Free from blind hatred and bigotry and the development of what is, essentially second class Americans.  If you think an employer has the right to terminate someone's employment simply because that employee is gay, what stops an employer from terminating someone's employment because they have an Irish surname or have blue eyes or are left handed?  If none of those immutable factors do not adversely impact the job assigned to that worker, there is no real valid reason to fire that worker, is there?


----------



## Katzndogz (Nov 8, 2013)

Nosmo King said:


> Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



If someone has a job, is qualified, reliable and performs well, it HIGHLY doubtful that the person will be fired because it's found out that the person is gay.   Unless the gay guy starts losing it over a coworker and start harassing him.   Should an employer have to hire someone just because they are gay, whether they are qualified and reliable or not.

None of us are able to be freely ourselves.  Being freely yourself is probably the number one reason why people are fired.   There is no "nobler" version of freedom that doesn't impose on someone else's freedom.   If the gay guy has the freedom to act out at work, then anyone working with him or her, has the same freedom to act out anti gay feelings.  That's freedom to be freely yourself.   

We don't discriminate enough, there should be more of it.


----------



## Nosmo King (Nov 8, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> ...


The law doesn't say that someone must be hired because they happen to be gay.  That's a specious argument and you know it.  

Workplace romances too often go awry and often they result in someone loosing their job.  That should apply to gay and straight alike.  

What the law says is an employer cannot fire someone because they happen to be gay.

Our society becomes greater the more we know and interact with our fellow citizens.  Discrimination and hatred stymies that growth.  Asking for more discrimination is a fool's errand.  Segregation and hatred and fear do NOTHING to advance society.


----------



## Katzndogz (Nov 8, 2013)

Nosmo King said:


> Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



Employers should be absolutely free to terminate employment because of a surname, or have blue eyes, or are left handed.   That leaves the person "free" to go somewhere they are appreciated.  Does an employee have the right to quit because the employer is left handed, or has an Irish surname or blue eyes?    No one would compel an employee to work for someone they consider objectionable.   Well, same thing.   A man or woman that may have worked for the same company for 25 years gets a new employer when the business is sold.  The new owner is gay and he comes to work in a dress every day.  Does the employee have the right to quit?  Can the employee say "I don't want to look at you in that dress every day"?  The employee can go further than that and tell the new boss that he hates gays.   Is there any circumstance that could legally be used to force that employee to stay?    Even if the employee was key, the backbone of the company, can anything be used to compel his attendance every day?


----------



## Nosmo King (Nov 8, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> ...



The employee/employer relationship is not an apples to apples comparison.  An employee is free to quit whenever they desire.  Employment is voluntary, not slavery.

But an employer should not fire an employee without cause, and that cause cannot be due to an immutable circumstance of said employee.  To deny legitimate work, a means on which to live due to bigotry is simply unfair and un-American.


----------



## whitehall (Nov 8, 2013)

Since the homosexual bullies think it's fine to shock little girls with hairy pretend females in school bathrooms and locker rooms why not go all the way (no pun intended) and legalize everything related to sexual conduct? Let your imagination be your guide.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Nov 8, 2013)

Nosmo King said:


> Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



I also support the right of a gay employer to fire someone who converts to Evangelical Christianity and starts preaching about homosexuality being a sin, but don't let the fact that you are advocating for forcing that gay person not to be able to fire an obnoxious asshole prove to you that you are wrong.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Nov 8, 2013)

Nosmo King said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > Luddly Neddite said:
> ...



Supporting it shows you are an idiot.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Nov 8, 2013)

Nosmo King said:


> Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



I should pos rep you for this, I actually laughed out loud.

Telling gay people that they cannot fire someone for for being a Christian is a lot more limiting of their freedom than telling the Christian he has to look for another job.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Nov 8, 2013)

Nosmo King said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



The law didn't say that employers had to give preferential treatment based on past actions of other people either, until it did.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Nov 8, 2013)

Nosmo King said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



Why shouldn't they fire people without cause? Doesn't requiring cause, whatever the fuck you think that is, make the employer the salve?


----------



## Iceman (Nov 8, 2013)

Nosmo King said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > Luddly Neddite said:
> ...



No I don't support equality for all, nor did the Founders of the United States. So to suggest blanket egalitarianism is an American value is incorrect. But I do support free association(aka discrimination). In a free society individuals have the right to associate and disassociate with whomever they want for whatever reason they want.


----------



## Nosmo King (Nov 8, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Katzndogz said:
> ...


I want to understand your position.  Is this just more good ol' boy gay bashing, or is it your contention that no workers should have any rights in the workplace at any time?  Do your principles allow for any consideration of labor as humans and not merely a commodity?


----------



## Flopper (Nov 8, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> ...


Employees should be judge based on only one criteria, the quality of their work versus the amount they are paid. It should make no difference, what the employee's sexual preference are, their skin color, their sex, their ethnicity, or their religion.  It's their ability to do their job that's important.  It's good business and it's right thing to do.


----------



## Katzndogz (Nov 8, 2013)

Flopper said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



Because it's good business, most successful business people will conduct their affairs like you propose.   That it's the "right" thing to do depends on your personal opinion of what right means.   It's not the right thing to do just because it's the politically correct thing to do.   Certain businesses may want to hire ONLY gays.   I don't know whether Barney's on Wilshire has a policy of only hiring gays or whether it just worked out that way but all the sales people are gay.   It works for this store.  Should they be forced to hire some token straight just to show how diverse they are?


----------



## Flopper (Nov 8, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> Flopper said:
> 
> 
> > Katzndogz said:
> ...


No, sexual preference has not been a major factor in job discrimination as it has been for blacks and females.  Hiring policies toward blacks and females have resulted in significantly lower pay and job discrimination.  That is not the case with gays.  Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender earn more, save more, have less debt compared to national averages.
Gay people earn more, owe less - Dec. 6, 2012


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Nov 8, 2013)

Nosmo King said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



They should have a right not to be killed, not to have their property stolen, and all the other rights everyone has. They should also have a right to negotiate whatever contract they want.

You prefer to take at least one of those rights away from them, and call it freedom. The thing you don't seem to get is that anything that takes away anyone's rights means less freedom.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Nov 8, 2013)

Flopper said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



Does that mean you oppose the law? Or are you actually lying?


----------



## Flopper (Nov 8, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Flopper said:
> 
> 
> > Katzndogz said:
> ...


I have no strong feeling concerning the bill.  I do believe discrimination against gay and lesbians in the workplace is wrong, however I'm not sure we need a law against it. About half the states already have such laws.


----------



## Politico (Nov 9, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> All you homophobic anti-Americans need to just relax. Take a few slow deep breaths.
> 
> Your fellow homophobic, anti-American Rs and t-potties in the House won't pass this because they don't believe in the Constitutional guarantee of equality for all Americans any more than you do.



This drivel is so old.


----------



## Nosmo King (Nov 9, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...


Do American citizens have the right to be homosexuals?  Do Amerians citizens have a right to earn a living?  Should American citizens have their rights protected by law?


----------



## Katzndogz (Nov 9, 2013)

Nosmo King said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



Americans do not have a right to any, all and every job they wish.   There's no such right.  While Americans have the right to be homosexuals if they wish, there is no right to have everyone else accept their homosexual relationships.   Sorry, the right just doesn't exist.


----------



## Nosmo King (Nov 9, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...


i did not specify "any job they wish". You added that caveat.  Would you like to answer the question as it was posed?  Do Americans have a right to earn a living?

And while you're mulling that over, can you answer this: is there a difference between "acceptance" and "toleration"?   Homosexuals, I believe, would settle for toleration, while Conservatives always seem to hide behind the semantic skirts of acceptance.


----------



## driveby (Nov 9, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> ENDA Vote: Senate Votes To Outlaw LGBT Workplace Discrimination
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Since Obama doesn't give a fuck about ONLY 5% of the population losing their health insurance, surely he will veto this bill that only deals with about 2% of the population?.......


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Nov 9, 2013)

Nosmo King said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



I wouldn't call it a right in the classical sense of the word.

They do, however, have the right to have the government leave them the fuck alone, even if they are homosexuals. That means the government cannot make being a homosexual illegal, it does not mean the government can force me to sleep with one.

And, no, the American people do not have a right to earn a living anymore than they have a right to live in your house.


----------



## Nosmo King (Nov 9, 2013)

quantum windbag said:


> nosmo king said:
> 
> 
> > quantum windbag said:
> ...



Americans do not have the right to earn a living?  Does that apply to all Americans, or are there specific classes of Americans?   If the right to earn a living is denied, what are those people supposed to do?  Why did you conflate the right to earn a living with trespass?


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Nov 9, 2013)

Nosmo King said:


> quantum windbag said:
> 
> 
> > nosmo king said:
> ...



It applies to everyone in the world. Nothing, anywhere, requires someone to hire somebody just because they need a job. If it did, there would be 0 unemployment. It isn't my fault you don't understand that.


----------



## Nosmo King (Nov 9, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > quantum windbag said:
> ...


I did not say that Americans had a right to be offered a job.  I asked if Americans had a right to earn a living.  Do American citizens have a right to earn a living?


----------



## eagle7_31 (Nov 9, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> ENDA Vote: Senate Votes To Outlaw LGBT Workplace Discrimination
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Congress did not vote, just the senate.


----------



## Wyld Kard (Nov 9, 2013)

Congress votes to end gender id/gay job discrimination   

And it opens the door to alot of frivolous lawsuits.


----------



## Katzndogz (Nov 9, 2013)

There are so many limitations on employers now, watch as the visible and available job market shrinks and employers to go agencies or word of mouth.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Nov 9, 2013)

Nosmo King said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



What part of my answer did you not understand?


----------



## Nosmo King (Nov 10, 2013)

Wildcard said:


> Congress votes to end gender id/gay job discrimination
> 
> And it opens the door to alot of frivolous lawsuits.


How dare Americans avail themselves of the justice system in order to secure their own rights! 

Frivolous is what the defendants call law suits.  Justice is what the plaintiffs seek.  On top of firing someone simply because they're homosexuals, would you keep them from seeking justice through the courts as well?


----------



## Katzndogz (Nov 10, 2013)

There is no right to a job.  There just isn't.  There is no right for a specific job with a specific employer.


----------



## Wyld Kard (Nov 11, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Boehner says freedom from discrimination will cost businesses too much.  At the very least, he hides his fear of freedom.  The stock Conservative bigot does not disguise their ignorance as we'll.
> ...





> Those who hate equal freedoms and rights as guaranteed by our Constitution also hate our country. They're the same traitors who side with other countries over their own.


----------



## LiberalatHeart (Nov 11, 2013)

Yes, it is a good thing that ENDA passed the Senate...but it will be killed in the Republican-controlled House. I do find Boehner's excuse for not bringing up for a vote pathetic, he is probably the worst House Speaker we have ever head....he is the Speaker of the House, not just the Republicans. Bring it up for a vote so we know which Congressmen/Congresswomen are against equal rights. If we want to bring frivolous lawsuits into this, I would assume that this would be the same position as those against the Equal Rights Bill of 1965 right?? I find it absolutely amazing at how arrogant and hateful Conservatives are towards the LGBT community. They demean them during speeches and on television, and then praise the constitution...because I guess the "Pursuit of Happiness" only applies to straight people in their eyes? Or, that they are "pro-life" yet the condone state-sanctioned executions. Ahhh, how the contradictions pile up.


----------



## Katzndogz (Nov 12, 2013)

Conservatives don't hate the LGBT community, we are just sick and tired of having their agenda shoved at us all the time and are fighting back.  Politically, before we have to take it to the streets which is already happening in some places.


----------



## Nosmo King (Nov 12, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> Conservatives don't hate the LGBT community, we are just sick and tired of having their agenda shoved at us all the time and are fighting back.  Politically, before we have to take it to the streets which is already happening in some places.


If Conservative truly don't hate the LGBT community, why won't Conservatives help pass a law protecting them?  Perhaps Conservatives believe that there isn't any discrimination faced by LGBT folks. Or perhaps Conservatives think that should ENDA pass, there will be an increased cost to businesses?  Can freedom from workplace discrimination bee just too costly?  Is there a price for freedom beyond the sacrifice made by our servicemen and women?  Is profit more important than freedom?


----------



## LiberalatHeart (Nov 12, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> Conservatives don't hate the LGBT community, we are just sick and tired of having their agenda shoved at us all the time and are fighting back.  Politically, before we have to take it to the streets which is already happening in some places.



Yea, they are shoving their agenda down your throats alright....how dare they seek equal rights in society??? Who are they to believe they should be married, not be refused services or jobs because of their orientation? Boy, go figure you guys are losing this battle...not to mention all the other minority groups. 

Really sad to see this kind of behavior about equal rights, especially in this day of age


----------



## bodecea (Nov 12, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> Conservatives don't hate the LGBT community, we are just sick and tired of having their agenda shoved at us all the time and are fighting back.  Politically, before we have to take it to the streets which is already happening in some places.



Same thing we heard about civil rights and women's rights.   You guys need to get a new schtick.


----------



## HUGGY (Nov 12, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> ENDA Vote: Senate Votes To Outlaw LGBT Workplace Discrimination
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Does that mean KrustyFrank and ButtWarriorToo will be tempted to come outta the closet?

Good grief.. they are both already insufferable...


----------



## naomibee (Nov 12, 2013)

Even though I don't like it. I also know it's no one's business what people do. There ways might not be mine. but so what!!!. let people live there own lives.


----------



## Ernie S. (Nov 12, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Boehner says freedom from discrimination will cost businesses too much.  At the very least, he hides his fear of freedom.  The stock Conservative bigot does not disguise their ignorance as we'll.
> ...


What about my freedom to hire who I choose? I did some digging and found a picture of you in business attire. Frankly, I don't want you interacting with my clients.







Seriously! Where does the Constitution state that your rights trump mine?


----------



## LiberalatHeart (Nov 12, 2013)

Exactly...also, it is truly hilarious to see Republicans oppose gay marriage, equal rights, voting rights, and other social issues. Then they shove the Constitution and other Founding Documents down everyone's throats...so I guess "Pursuit of Happiness" only applies to people who agree with them?


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Nov 12, 2013)

LiberalatHeart said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > Conservatives don't hate the LGBT community, we are just sick and tired of having their agenda shoved at us all the time and are fighting back.  Politically, before we have to take it to the streets which is already happening in some places.
> ...



Equal rights does not include forcing people to hire them simply because they are gay anymore than it is forcing girls to share the bathrooms with boys.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Nov 12, 2013)

LiberalatHeart said:


> Exactly...also, it is truly hilarious to see Republicans oppose gay marriage, equal rights, voting rights, and other social issues. Then they shove the Constitution and other Founding Documents down everyone's throats...so I guess "Pursuit of Happiness" only applies to people who agree with them?



Want to know what is truly hilarious?

Your belief that you are able to defend your positions.


----------



## Katzndogz (Nov 12, 2013)

LiberalatHeart said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > Conservatives don't hate the LGBT community, we are just sick and tired of having their agenda shoved at us all the time and are fighting back.  Politically, before we have to take it to the streets which is already happening in some places.
> ...



They have voluntarily chosen to engage in a behavior that others may or may not accept.  They have equal rights.  They have the same rights to marry as everyone else has, and the same prohibitions as any other pervert has.


----------



## LiberalatHeart (Nov 12, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> LiberalatHeart said:
> 
> 
> > Katzndogz said:
> ...



Well, that is a sad and weak comparison. This is not forcing anyone to hire someone based on their orientation. This is simply making it illegal to deny someone a job based on their orientation, just as it is illegal to refuse a job based on ethnicity, religion, and gender. But I guess based on your views, that you are against that too....pathetic.


----------



## Nosmo King (Nov 12, 2013)

Ernie S. said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...


ENDA doesn't say you MUST hire LBGT.  It says you cannot fire them BECAUSE they are LBGT.


----------



## LiberalatHeart (Nov 12, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> LiberalatHeart said:
> 
> 
> > Exactly...also, it is truly hilarious to see Republicans oppose gay marriage, equal rights, voting rights, and other social issues. Then they shove the Constitution and other Founding Documents down everyone's throats...so I guess "Pursuit of Happiness" only applies to people who agree with them?
> ...



I can defend my positions all week and twice on Sunday if you want to play that game. The Republican joke about frivolous lawsuits is old and no one is buying that snake oil, but it seems you may be one of their dealers???? Using your logic...employers should also be able to refuse work to a woman, an African American, or a Catholic. America is based on equality, yet Republicans are against that....shocker! That was the party that opposed Civil Rights legislation and just about any other equal rights bill brought up in the last 100 years.


----------



## LiberalatHeart (Nov 12, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> LiberalatHeart said:
> 
> 
> > Katzndogz said:
> ...



You can take that argument and shove it up your ass, because that is where it belongs. You must also believe in conversion therapy, that people "choose" to be LGBT? Amazing, simply amazing that in this day of age...people could be so ignorant and stupid. And you are wrong, many states (controlled by Republicans, I know surprise!) still ban same-sex marriage and would take the first chance they got to make it illegal for same-sex couples to adopt children...disgraceful. The protection of marriage is bullshit, it is an institution with a 50% failure rate....I do not think same-sex couples are doing anything to bring it down.

So put that in your pipe and smoke it!


----------



## Iceman (Nov 12, 2013)

LiberalatHeart said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > LiberalatHeart said:
> ...



Mayor De Blasio's wife was a former lesbian. She changed. Did she make a choice to be straight or was she born gay?


----------



## Nosmo King (Nov 12, 2013)

Iceman said:


> LiberalatHeart said:
> 
> 
> > Katzndogz said:
> ...


She is not a lesbian.  The article she wrote was from the perspective of a lesbian.  Much the way Truman Capote was not a killer, but he wrote In Cold Blood.


----------



## Iceman (Nov 12, 2013)

Nosmo King said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > LiberalatHeart said:
> ...



Uh no. She is a self admitted former lesbian. 
Mayoral candidate Bill de Blasio?s wife Chirlane McCray, a former lesbian, opens up about falling in love with a man - NY Daily News

So was she born homosexual or did she chose to be straight?


----------



## LiberalatHeart (Nov 12, 2013)

She could be bisexual....I guess I am just not seeing the argument you are making.


----------



## Iceman (Nov 12, 2013)

LiberalatHeart said:


> She could be bisexual....I guess I am just not seeing the argument you are making.



She didn't come out as bisexual. It is very clear in the article she came out to her parents as a lesbian when she was 17. Was she born bisexual or did she chose to marry a man later in her life. If she was born bisexual, how come she didn't know it until later in life?


----------



## Katzndogz (Nov 12, 2013)

Iceman said:


> LiberalatHeart said:
> 
> 
> > Katzndogz said:
> ...



People can change their behavior without changing themselves.  In this case being a lesbian paid very little.  Being the wife of a loudmouth paid much more.


----------



## Iceman (Nov 12, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > LiberalatHeart said:
> ...



So she chose to be straight? This makes sexuality a choice.


----------



## WorldWatcher (Nov 12, 2013)

Iceman said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > Iceman said:
> ...




#1  Some try to define the world as a binary environment - true/false, yes/no, 1/0.  When in fact sexuality consist over range of possibility where the individual is 100% attacked to females or 100% attacked to males.  The truth is though that sexuality can exist in a range.

#2  Secondly don't confuse changing behavior with changing sexual orientation.  They are not the same thing.


>>>>


----------



## Ernie S. (Nov 12, 2013)

Nosmo King said:


> Ernie S. said:
> 
> 
> > Luddly Neddite said:
> ...



You come to work looking like that and you are NOT going to deal with my clients.


----------



## Iceman (Nov 12, 2013)

WorldWatcher said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > Katzndogz said:
> ...



So then it is not a choice, or you are not born one way? Then why do some harp on homosexuals being born that way? As though it means something?


----------



## Ernie S. (Nov 12, 2013)

LiberalatHeart said:


> She could be bisexual....I guess I am just not seeing the argument you are making.



I'm guessing that you are an idiot. She, herself says she is a "former lesbian" WTF are you to doubt that?


----------



## WorldWatcher (Nov 12, 2013)

Iceman said:


> WorldWatcher said:
> 
> 
> > Iceman said:
> ...




Again, trying to apply a binary status to something that can exist as a range.

Think of a very tall, narrow bell curve representing a population.  100% Heterosexuals represent the tall center either attracted to only men or only women.  However at the outskirts there are those that can be attracted to either.

That doesn't mean it's a "choice" or it's "biological", it's a reflection of what is.  Sexual Orientation (binary or range) is a "choice" or it's "biological", completely different matter.


>>>>


----------



## LiberalatHeart (Nov 12, 2013)

Ernie S. said:


> LiberalatHeart said:
> 
> 
> > She could be bisexual....I guess I am just not seeing the argument you are making.
> ...



Nope, just giving a side...I have seen people who are bi-sexual come out as lesbians or gay. I have friends who are bi-sexual, but who call themselves (former)gay or lesbian. Just because she has come out as a (former) lesbian, doesn't show that people are not born gay or lesbian or bisexual, etc...This has been proven scientifically to an extent and is one of the key factors that conversion therapy was deemed illegal.

But mentioning science around a Republican is like throwing Holy water on the devil, they do not mix very well...


----------



## Iceman (Nov 12, 2013)

LiberalatHeart said:


> Ernie S. said:
> 
> 
> > LiberalatHeart said:
> ...


What do you know about "science"?


----------



## LiberalatHeart (Nov 12, 2013)

Why the need for quotations on Science, it is a field of study and discovery...not a hypothetical. 

What I have stated, are generally accepted scientific studies done on this subject....I will throw the question right back at you, what do you know?

I mainly study aeronautics for my license and career.


----------



## Iceman (Nov 12, 2013)

LiberalatHeart said:


> Why the need for quotations on Science, it is a field of study and discovery...not a hypothetical.
> 
> What I have stated, are generally accepted scientific studies done on this subject....I will throw the question right back at you, what do you know?
> 
> I mainly study aeronautics for my license and career.



So what about aeronautics makes you qualified to discuss homosexuality and the supposed "science" about one being genetically predisposed to it?


----------



## LiberalatHeart (Nov 12, 2013)

I just stated that what I have shared are the accepted results of scientific studies done over a period of time, which is what caused conversion therapy to be outlawed for the most part. 

And why is Science a theoretical to you??? Do you not accept Science as a field of study or knowledge, something that is required in schools? Or do you believe that there is only God and Science is a liberal phenomenon? I bet you believe that the world started with two white people in a garden who ate a forbidden fruit....and that evolution is a farce? Ahh, funny.

I stated this when I originally posted it, time for some glasses.


----------



## Iceman (Nov 12, 2013)

LiberalatHeart said:


> I just stated that what I have shared are the accepted results of scientific studies done over a period of time, which is what caused conversion therapy to be outlawed for the most part.
> 
> I stated this when I originally posted it, time for some glasses.



What scientific studies have shown there is a genetic predisposition to homosexuality? Links please.


----------



## LiberalatHeart (Nov 12, 2013)

Homosexuality & Choice: Are Gay People 'Born This Way?'


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Nov 12, 2013)

LiberalatHeart said:


> Why the need for quotations on Science, it is a field of study and discovery...not a hypothetical.
> 
> What I have stated, are generally accepted scientific studies done on this subject....I will throw the question right back at you, what do you know?
> 
> I mainly study aeronautics for my license and career.



I know that there is absolutely no scientific evidence that sexual preference is genetic.

I know that there is scientific evidence  that free will exists.

I know that anyone who denies either of those statements doesn't know enough about science to discuss the issues involved in who sleeps with whom.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Nov 12, 2013)

LiberalatHeart said:


> Homosexuality & Choice: Are Gay People 'Born This Way?'



That is an opinion piece written by a hack that ignores science, let me explain why.

First thing you see is this.



> We know, from many twin and adoption studies, that sexual preference has a genetic component.



The truth is exactly the opposite. If sexual preference was genetic then monozygotic twins would always have the same preference. The truth is that sexual preference is no more controlled by genetics than favorite colors or what language you speak.

Then it goes into the brain, and makes a bunch of unfounded claims, without once exploring causality. (I know causality is a scary word, but you need to understand it if you want to discuss science.) Are the differences in brain structure the result of, or the cause of, sexual preference? Since the author then goes off into other things that are not heritable in her discussion, it would be arguable that behavior influences brain structure. Since there is a whole field  devoted to the study of neuroplasticity, which is the accepted norm among neurologists now, and the article is basing its argument on the older, and mostly discredited, theory that the brain is static, guess which side has the batter science.

It does make one good point, one that totally destroys your attempt to defend gay rights as an outgrowth of sexual preference not being a free choice.



> If sexual preference can be altered, then people who support gay  rights cant rely on the argument that gay people should be protected  from discrimination because gay people have no choice but to be gay  an  argument that seems like an apology for homosexuality, as if  homosexuality is a disease for which there is no cure.
> There is  an element of homophobia in that argument the implication that gay  people would become straight, if only they could. Supporting gay  marriage becomes equivalent to supporting the construction of wheelchair  ramps. The gays cant help being that way approach is reminiscent of  the old view of homosexuality as a psychiatric illness.
> In a blog post for Slate, J. Bryan Lowder comments on Cynthia Nixons claim that her lesbianism is a choice. Lowder agrees with Nixon that blaming biology cedes a great deal of control to bigoted people.
> You  dont have to defend a controversial action by arguing that you have no  control over your behavior. In fact, when we you do so, you reinforce  the belief that your behavior is undesirable.
> Nobody has to prove  that biology forces them to vote for a particular political party,  practice a certain religion or follow a particular diet.



I actually like the point that, by defining sexual preference as something no one has control over, you are exhibiting homophobia. Personally, I think it is no one's business who I fuck. I don't need the government to protect my right to fuck who I want because I don't have a choice. I have free will, and they need to leave me the fuck alone despite the fact that I have a choice.

Maybe you should stop relying on fake science to define your politics, and base your positions on the fact that the government exist only to take away your rights, and the only way to make sure it doesn't do that is to refuse to give them power over your life.


----------



## LiberalatHeart (Nov 12, 2013)

Here is another link: Homosexual Behavior Largely Shaped By Genetics And Random Environmental Factors

And another: New Insight into the (Epi)Genetic Roots of Homosexuality | TIME.com


It is based off of well-tested hypotheses of evolution. The evidence and tests have pointed to epigenetics.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Nov 13, 2013)

LiberalatHeart said:


> Here is another link: Homosexual Behavior Largely Shaped By Genetics And Random Environmental Factors
> 
> And another: New Insight into the (Epi)Genetic Roots of Homosexuality | TIME.com
> 
> ...



Argument from authority, how original.

Educate yourself on epigentics before you start using it as a basis to defend absurd positions. Lamarckian evolution is so discredited in the scientific community that I don't even need to claim there is a consensus to argue against it.


----------

