Current Events Thread

[SoonerBounce13]

Or is it that you can't fire someone for it?

 

[SoonerBounce13]

I agree with the dissenting judges that it seems the court is trying to legislate this issue instead of congress doing the legislating

 

[thebigabd]

Are you happy w/the ruling?

Yea, I agree with it... I think Neil Gorsuch did a good job articulating it.

 

[thebigabd]

Or is it that you can't fire someone for it?

It's that one... You can't fire or discriminate against someone for being gay.

 

[steverocks35]

It's that one... You can't fire or discriminate against someone for being gay.

But if you can't fire them for it then you also can't refuse to hire them because of it. They are now a protected class according to the law.

 

[SoonerBounce13]

It's that one... You can't fire or discriminate against someone for being gay.

or trans it appears.

One of the cases was that an employeee had a sex change and came back to work dressing like a woman.

I guess my argument would be that if sexual orientation is a determination of who you are, and you changed your sexual orientation or "sex" after being employed, then you aren't the same person I hired.

Yeah, thats a stretch, but I just don't see how this is covered under the current laws

 

[sheepdogs1]

Yea, I agree with it... I think Neil Gorsuch did a good job articulating it.

Good for you. And it was decided by a conservative court majority let alone by judges appointed by .................

 

[SoonerBounce13]

Good for you. And it was decided by a conservative court majority let alone by judges appointed by .................

That is the only positive I get from the ruling

 

[steverocks35]

That is the only positive I get from the ruling

Do you think it should be allowable to fire someone if you find out they are gay? I thought we were way past that as a society.

 

[SoonerBounce13]

Do you think it should be allowable to fire someone if you find out they are gay? I thought we were way past that as a society.

Yes I do. I have more issues with now not being able to use sexual orientation as a hiring metric. But I also believe that a company should be able to have control of whom they employ.

I'm not saying it would be right or wrong for somebody to do it, but I think as an owner, you should be able to decide who works for you

 

[thebigabd]

I agree with the dissenting judges that it seems the court is trying to legislate this issue instead of congress doing the legislating

I disagree...

“The statute’s message for our cases is equally simple and momentous: An individual’s homosexuality or transgender status is not relevant to employment decisions,” Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote for the court in a 6–3 ruling. “That’s because it is impossible to discriminate against a person for being homosexual or transgender without discriminating against that individual based on sex.” Chief Justice John Roberts and the court’s four liberal justices joined the opinion.

The textualist approach in this case would essentially require lawmakers to list out every specific thing you can't discriminate against... It says you can't discriminate based on "race, color, religion, sex, and national origin".... So today, the Supreme Court says that applies to being gay, because if if you discriminate for being gay you have discriminated against their sex.

“Rather than suggesting that the statutory language bears some other meaning, the employers and dissents merely suggest that, because few in 1964 expected today’s result, we should not dare to admit that it follows ineluctably from the statutory text,” Gorsuch responded. “When a new application emerges that is both unexpected and important, they would seemingly have us merely point out the question, refer the subject back to Congress, and decline to enforce the plain terms of the law in the meantime.” This approach, Gorsuch concluded, was incompatible with their obligation to interpret and apply the law as it’s written.

 

[sheepdogs1]

And it looks like a Jefferson statue in Oregon was torn down. Was not a problem under a democratic president even though there exists no one who can proclaim that they spent a day in their life where Thomas was not a slave owner. Convenience has no bounds when it comes to liberals. A finicky bunch they are.


https://www.cbsnews.com/news/thomas-jefferson-statue-toppled-in-portland-oregon/

 

[SoonerBounce13]

I disagree...

“The statute’s message for our cases is equally simple and momentous: An individual’s homosexuality or transgender status is not relevant to employment decisions,” Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote for the court in a 6–3 ruling. “That’s because it is impossible to discriminate against a person for being homosexual or transgender without discriminating against that individual based on sex.” Chief Justice John Roberts and the court’s four liberal justices joined the opinion.

The textualist approach in this case would essentially require lawmakers to list out every specific thing you can't discriminate against... It says you can't discriminate based on "race, color, religion, sex, and national origin".... So today, the Supreme Court says that applies to being gay, because if if you discriminate for being gay you have discriminated against their sex.

“Rather than suggesting that the statutory language bears some other meaning, the employers and dissents merely suggest that, because few in 1964 expected today’s result, we should not dare to admit that it follows ineluctably from the statutory text,” Gorsuch responded. “When a new application emerges that is both unexpected and important, they would seemingly have us merely point out the question, refer the subject back to Congress, and decline to enforce the plain terms of the law in the meantime.” This approach, Gorsuch concluded, was incompatible with their obligation to interpret and apply the law as it’s written.

this is just idiotic.

Sexual orientation is not sex. We have lost the definition of what sex is in this world. It has changed definitions. Somebody's sex is vastly different than somebody's orientation

 

[steverocks35]

Yes I do. I have more issues with now not being able to use sexual orientation as a hiring metric. But I also believe that a company should be able to have control of whom they employ.

I'm not saying it would be right or wrong for somebody to do it, but I think as an owner, you should be able to decide who works for you

So what if someone buys a company and fires all the African-American people that work there. Would that be okay?

 

[BCSooners]

Yes I do. I have more issues with now not being able to use sexual orientation as a hiring metric. But I also believe that a company should be able to have control of whom they employ.

I'm not saying it would be right or wrong for somebody to do it, but I think as an owner, you should be able to decide who works for you

Man that’s sad.

 

[SoonerBounce13]

So what if someone buys a company and fires all the African-American people that work there. Would that be okay?

I'm not touching this one because I know my words would get twisted.

 

[SoonerBounce13]

Man that’s sad.

I'm sorry?

 

[steverocks35]

I'm not touching this one because I know my words would get twisted.

I'm not twisting your words. You said that an owner should be able to determine who works for them. What if an owner doesn't want any African-American people working for him?

 

[mict085]

this is just idiotic.

Sexual orientation is not sex. We have lost the definition of what sex is in this world. It has changed definitions. Somebody's sex is vastly different than somebody's orientation

It shouldn’t matter either way. Nobody should discriminate against anyone else for any reason. A persons actions and behavior should determine their employment. Can you do the job? Period. Nobody should be discriminated against based on sex, religion, race, sexual orientation, or any other reason. It’s really very simple.

 

[steverocks35]

It shouldn’t matter either way. Nobody should discriminate against anyone else for any reason. A persons actions and behavior should determine their employment. Can you do the job? Period. Nobody should be discriminated against based on sex, religion, race, sexual orientation, or any other reason. It’s really very simple.

I completely agree. Good post.