kmudd20001:
Force the hiring of gays? Cite?
If you don’t know the employee’s sexual orientation, obviously any decision you make won’t take that into account. Therefore you have nothing to worry about.
The problem is when an employer does know, and then bases his hiring/firing decision on it.
Religion is… and it’s illegal for employers to discriminate on the basis of religion, too.
Nothing. And that’s exactly the purpose of the laws - to make sure everyone is treated equally.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by kmudd20001 *
**
Marriage is a union between a man and a woman. You have the same right to marry someone of the opposite sex as anyone else does. **
In your opinion. There is gay marriage in Europe now. Just passed in I believe the Netherlands. Just because some people here think marriage should be only between a man and a woman does not mean that is right. Before you say anything about the Bible, let me remind you about the seperation of church and state in the USA. I should be able to have a legal wedding with a man. That is not a special right, that is an equal right.
Back this up with a citation or retract it.
What is wrong is that people are fired for being overweight, gay, female, black… which is wrong.
It is also wrong to lump gay people in with people into bestiality. But, it shouldn’t be surprising based on your spurious remarks that you would be so perjorative to gay people.
If everyone in the world was Straight, life would go on.
If everyone turned gay, NATURE WOULD FIND A WAY for life to go on
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Hastur *
**
herb Baumeister killed somewhere between 16 and 60 gay men.
Jeffery Dalmer killed 17 , John Wayne Gacy killed 35.
Not all of them vitims were gay ,some were just tricked into being in the wrong place at the wrong time. these are just the most famous killers of gay men.
But all of these innocent people were killed and no one in the gay community spoke out like they did with Matthew Shepherd. I want all convicted killers to have the maxium punishment by law .But for the gay community to act like gays are only killed by straights and there needs to be new laws to protect gays it is a total lie.The
“The law, in its infinite equality, forbids both the rich and the poor to sleep under bridges, and to steal bread.”
– Francois Villon
:rolleyes:
http://www.afa.net/homosexual_agenda/default.asp
Don’t blame me, you asked. On the one hand, it’s so ridiculous as to be funny, but on the other, it’s so filled with hate and stupidity as to be scary.
Here is a pretty good analysis of the six bible passages that seem to condemn homosexual behavior.
I leave it to self-righteous heterosexuals to resolve the hundreds and hundreds of passages that seem to condemn heterosexual behavior.
In my own opinion, Jesus pretty well dismisses all this nonsense in Mark 7:18-23.
I must say that, while I am a straight guy, I do not support homosexuality. Well…maybe I should say that I do not condone it. However, I have no problem interacting with gay people. I have a friend that is gay, and while it is a bit weird bringing up a hot girl or something similar in a conversation, and then remembering that he could care less, there is nothing wrong with hanging out with him.
Which has fuckall to do with your claim that more gay men are murdered by other gay men than by straight men, unless you are implying that these are a majority of all gay men that have been murdered.
Where has the “gay community” ever made any claim of the sort? Matthew Shepherd’s case was a big deal because it brought to light certain issues, like the amount of persecution that gays faced. The other cases were not any sort of political issue. To claim that publicizing Shepherd’s murder in some way denied the existence of other murders is idiotic.
On behalf of the entire queer community, past and present, I would like to take a stand and say that psychotic serial killers are bad.
:rolleyes:
You have made my point by saying MS was a big deal for political reasons. Every murder should be a big deal not just the Politically correct ones.
**
[/QUOTE]
Why would an employer have to prove it didn’t know the terminated employee was gay? If an employee brings a suit, the burden of proof fall on the employee to prove he was fired because he was gay. So there’s not much chance of ‘gay quotas’ popping up.
Unless I have horribly misunderstood something…
kmudd, how do you know if a black person was fired because they are black? It’s difficult to tell if someone was fired because of discrimination, but, let me get this straight, your contention is:
Because it is difficult to tell if someone was fired because of discrimination, there should be no legal protection against being fired because of discrimination.
Is that true? Is that your viewpoint, or have I misunderstood what you’re saying here?
What I am saying is companies in an efford to prevent lawsuits and to comply with the law.There will be a quota system set up. How else can they prove they are fair to gays other than keep records on employees sexual orientation. So when someone claims “Company A didn’t hire me because I am gay!” .Company A’s lawer pulls some documents showing how they have do have gays working for them. Otherwise in court someone will ask the president
of the company ,“Have you ever had any gays working for you”? .
What does he say? " I don’t know I don’t require my employees to tell me about their sexual orientation"?
Or does he say “Look I have signed papers from my employees showing some are gay”?
We don’t need companies to keep records on people’s sexual orientation.
If you file a lawsuit, you have the burden of proof. So the claimant would first have to establish that with a preponderance of the evidence that their claim was true. It’s really quite difficult to do. Your assesment was flawed.
RE: your point about murders etc. JonBonet Ramsey’s case generated a whole lot more press than MS’s. Obviously the pre-teen beauty queen set has a much more powerful lobby.
kmudd, what you are doing here called a strawman. It involves creating an argument that doesn’t exist otherwise and disproving it, in hopes that people think you won a different argument.
Read this carefully:
The burden of proof is on the accuser. A complaintant must prove he was fired for being gay. The company does not have to prove that they didn’t fire him for being gay. Innocent until proven guilty.
This is our (at least, my)
If someone is fired for being gay and can prove it, he should be able to sue for that.
Do you think that is unreasonable?
–John
I understand your point and would agree to it but that is not the way it is in court. For example there have been many
companies who have been sued in court and lost because they didn’t have the correct quota of employees.
These types of lawsuits is what makes companies setup quota systems.
I am not complaing about MS case being publicized but about
dozens of other gays being murdered and nothing said about it.