Sexual Orientation, the countdown to equal rights, when will it happen?

[AGENT J]

1. Equal rights for gay people in the United States will NEVER be fully achieved.
2.) In fact, in the coming decades, I expect there will be a rollback of the rights that gay people enjoy today.
3.) There will be an increasing number of new Americans whose religious tenets condemn homosexuality.

1.) well of course not fully in "practice", equal rights unfortunately are never fully achieved for anybody that didnt have them from the start . . women, minorities etc. but in legality they can be.
2.) coming "DECADES" yeah that wont be happening. The only national protections right now is equal marriage rights and that wont be rolled back. As far as areas rolling back local protections that may happen but the opposite will be happening to.
3.) all religions and americans are free to have bigoted beliefs that condemn homosexuality, people are free to BELIEVE what they want. Its their ACTIONS they have to watch, what they dont get to do is violate peoples rights, break the laws or treat others as lesser citizens in the previous mentioned regards.

 

[BrotherFease]

25 states have implemented some kind of gay protection. What's wrong with letting the states decide?

Civil rights are federal rights. They apply to everybody. This is like saying states should decide whether or not, segregated by race bathrooms/drinking foundations should exist.

 

[BrotherFease]

Something that keeps puzzling me, the quest for equal rights but wanting to be recognized as needing special protection.

No, it's not about "special protection", but to protect all sexual orientations from discrimination. I agree that nobody gets special rights. The 14th amendment was passed in order to protect black people, but in reality, it was there to protect everybody. Nobody is going to argue that black people were asking for "special rights". They were asking for equal rights. Same with today.

 

[BrotherFease]

This is interesting looks like some cases re coming up that could speed this up and make it a reality as soon as this year . . . . .

Supreme Court to revisit gay rights in landmark workplace discrimination case

seems theres 3 cases that could impact this really soon

Altitude Express, Inc. v. Zarda
Bostock v. Clayton Count Georgia
R.G. and G.R. Funeral Homes v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission,

Yep. We will see what happens. If it comes out in favor of LGBTQ Americans, then the equality act is irrelevant.

 

[MAGAnificent]

No they are not

Yes they are.

 

[AGENT J]

No, it's not about "special protection", but to protect all sexual orientations from discrimination. I agree that nobody gets special rights. The 14th amendment was passed in order to protect black people, but in reality, it was there to protect everybody. Nobody is going to argue that black people were asking for "special rights". They were asking for equal rights. Same with today.

BINGO!!!!

always funny how its "special rights" when its a group somebody doesnt agree with or approve of etc

 

[BrotherFease]

BINGO!!!!

always funny how its "special rights" when its a group somebody doesnt agree with or approve of etc

Yep. It's pure straw man argumentation. In fact, the irony here is the people making these arguments are the ones in favor of special rights. Ben Carson argued against gay marriage under the guise that it creates special rights for gay people. But we was really arguing that straight couples getting special rights.

Think of this theorem:

Joe and Sue love each other and are consenting adults. They can sign a marriage license.
Joe and Tom love each other and are consenting adults. They cannot sign a marriage license.

What is the difference between Joe/Sue and Joe/Tom? Both love each other. Both are consenting adults. The difference is the fact that Joe and Sue are a straight couple, while Joe and Tom are a same-sex couple. Arguing that Joe and Sue can sign a marriage license is giving them special protections.

 

[antiquity]

Just need to wait for the old people to die.

Need to wait for old people to die? FYI there will always be a new generation of replacement old people.

 

[SDET]

Ok, then we can list you as an age bigot. I wonder if you support euthanasia.

Just need to wait for the old people to die.

 

[SDET]

Define equality. If one moves the goalposts and demands "historical equality", that's just another term for revenge.

When will equal rights for sexual orientation be nationally protected?

0-2 years?
3-5 years?
6-8 years?
9-10 years
10+
Never




LIke with equal marriage rights the road wasn't over night. While it was a great victory, one that i was so happy to witness with my own eyes more equal rights victories are happening all the time.

Like i always said about equal marriage rights, there was a time when i thought it would never happen in my life time. Then that changed with a couple cases and bigots overstepping way too far helping equal rights spread. It was then i KNEW it would happen in my life time. Their persistent bigotry is what helped it! Try to force their views on others and treating them as lessers paved the way!

Well now another injustice will be fixed in my live time and national protections for sexual orientation is on its way. My personal prediction is 2-6 years but at the most I say 10.

Right now whether the discussion is about housing, employment or public accommodations at least 20 states protect sexual orientation already. Theres court cases with more on the way. Many major cities and or counties in side the states that dont do and the vast majority of 91% of fortune 500 companies. (83% for gender identity which is amazing considering it was only 3 in 2000)

Movement Advancement Project | Non-Discrimination Laws
LGBT employment discrimination in the United States - Wikipedia
List of cities and counties in the United States offering an LGBT non-discrimination ordinance - Wikipedia
LGBTQ Americans Aren't Fully Protected From Discrimination in 30 States | Freedom for All AmericansFreedom for All Americans
http://www.ncsl.org/research/civil-and-criminal-justice/state-public-accommodation-laws.aspx

#EqualRightsAreWinning

 

[SDET]

In other words, they are not yet royalty. The term you're looking for is "disadvantaged members of a protected class", otherwise you might inadvertently protect heterosexuals. Not only that if not carefully worded it could impede implementing hiring preferences for homosexuals.

They are not a protected class

 

[AGENT J]

Define equality. If one moves the goalposts and demands "historical equality", that's just another term for revenge.

Youll have to ask your question better because i have no idea what you dont understand if you read the OP and the poll question.

Here, ill repost the question and you read it slower:

"When will equal rights for sexual orientation be nationally protected?"
This means sexual orientation will be protected under the term sex in civil rights

Has nothign to do with "revenge", Let me know if you are still confused

 

[AGENT J]

This is interesting looks like some cases re coming up that could speed this up and make it a reality as soon as this year . . . . .

Supreme Court to revisit gay rights in landmark workplace discrimination case

seems theres 3 cases that could impact this really soon

Altitude Express, Inc. v. Zarda
Bostock v. Clayton Count Georgia
R.G. and G.R. Funeral Homes v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission,

More info on this
Court to mull transgender, gay rights in workplace - Portland Press Herald

and this is exactly why equal rights is needed and why it will happen in my life time

The gay rights movement has won victory after victory at the Supreme Court, capped by the landmark 2015 decision that established a constitutional right to same-sex marriage. But gay rights leaders say “married on Sunday, fired on Monday” is a possibility in more than half of the United States, where there is no specific protection for gay or transgender workers. The states that prohibit discrimination are not uniform – some protect only gender identity or transgender status, and some differentiate between public and private employment.

The issue for the court is the reach of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which, besides protecting against workplace discrimination because of race, also prohibits discrimination “because of sex.”

in america there's no room for this type of vile bigotry and thank god it will be coming to an end in many regards as far as legality and protection is concerned in the near future.

 

[Jason Warfield]

Something that keeps puzzling me, the quest for equal rights but wanting to be recognized as needing special protection.

When you get beat up and killed for being LGBQT even thought you are an American citizen...then, yeah, you need protection. When you are discriminated against because of your sexuality, then you need protection.

If none of that was happening, then you would be correct, it would be a non-issue. But that IS happening. To American citizens. And the "special protections" are really just the demand to be treated equally. There's nothing special about that.

What is special...is thinking that your fellow American isn't really American if they aren't like you and you take action to make sure that your fellow Americans know that.

 

[AGENT J]

When you get beat up and killed for being LGBQT even thought you are an American citizen...then, yeah, you need protection. When you are discriminated against because of your sexuality, then you need protection.

If none of that was happening, then you would be correct, it would be a non-issue. But that IS happening. To American citizens. And the "special protections" are really just the demand to be treated equally. There's nothing special about that.

What is special...is thinking that your fellow American isn't really American if they aren't like you and you take action to make sure that your fellow Americans know that.

claims of special protections has and will always been a failed copped out. Its based on dishonesty and or ignorance and nobody educated and objective takes the failed claim seriously. NOBODY can ever support the failed claim, its always fun watching the handful try though.

 

[AGENT J]

Came across this poll from earlier this year . . . .if this is true/accurate it makes me feel very good about the many great fellow Americans we have that understand how vile discrimination is.



Percent who favor laws that would protect, gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people against discrimination in jobs, public accommodations and housing

A majority of Americans across every state and almost every demographic support LGBTQ nondiscrimination protections, according to a poll released Tuesday by the nonprofit research firm Public Religion Research Institute.

The nonpartisan organization's "American Values Atlas" survey found that 69 percent of Americans support “broad nondiscrimination protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people.” That includes majorities in all major religions, from 90 percent of Unitarian/Universalists to 53 percent of Jehovah’s Witnesses.

Majority of Americans back LGBTQ protections — but support is sliding

 

[truthatallcost]

It's already happened in Western Europe, but it'll never happen here. The future of our country is Latin America. See sexual orientation discrimination in Latin America for an idea of what the future holds.

 

[AGENT J]

It's already happened in Western Europe, but it'll never happen here. The future of our country is Latin America. See sexual orientation discrimination in Latin America for an idea of what the future holds.

of course, it will we are already on our way with many states, counties, cities and corporations leading the way just a matter of time just like equal marriage rights needed.

 

[Wayne Jr]

Wow, a thread about an issue that's already been resolved is still going. You people have nothing better to do.

 

[AGENT J]

1.)Wow, a thread about an issue that's already been resolved is still going. You people have nothing better to do.

1.) wow except it factually hasnt been resolved
2.) what people? the people more educated than you on this topic and this country? Sweet irony! LOL

 

[truthatallcost]

of course, it will we are already on our way with many states, counties, cities and corporations leading the way just a matter of time just like equal marriage rights needed.

Sorry J, but just like with the environment, Democrats are torpedoing one of their objectives by way of their insane quest for demographic change. When Ilhan Omar says, "this is not going to be the country of white people", millions of young people applaud her. And she's right; the country isn't going to be majority European very soon. So.....what does this mean for sexual orientation equality? Europe and parts of Asia are LGBTQ friendly, while Africa, the Mideast, and Latin America aren't. Murders which include a motive of gay bashing, lesbian bashing, and trans bashing are common in the armpits of the world. So when the United States is largely comprised of non-Europeans, and Asians will be 10% or less, the future will not be kind to the LGBT community. That's just reality.

'This Is Not Going to Be the Country of White People': Ilhan Omar Blames Trump, GOP 'Goons' for Rise in Islamophobia, Anti-Semitism

 

[AGENT J]

Sorry J, but just like with the environment, Democrats are torpedoing one of their objectives by way of their insane quest for demographic change. When Ilhan Omar says, "this is not going to be the country of white people", millions of young people applaud her. And she's right; the country isn't going to be majority European very soon. So.....what does this mean for sexual orientation equality? Europe and parts of Asia are LGBTQ friendly, while Africa, the Mideast, and Latin America aren't. Murders which include a motive of gay bashing, lesbian bashing, and trans bashing are common in the armpits of the world. So when the United States is largely comprised of non-Europeans, and Asians will be 10% or less, the future will not be kind to the LGBT community. That's just reality.

'This Is Not Going to Be the Country of White People': Ilhan Omar Blames Trump, GOP 'Goons' for Rise in Islamophobia, Anti-Semitism

nothing to be sorry about nothing you posted impacts rationally impacts anything i said :shrug:
equal rights are winning and will continue and in my lifetime we will see sexual orientation nationally protected and in many places it already is.

 

[maxparrish]

It's already happened in Western Europe, but it'll never happen here. The future of our country is Latin America. See sexual orientation discrimination in Latin America for an idea of what the future holds.

For better or worse, I wouldn't count on democratic choice as having any power in America. When the voters support something in line with liberal-left thinking, judges confirm the vote as valid. When the voters are more conservative, the judges work overtime canceling their vote and declaring the actual law themselves.

California is a good example. The voters, although overwhelming democratic, voted against gay marriage in a referendum. A gay federal judge, said that can't be and canceled democracy. It was appealed to the Supreme Court where the 4 liberals and Justice Kennedy "discovered" a new legal right for same sex marriages that is protected by the Constitution. It didn't matter that the Hispanics along with older whites were the majority - their thinking was odious to a judges so "poof" democracy goes away.

Its not like this is the first time: recall California's proposition on denying education and other benefits to illegals. That too was canceled by Judges (and decades ago Judges canceled California and other states rights to impose a residency requirement for welfare benefits).

Rest assured, long before every state passes a protection SCOTUS will find a new meaning to either the Constitution or statutory law and declare their "discovery".

 

[maxparrish]

No, it's not about "special protection", but to protect all sexual orientations from discrimination. I agree that nobody gets special rights. The 14th amendment was passed in order to protect black people, but in reality, it was there to protect everybody. Nobody is going to argue that black people were asking for "special rights". They were asking for equal rights. Same with today.

Yep. It's pure straw man argumentation. In fact, the irony here is the people making these arguments are the ones in favor of special rights. Ben Carson argued against gay marriage under the guise that it creates special rights for gay people. But we was really arguing that straight couples getting special rights.

Think of this theorem:

Joe and Sue love each other and are consenting adults. They can sign a marriage license.
Joe and Tom love each other and are consenting adults. They cannot sign a marriage license.

What is the difference between Joe/Sue and Joe/Tom? Both love each other. Both are consenting adults. The difference is the fact that Joe and Sue are a straight couple, while Joe and Tom are a same-sex couple. Arguing that Joe and Sue can sign a marriage license is giving them special protections.

Actually its a great deal more complex and the two subjects are not the same.

The expansion of marriage contracts to include marriage choices between same sex couples is not that of "special rights" per se' (straights and gays always had identical rights to marry a person of the opposite sex), but that of removing a prior limitation on the equal right to form legal association between consenting adults based on the parties sex. As with all expansions of true rights, this took nothing from another's prior right to marry; people who always married the opposite sex may still do so.

Not so with the proposed discrimination law. All discrimination law is based not on 'freeing' but on suppressing rights of voluntary association between parties at the cost of one party, on behalf of a second (or third) party. Coercion by the government of individuals to either buy from, or sell to, or hire, or work for another person is not a providing "special right", except in the sense of granting a "special right" to deny some other person's contractual rights on behalf of others benefit.

The 14th amendment did not provide "special protections" for gay orientations (or, for that matter black culture) - it mandated equality of fundamental rights under the law regardless of race. Anti-discrimination law was written PRECISELY because the 14th amendment didn't suppress private choice of association or private choices of individuals to buy or sell from whom they please.

To do that required a law that suppressed rights of free choice, i.e. which is what some now seek for sexual orientation, sexual personae, cross dressing, and 'natural' hair.

 

[Noodlegawd]

It's not clear what you mean by "equal rights for sexual orientation."

If you mean a prohibition on discriminating against people on the basis of sexual orientation, why don't you just say that?

Otherwise, what rights do LGBT people not have that the rest of us do?