• 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!

White House: Obama to sign order banning anti-gay discrimination

AGENT J

"If you ain't first, you're last"
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 25, 2010
Messages
80,422
Reaction score
29,075
Location
Pittsburgh
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
White House: Obama to sign order banning anti-gay discrimination*-*Los Angeles Times


[h=1]White House: Obama to sign order banning anti-gay discrimination[/h]Pesident Obama plans to sign an order banning discrimination against gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender employees by companies that do business with the federal government, a long-sought goal of gay rights organizations.After months of calling on Congress to pass a strong anti-discrimination law, Obama told his staff to come up with an executive order banning discrimination by federal contractors, a White House official said Monday.The measure will prohibit those firms from discriminating based on sexual orientation or gender identity. The move would implement on a limited scale what the White House would like to see Congress pass into law for everyone to follow.“This is consistent with the president’s views that all Americans, LGBT or not, should be treated with dignity and respect,” the official said.Although several states have laws that ban discrimination against gays in the workplace, many do not. In those states, an employer can legally fire, demote or otherwise discriminate against a worker solely on grounds of sexual orientation.
Gay rights advocate say the executive order could provide employment protections for about 11 million workers who have none.The order comes after years in which the president has called on Congress to pass the Employment Non-Discrimination Act and thereby make it unlawful for any employer to fire or censure a worker based on sexual orientation.The measure has been approved by the Democratic-led Senate but hasn’t advanced in the Republican-controlled House. The president has held back on taking executive action despite repeated calls from activists to move ahead with the executive order, a lack of action that had frustrated some supporters.
Back-up links:
http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nat...lgbt-people/8IvjUvte1IbqThWXrT1ySI/story.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/obama-to-sign-order-protecting-lgbt-rights-for-federal-contractors/
Obama to sign order barring federal discrimination against gays - chicagotribune.com

another step towards equal rights for sexual orientations!
Its a shame this bill simply didnt pass or even come to a vote in the house. How pathetic is politics when they cling to BS imaginary party lines instead of simply doing whats right for the people and protecting and granting equal rights and fighting against discrimination. Its simply hypocritical and ignorant.
 
another step towards equal rights for sexual orientations!
Its a shame this bill simply didnt pass or even come to a vote in the house. How pathetic is politics when they cling to BS imaginary party lines instead of simply doing whats right for the people and protecting and granting equal rights and fighting against discrimination. Its simply hypocritical and ignorant.

You know, while I support SSM and support not discriminating against gays, Obama has set a horrible precidence from legislating by executive order.

I really fear the next GOP president that comes in. The precidence set is that it is ok to legislate nationally through executive order when something can't get approved through congress. While the number of Obama's executive orders have been less than past presidents, the impact of Obama's executive orders have been massive.

People supporting this IMO are using the excuse of "The ends justify the means", however, the stage is set for a GOP president to do the same thing.
 
How tyrannical is this president going to be in his lame duck stage? Are we really going to have to impeach this supposed constitutional scholar who shows daily he neither knows the constitution nor cares for it. Worst president ever.
 
White House: Obama to sign order banning anti-gay discrimination*-*Los Angeles Times




Back-up links:
Obama to sign order prohibiting contractor bias against LGBT people - Nation - The Boston Globe
Obama to sign order protecting LGBT rights for federal contractors - CBS News
Obama to sign order barring federal discrimination against gays - chicagotribune.com

another step towards equal rights for sexual orientations!
Its a shame this bill simply didnt pass or even come to a vote in the house. How pathetic is politics when they cling to BS imaginary party lines instead of simply doing whats right for the people and protecting and granting equal rights and fighting against discrimination. Its simply hypocritical and ignorant.


Another volation of the constitution by bypassing congress.
 
Next GOP president that comes forth can now undo everything Obama's done with a series of executive orders.

This is stupid.
 
White House: Obama to sign order banning anti-gay discrimination*-*Los Angeles Times



Back-up links:
Obama to sign order prohibiting contractor bias against LGBT people - Nation - The Boston Globe
Obama to sign order protecting LGBT rights for federal contractors - CBS News
Obama to sign order barring federal discrimination against gays - chicagotribune.com

another step towards equal rights for sexual orientations!
Its a shame this bill simply didnt pass or even come to a vote in the house. How pathetic is politics when they cling to BS imaginary party lines instead of simply doing whats right for the people and protecting and granting equal rights and fighting against discrimination. Its simply hypocritical and ignorant.

And one more step towards dictatorship.
 
1.)You know, while I support SSM and support not discriminating against gays, Obama has set a horrible precidence from legislating by executive order.

2.)I really fear the next GOP president that comes in. The precidence set is that it is ok to legislate nationally through executive order when something can't get approved through congress.

3.)While the number of Obama's executive orders have been less than past presidents, the impact of Obama's executive orders have been massive.

4.)People supporting this IMO are using the excuse of "The ends justify the means", however, the stage is set for a GOP president to do the same thing.

1.) youll have to be more specific cause im not aware of any "precedence" he has set that others haven't and this issue certainly is of no concern since its 100% with in his power. Again not saying you are wrong just saying this isnt an example so im wondering what you are referring too.

2.) thats not what happen here? this is the same bill that was being pushed because he does not have that power this is about government and he does have that power. DId you read the article?

3.) again youll have to give me examples you may be 100% right but this isnt one of them as far as impact/precedence

4.) the stage as been there since EOs have been around this is nothing new and its legal. if obama id ZERO EOs nothing would change the next pres could STILL do them????
 
1.)How tyrannical is this president going to be in his lame duck stage?
2.)Are we really going to have to impeach this supposed constitutional scholar who shows daily he neither knows the constitution nor cares for it.
3.)Worst president ever.

1.) where? proof? links?
2.) nothing here is impeachable
3.) you are free to have that opinion
 
You know, while I support SSM and support not discriminating against gays, Obama has set a horrible precidence from legislating by executive order.

I really fear the next GOP president that comes in. The precidence set is that it is ok to legislate nationally through executive order when something can't get approved through congress. While the number of Obama's executive orders have been less than past presidents, the impact of Obama's executive orders have been massive.

People supporting this IMO are using the excuse of "The ends justify the means", however, the stage is set for a GOP president to do the same thing.

It sets a bad prescidence no matter which party future presidents belong to.
 
And one more step towards dictatorship.

theres nothign here that is dictatorship and that all presidents cant do or havent done lol
love the hyperbole though
 
It sets a bad prescidence no matter which party future presidents belong to.

please do tell what NEW precedence this sets? lol
 
Proof that he's tyrannical? It's the same sort of fact you deal in - my opinion. The only way to prove that is if he were already impeached. And abandoning his oath of office is a high crime. The Constitution does not support this grant, especially where he's already been told no by Congress.

But he's continuing to rack up the things he could be impeached for.
 
please do tell what NEW precedence this sets? lol

That the executive branch can make laws, which it can't legally do. You want the president--any president--to be able to pass any law he wants? What's to stop a president from legalizing discrimination?
 
1.) youll have to be more specific cause im not aware of any "precedence" he has set that others haven't and this issue certainly is of no concern since its 100% with in his power. Again not saying you are wrong just saying this isnt an example so im wondering what you are referring too.

2.) thats not what happen here? this is the same bill that was being pushed because he does not have that power this is about government and he does have that power. DId you read the article?

Well "you'll" have to understand that Obama has passed many things via EO that have profound changes. Obamacare implementation, delays on how its run, and now this. These are a few examples that I think "you'll" see have massive impact on folks. The EO was not meant to be this way.

3.) again youll have to give me examples you may be 100% right but this isnt one of them as far as impact/precedence

See above. I doubt "you'll" agree, but that isn't my choice for posting this.

4.) the stage as been there since EOs have been around this is nothing new and its legal. if obama id ZERO EOs nothing would change the next pres could STILL do them????

And that makes it right?
 
theres nothign here that is dictatorship and that all presidents cant do or havent done lol
love the hyperbole though

Show me one law that the executive branch has passed. Thanks in advance.
 
1.)That the executive branch can make laws, which it can't legally do.
2.)You want the president--any president--to be able to pass any law he wants? What's to stop a president from legalizing discrimination?

1.) correct
2.) nope and this doesnt do that lol

so again i ask

what NEW precedence does this set, please try to answer this time and realize it its legal and many other presidents have done the same there is no new "precedence" set
 
1.)Well "you'll" have to understand that Obama has passed many things via EO that have profound changes. Obamacare implementation, delays on how its run, and now this. These are a few examples that I think "you'll" see have massive impact on folks.

2.)The EO was not meant to be this way.



3.)See above. I doubt "you'll" agree, but that isn't my choice for posting this.



4.)And that makes it right?

1.) well see now thats an example i could partially agree with ACA but again im not seeing the new precedence

2.) I agree there have been EOs that do not function the way I "think" EOs are supposed to but again this sint one of them

3.) but i did agree partially just not for this particular EO because theres no reason too

4.) nope never implied that once only said this is nothing new like people said and this particular EO isnt wrong in anyway.

If BAD EOs are to be discussed thats fin by me, if the EO process is to be discussed thats fine by me. Thats not the thread topic and this EO is fine and legal and doesnt overstep any boundaries.
 
1.)Proof that he's tyrannical? It's the same sort of fact you deal in - my opinion. The only way to prove that is if he were already impeached. And abandoning his oath of office is a high crime. The Constitution does not support this grant, especially where he's already been told no by Congress.

But he's continuing to rack up the things he could be impeached for.

so you have none, thanks let us know when you do
 
Show me one law that the executive branch has passed. Thanks in advance.

translation you cant back up your false claim thanks i knew that
 
translation you cant back up your false claim thanks i knew that

Translation: You can't show him one piece of legislation the executive has written and then passed without congress. :)


Tim-
 
Translation: You can't show him one piece of legislation the executive has written and then passed without congress. :)


Tim-

not needed his failed strawman has nothing to do with this LEGAL EO

nothing LMAO

failed straw men are failed stramen
 
not needed his failed strawman has nothing to do with this LEGAL EO

nothing LMAO

failed straw men are failed stramen


So, simply that he is "planning" to do it, does not mean that he has done it, so is that the strawman you are referring too? What about the 32 EO's changing the ACA? What about immigration law changes by EO? Are those fabrications, and strawmen as well?

Tim-
 
I read the earlier posts and then sort of skipped to the end so somebody else has probably brought it up. But the most ironic thing about all of Obama's executive orders that bypass Congress and legislate are especially ironic when he was so critical of executive orders issued by President Bush. But I'm quite used to candidate Obama bearing absolutely no resemblance to President Obama. You can't believe anything uttered by this man is his conviction or the truth.

 
so you have none, thanks let us know when you do

Nor do you. But that's par for the course. The fact is the POTUS was already told no on this matter by the only body granted the power to make legislation and now he's legislating through EO.

I'd say that I just can't wait to hear you squeal when some other POTUS legislates like this in a way that goes against your "facts", but I don't really want that to happen either.
 
Back
Top Bottom