First of all, Booker is a Senator, not a Congressman. Second of all, how the US treats countries that oppress people based on their sexual orientation and how the US treats Muslim countries IS the business of the Secretary of State.
And a join date of this very month…
Us “regular citizens” don’t advise an idiot President which nations to support, which to negotiate with, and which to sanction. And we don’t pander to a constituency that writes laws for African countries to codify gay persecution. YMMV.
I’m, yes as male Senator is a congressman.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
So unfair to bigots and homophobes!
You’re, no as female representative is a congressman.
Sent from my anus using Tapafart
He a senator, not a representative, but indeed a congressman.
And the questions he put to Pompeo, as reported here, seem fair to me. Would Pompeo allow a foreign national who’d married a U.S. citizen to come to the U.S.? What if the marriage was same-sex? What if the spouse was Muslim? What policy guidelines will Pompeo set for his new Department? What advice on forming policies will he give to Trump? If Pompeo can keep his personal feelings aside and do his job equitably, no problem, but it’s worth asking if he can actually do that.
It’s actually fair to everyone.
People should be hired and chosen for things using objective information.
Too much emotion and subjectivity can cause many problems.
I’m pretty sure there is no legal prohibition against asking potential employees about bigoted beliefs.
What makes you think I hang out in that universe? Egads, I just love people who make stupid-ass assumptions about me.
Not by a long shot.
Based on the available information, what other kind assumptions do you expect people to make about a stupid ass?
He is correct, in a manner of speaking. We assume (well, not assume so much as ‘have learned from experience’) that he’s a stupid ass.
I noticed in that link that there’s a reference to a Jordan Sekulow. Wonder if there’s a connection to Jay Sekulow, Trump’s lawyer. Doesn’t seem like it would be a very common name.
But you never correct us properly. You just say we’re so wrong that we’re not even in the same universe with right ( or something like that ). You just keep us guessing on that ‘right’. It’s like you wouldn’t even bother to make up some stuff, you just deny.
Not very convincing.
And… ?
He just objects to being considered “more or less decent” sort of people. We are just lucky that Clothy didn’t break out with the racial epithets in his response.
Okay, originally, I was simply thinking of the protected class of information that an employer can’t discriminate against:
Race, age, religious beliefs, disability, marital status, sexual orientation, or pregnancy.
Not sure how a proper interview would digress to the point of knowing someone is a bigot…
If I was to ask anyone about the above things when conducting an interview, I would be opening myself up to a potential discrimination suit if I asked anything about those things & then didn’t hire the person. Then, my employer would obviously fire me for that.
Yes, I’m new here because I’m trying to find a forum with less ridiculous emotionally charged users who lack real discussion abilities.
I see I entered at my own risk in The Pit! Haha (and my last sentence here is in jest—not directed at anyone)
Well, if you’re serious about that, the Great Debates forum is your better bet. You could start a thread titled “Are these fair question to ask a cabinet nominee?” and while the responses may get emotional at times, the responses by and large, I predict, will be literate and well-argued.
The Pit is for laughs and sneers and oodles of abuse. It has its purposes.
TallPoppy, may I infer from the wording of your posts that you, personally, actually conduct employment interviews where you work?
If so, would you mind sharing what the jobs are, for which you interview candidates?
But, if you are hiring someone who will be in charge of hiring, disciplining, and terminating employees, then asking them whether or not they can do so without being influenced by racial prejudices is very relevant, and not in any way protected by discrimination laws.
When they will be influential in diplomacy, and they will be helping to decide which countries we will be bombing, it is even more relevant.
Just don’t take the second door on the left - that’s where we do “Being Hit Over The Head” lessons.