• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

LGBT Non-Discrimation Vote Passes Senate [W:215]

Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

TurtleDude said:
I know you won't agree with this but I believe a private business has the right to hire or fire whomever it wants PERIOD
Click to expand...

Then why didn't you say that instead of your story?

I also think the number of truly "private" businesses is much lower. If they get any kind of government assistance, they are not private. For example the NFL gets subsidies, banks get bailouts etc.
 
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

chromium said:
Then why didn't you say that instead of your story?

I also think the number of truly "private" businesses is much lower. If they get any kind of government assistance, they are not private. For example the NFL gets subsidies, banks get bailouts etc.
Click to expand...

that story had nothing to do with me. It was the first major gay discrimination hiring case that made the news in Cincinnati. Cincinnati passed some addition to its local laws prohibiting such firings.

I was not, nor have I ever been associated with or a partner of the Taft Law firm. I was merely offered a job there 30 years ago
 
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

chromium said:
Then why didn't you say that instead of your story?

I also think the number of truly "private" businesses is much lower. If they get any kind of government assistance, they are not private. For example the NFL gets subsidies, banks get bailouts etc.
Click to expand...

I am not aware of many law firms getting Government assistance.
 
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

TurtleDude said:
that story had nothing to do with me. It was the first major gay discrimination hiring case that made the news in Cincinnati. Cincinnati passed some addition to its local laws prohibiting such firings.

I was not, nor have I ever been associated with or a partner of the Taft Law firm. I was merely offered a job there 30 years ago
Click to expand...

Well allow me to tell a story. A gay law prof at a major public law school was denied tenure, which was very rare. He sued and the university, despite its policy and quite a history of liberalism tried to argue in court that the case should be tossed because *their non-discrimination policy was voluntary.* In other words, the state does not have an ENDA type law, so the college tried to say it could deny this guy tenure cause of his sexuality in spite of their decades-long written policy.

LawSchool.com, LawTV's site for law students, lawyers, future lawyers, law profs, college students studying for the LSAT, and law school graduates taking the bar exam.

"After Hammer sued in January 2005, one argument the university advanced was that its non-discrimination and diversity policies were suggestions rather than rules, according to briefs the university filed with the court."

ENDA will protect public employees too.
 
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

chromium said:
Well allow me to tell a story. A gay law prof at a major public law school was denied tenure, which was very rare. He sued and the university, despite its policy and quite a history of liberalism tried to argue in court that the case should be tossed because *their non-discrimination policy was voluntary.* In other words, the state does not have an ENDA type law, so the college tried to say it could deny this guy tenure cause of his sexuality in spite of their decades-long written policy.

LawSchool.com, LawTV's site for law students, lawyers, future lawyers, law profs, college students studying for the LSAT, and law school graduates taking the bar exam.

"After Hammer sued in January 2005, one argument the university advanced was that its non-discrimination and diversity policies were suggestions rather than rules, according to briefs the university filed with the court."

ENDA will protect public employees too.
Click to expand...

its a different issue than a law firm. It is almost impossible to argue that the U of Michigan-one of the three best public law schools in the USA (UVa and U Cal Berk. being the other two IMHO) is going to suffer any issues by having an openly gay professor

a conservative Republican (TAFT LAW FIRM) law firm who represents old conservative interests in Cincinnati might well suffer by offering partnership or maintaining the employment of an openly gay lawyer who constantly takes on pro bono cases that are contrary to the interests of the fee paying clients.

so i don't really see the point you are trying to make-
 
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

TurtleDude said:
its a different issue than a law firm. It is almost impossible to argue that the U of Michigan-one of the three best public law schools in the USA (UVa and U Cal Berk. being the other two IMHO) is going to suffer any issues by having an openly gay professor

a conservative Republican (TAFT LAW FIRM) law firm who represents old conservative interests in Cincinnati might well suffer by offering partnership or maintaining the employment of an openly gay lawyer who constantly takes on pro bono cases that are contrary to the interests of the fee paying clients.

so i don't really see the point you are trying to make-
Click to expand...

"first male professor in the history of the law school denied tenure"

goes on to list a few that likely voted no entirely because of his sexuality including anti-gay comments they made

He was almost certainly denied tenure due to being gay and they tried to say "so what?" in court. With ENDA they can't do that. Would UMich suffer? Of course not. Why was he denied tenure then? Bigoted law profs, just like my uncle's bigoted boss. That's all it takes to screw someone over, even in "liberal paradise"
 
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

chromium said:
"first male professor in the history of the law school denied tenure"

goes on to list a few that likely voted no entirely because of his sexuality including anti-gay comments they made

He was almost certainly denied tenure due to being gay and they tried to say "so what?" in court. With ENDA they can't do that. Would UMich suffer? Of course not. Why was he denied tenure then? Bigoted law profs, just like my uncle's bigoted boss. That's all it takes to screw someone over, even in "liberal paradise"
Click to expand...

I couldn't care less. if they denied a good professor tenure based on an issue that has ZERO to do with his abilities then they are stupid.

IN some cases being gay and advocating for gays is a non issue

in some cases it is
 
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

TurtleDude said:
a conservative Republican (TAFT LAW FIRM) law firm who represents old conservative interests in Cincinnati might well suffer by offering partnership or maintaining the employment of an openly gay lawyer who constantly takes on pro bono cases that are contrary to the interests of the fee paying clients.

so i don't really see the point you are trying to make-
Click to expand...

Ok so reading again, your argument is they should be able to fire him cause it "harms" the law firm. So your argument is certain clients were prejudiced against certain groups so the solution is to keep those groups out to the extent possible? The south would still be operating under jim crow then. I have no sympathy for the prejudiced clients, nor the law firm that would fire the gay worker to appease them. But according to you, that wasn't why he was fired.
 
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

chromium said:
Ok so reading again, your argument is they should be able to fire him cause it "harms" the law firm. So your argument is certain clients were prejudiced against certain groups so the solution is to keep those groups out to the extent possible? The south would still be operating under jim crow then. I have no sympathy for the prejudiced clients, nor the law firm that would fire the gay worker to appease them. But according to you, that wasn't why he was fired.
Click to expand...

I think the law firm has a right to do what it wants. if it does stupid things than it will hurt itself

but I don't think gays should be able to sue over that

I don't think the government should have the power to prevent private employers from firing or hiring whom they want.

He was fired probably because his in your face homosexuality offended some clients and his pro bono activities of advancing gay and other far left interests offended some and some probably didn't think he was spending enough time on what associates at big bucks firms are expected to do-making the partners lots of money

good night
 
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

DVSentinel said:
99% of Republicans aren't really trying to do anything. They had complete majority for 4 years and did absolutely nothing to reverse previous actions by the left.

The only two apparent constants in US politics is that the Reps won't do **** and the Dems will always do something stupid.
Click to expand...

Not disagreeing there, but as I said as long as a law like this is in place where "Christians and other religions" are protected from being fired just for their beliefs, yet LGBT are not, I will support LGBT to be protected as well. That's the way it goes.
 
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

TurtleDude said:
I know you won't agree with this but I believe a private business has the right to hire or fire whomever it wants PERIOD
Click to expand...

Again, I don't fully disagree with you as time has gone on I have changed my position such that if ALL protections are dissolved than I would agree. However, since all protections have NOT been dissolved, I will support LGBT being added to the list of protections. Why should someone be protected from being fired just because they believe in some sky god yet someone that happens to live another lifestyle like LGBT be denied? Sorry, don't agree with that and will support LGBT being added to that "protection' list until conservatives and others alike decide to dissolve THEIR protections as well.
 
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

TheNextEra said:
Again, I don't fully disagree with you as time has gone on I have changed my position such that if ALL protections are dissolved than I would agree. However, since all protections have NOT been dissolved, I will support LGBT being added to the list of protections. Why should someone be protected from being fired just because they believe in some sky god yet someone that happens to live another lifestyle like LGBT be denied? Sorry, don't agree with that and will support LGBT being added to that "protection' list until conservatives and others alike decide to dissolve THEIR protections as well.
Click to expand...

Well said
 
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

TheNextEra said:
Again, I don't fully disagree with you as time has gone on I have changed my position such that if ALL protections are dissolved than I would agree. However, since all protections have NOT been dissolved, I will support LGBT being added to the list of protections. Why should someone be protected from being fired just because they believe in some sky god yet someone that happens to live another lifestyle like LGBT be denied? Sorry, don't agree with that and will support LGBT being added to that "protection' list until conservatives and others alike decide to dissolve THEIR protections as well.
Click to expand...

I've seen exactly one on this forum say he's willing to do that, a couple others who are not Christian say "Ok remove race, gender, all protections," but yeah the vast majority of complaints here has been directed at specifically LGBT getting employment protection. Wonder what that tells us.
 
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

TheNextEra said:
Again, I don't fully disagree with you as time has gone on I have changed my position such that if ALL protections are dissolved than I would agree. However, since all protections have NOT been dissolved, I will support LGBT being added to the list of protections. Why should someone be protected from being fired just because they believe in some sky god yet someone that happens to live another lifestyle like LGBT be denied? Sorry, don't agree with that and will support LGBT being added to that "protection' list until conservatives and others alike decide to dissolve THEIR protections as well.
Click to expand...

agreed i think its insane to think one set or protection of rights is ok and another is wrong in this case.

but also i have to say for me personally i dont want any of those protections going anywhere, its the government job to protect rights and i want those rights protected.

I like that i live in a country that TRIES not to empower bigots and people that want to illegal discriminate.

Theres nothing ok to me about somebody firing somebody simply because of gender, race, religion, sexual orientation etc. That insane to me and something id never support. Not saying thats what you want just stating how i feel.
 
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

TheNextEra said:
Not disagreeing there, but as I said as long as a law like this is in place where "Christians and other religions" are protected from being fired just for their beliefs, yet LGBT are not, I will support LGBT to be protected as well. That's the way it goes.
Click to expand...

So, due to your dislike of Christians, you will continue taking incremental steps away from Freedom? Ok, but we didn't get where we are in a single giant leap but by one small step at a time, we probably won't fix in one giant step either, we will need to take small steps. The first step is always stopping the momentum/movement in the direction things are going. You cause the problem to recede until you stop it going forward.
 
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

AGENT J said:
agreed i think its insane to think one set or protection of rights is ok and another is wrong in this case.

but also i have to say for me personally i dont want any of those protections going anywhere, its the government job to protect rights and i want those rights protected.

I like that i live in a country that TRIES not to empower bigots and people that want to illegal discriminate.

Theres nothing ok to me about somebody firing somebody simply because of gender, race, religion, sexual orientation etc. That insane to me and something id never support. Not saying thats what you want just stating how i feel.
Click to expand...

Actually you don't. You support all kinds of protections for different groups but totally support and call for ****ing over white males. All means all, not all but white males.
 
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

DVSentinel said:
Actually you don't. You support all kinds of protections for different groups but totally support and call for ****ing over white males. All means all, not all but white males.
Click to expand...


BOOM! and there you have it, with one post you just showed you have no clue what these laws actually do
weird WHITE and MALE are both covered under RACE and GENDER

there is no bigger dishonest, illogical, insecure, mentally retarded, inaccurate and factually false "theory" than thinking theses laws "exclude" White (race) Males (gender) who have sexual orientation may have disabilities and may practice religion LMAO

thanks for the laugh and proving you have no idea what you are talking about on a topic.

so yes i do support us all being covered and facts prove your post wrong and destroy it again
 
Last edited:
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

Not that it matters when talking about protecting peoples equal rights, helping equity and fighting bigotry/discrimination but its a nice "bonus" when people actually agree

Gallup.Com - Polling Matters by Frank Newport: Senate Vote on ENDA Remarkably Close to Public Sentiment

Make it illegal to discriminate in the work place based on sexual orientation or gender identity.
63% yes
31% no
6% no opinion

again doesn't really matter but its good to see when society actually cares about equal rights, protecting their fellow Americans and offering the same privileges that they themselves have.

Its awesome to witness this improvement and movement to more civility and less bigotry/discrimination.
 
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

DVSentinel said:
So, due to your dislike of Christians, you will continue taking incremental steps away from Freedom? Ok, but we didn't get where we are in a single giant leap but by one small step at a time, we probably won't fix in one giant step either, we will need to take small steps. The first step is always stopping the momentum/movement in the direction things are going. You cause the problem to recede until you stop it going forward.
Click to expand...

Has nothing to do with dislike of Christians, it has to do with the right being hypocritical by saying that LGBT shouldn't be protected because of "freedom" yet they have no problem exercising their own protections for their "special" groups like Christians. Why do you hate freedom?
 
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

TheNextEra said:
Has nothing to do with dislike of Christians, it has to do with the right being hypocritical by saying that LGBT shouldn't be protected because of "freedom" yet they have no problem exercising their own protections for their "special" groups like Christians. Why do you hate freedom?
Click to expand...

I hate not freedom. But I choose not to walk another step along the road of slavery and misfortune, for each step along that road shall have to be traveled again to reach the road of Freedom.
 
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

DVSentinel said:
I hate not freedom. But I choose not to walk another step along the road of slavery and misfortune, for each step along that road shall have to be traveled again to reach the road of Freedom.
Click to expand...

Funny, the right has no problem traveling that road along "slavery and misfortune" (as you put it) when it suits THEIR needs. Sorry, but as long as the right continues to be hypocritical in the regards for protections they shall be applied to LGBT as well. Either get your side of the isle to change or deal with it.
 
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

TheNextEra said:
Funny, the right has no problem traveling that road along "slavery and misfortune" (as you put it) when it suits THEIR needs. Sorry, but as long as the right continues to be hypocritical in the regards for protections they shall be applied to LGBT as well. Either get your side of the isle to change or deal with it.
Click to expand...

Why do you keep point out the "right" to me? I am neither right or left. I care not what hypocrisy the right has, the subject here is creating more and more government stupidity and forcing beliefs down others throats. If you wish to discuss the right, the by all means start a thread on them.

But frankly religion and homosexuality are not the same thing. You are comparing apples to oranges, and I care not to purchase either. Religion seeks answers to life. This whole homosexual thing attempts to achieve recognition as normal an aberration of basic human instincts and dysfunction that differs from genetic design.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom