Acceptable registrations in the queue through March 16 at 11:00a ET have now been activated. Enjoy! -M.W.

Terms of Use have been amended effective October 6, 2019. Make sure you are aware of the new rules! Please visit this thread for details: https://www.mibuzzboard.com/phpBB3/view ... 16&t=48619

Supreme Court protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination

Debate and discussion of current events and political issues across the U.S. and throughout the World. Be forewarned -- this forum is NOT for the intellectually weak or those of you with thin skins. Don't come crying to me if you become the subject of ridicule. **Board Administrator reserves the right to revoke posting privileges based on my sole discretion**
User avatar
Honeyman
Posts: 5772
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 4:44 pm

Supreme Court protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination

Post by Honeyman » Mon Jun 15, 2020 12:57 pm

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKBN23M20N

Wonderful news! And a 6-3 vote!

I wonder if shit-for-brains trump will try and fire Gorsuch now. :rollin


The censorship king from out of state.

User avatar
Lester The Nightfly
Posts: 1727
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 6:19 pm

Re: Supreme Court protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination

Post by Lester The Nightfly » Mon Jun 15, 2020 3:59 pm

Honeyman wrote:
Mon Jun 15, 2020 12:57 pm
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKBN23M20N

Wonderful news! And a 6-3 vote!

I wonder if shit-for-brains trump will try and fire Gorsuch now. :rollin
I'm not quite ready to send Gorsuch flowers and candy for the following reason. From his opinion:

“Those who adopted the Civil Rights Act might not have anticipated their work would lead to this particular result likely, they weren’t thinking about many of the Act’s consequences that have become apparent over the years, including its prohibition against discrimination on the basis of motherhood or its ban on the sexual harassment of male employees. But the limits of the drafters’ imagination supply no reason to ignore the law’s demands.”

I read that as Gorsuch leaving something of a bread crumb trail to conservatives that they need to be more imaginative in legislative efforts to limit aggrieved classes claiming protection under the Civil Rights Act if they want those efforts upheld in the Supreme Court.

The best we can hope for, given Gorsuch's writings in this majority opinion, is he may on occasion fall into a Scalia mode of textualism. Don't mistake that with him being anything other than a friend of the conservative viewpoint.



User avatar
Rate This
Posts: 13963
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2020 12:17 am

Re: Supreme Court protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination

Post by Rate This » Mon Jun 15, 2020 4:22 pm

Lester The Nightfly wrote:
Mon Jun 15, 2020 3:59 pm
Honeyman wrote:
Mon Jun 15, 2020 12:57 pm
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKBN23M20N

Wonderful news! And a 6-3 vote!

I wonder if shit-for-brains trump will try and fire Gorsuch now. :rollin
I'm not quite ready to send Gorsuch flowers and candy for the following reason. From his opinion:

“Those who adopted the Civil Rights Act might not have anticipated their work would lead to this particular result likely, they weren’t thinking about many of the Act’s consequences that have become apparent over the years, including its prohibition against discrimination on the basis of motherhood or its ban on the sexual harassment of male employees. But the limits of the drafters’ imagination supply no reason to ignore the law’s demands.”

I read that as Gorsuch leaving something of a bread crumb trail to conservatives that they need to be more imaginative in legislative efforts to limit aggrieved classes claiming protection under the Civil Rights Act if they want those efforts upheld in the Supreme Court.

The best we can hope for, given Gorsuch's writings in this majority opinion, is he may on occasion fall into a Scalia mode of textualism. Don't mistake that with him being anything other than a friend of the conservative viewpoint.
I see an ends justify the means backstory to this whole thing...



User avatar
Honeyman
Posts: 5772
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 4:44 pm

Re: Supreme Court protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination

Post by Honeyman » Mon Jun 15, 2020 4:57 pm

Lester The Nightfly wrote:
Mon Jun 15, 2020 3:59 pm
Honeyman wrote:
Mon Jun 15, 2020 12:57 pm
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKBN23M20N

Wonderful news! And a 6-3 vote!

I wonder if shit-for-brains trump will try and fire Gorsuch now. :rollin
I'm not quite ready to send Gorsuch flowers and candy for the following reason. From his opinion:

“Those who adopted the Civil Rights Act might not have anticipated their work would lead to this particular result likely, they weren’t thinking about many of the Act’s consequences that have become apparent over the years, including its prohibition against discrimination on the basis of motherhood or its ban on the sexual harassment of male employees. But the limits of the drafters’ imagination supply no reason to ignore the law’s demands.”

I read that as Gorsuch leaving something of a bread crumb trail to conservatives that they need to be more imaginative in legislative efforts to limit aggrieved classes claiming protection under the Civil Rights Act if they want those efforts upheld in the Supreme Court.

The best we can hope for, given Gorsuch's writings in this majority opinion, is he may on occasion fall into a Scalia mode of textualism. Don't mistake that with him being anything other than a friend of the conservative viewpoint.
Maybe you're right, Les. But I think it's telling that he wrote the majority opinion.


The censorship king from out of state.

User avatar
TC Talks
Posts: 10103
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 2:41 am

Re: Supreme Court protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination

Post by TC Talks » Mon Jun 15, 2020 5:08 pm

I agree, why was he selected to do this? He's got to be the most homophobic amongst the justices, or isn't he? :wink:

Either way, wait until the few remaining bigoted Kristians who back Trump get wind that he fumbled another issue near and dear to them.


“The more you can increase fear of drugs, crime, welfare mothers, immigrants and aliens, the more you control all of the people.”
― Noam Chomsky

Posting Content © 2024 TC Talks Holdings LP.

User avatar
Lester The Nightfly
Posts: 1727
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 6:19 pm

Re: Supreme Court protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination

Post by Lester The Nightfly » Mon Jun 15, 2020 5:11 pm

Honeyman wrote:
Mon Jun 15, 2020 4:57 pm
Lester The Nightfly wrote:
Mon Jun 15, 2020 3:59 pm
Honeyman wrote:
Mon Jun 15, 2020 12:57 pm
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKBN23M20N

Wonderful news! And a 6-3 vote!

I wonder if shit-for-brains trump will try and fire Gorsuch now. :rollin
I'm not quite ready to send Gorsuch flowers and candy for the following reason. From his opinion:

“Those who adopted the Civil Rights Act might not have anticipated their work would lead to this particular result likely, they weren’t thinking about many of the Act’s consequences that have become apparent over the years, including its prohibition against discrimination on the basis of motherhood or its ban on the sexual harassment of male employees. But the limits of the drafters’ imagination supply no reason to ignore the law’s demands.”

I read that as Gorsuch leaving something of a bread crumb trail to conservatives that they need to be more imaginative in legislative efforts to limit aggrieved classes claiming protection under the Civil Rights Act if they want those efforts upheld in the Supreme Court.

The best we can hope for, given Gorsuch's writings in this majority opinion, is he may on occasion fall into a Scalia mode of textualism. Don't mistake that with him being anything other than a friend of the conservative viewpoint.
Maybe you're right, Les. But I think it's telling that he wrote the majority opinion.
Oh for sure. This was not nothing and I'm thrilled to see the ruling was something of a slam dunk. But I'm also aware for Roberts & Gorsuch, this was not a particularly heroic stand they took. Gay rights is pragmatically settled law at this point*

* Don't confuse that statement with a belief that all the fights are over, there's much work to be done, but a lot of heavy lifting has been accomplished in a historical context.



User avatar
Bryce
Posts: 7141
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 12:04 pm

Re: Supreme Court protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination

Post by Bryce » Mon Jun 15, 2020 7:46 pm

I'm glad the ruling went the way it did. No one should be fired for their sexual orientation as long as it's left at home.

I'm not sure however, that it was covered in the Civil Rights Act. Mind you, it doesn't mean it shouldn't be, but shouldn't that be up to Congress to fix and not the courts?


New York and Chicago were all in with respect to their sanctuary status — until they were hit with the challenge of actually providing sanctuary. In other words, typical liberal hypocrisy.

User avatar
Honeyman
Posts: 5772
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 4:44 pm

Re: Supreme Court protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination

Post by Honeyman » Mon Jun 15, 2020 7:48 pm

Bryce wrote:
Mon Jun 15, 2020 7:46 pm
I'm glad the ruling went the way it did. No one should be fired for their sexual orientation as long as it's left at home.

I'm not sure however, that it was covered in the Civil Rights Act. Mind you, it doesn't mean it shouldn't be, but shouldn't that be up to Congress to fix and not the courts?
What do you mean by..."as long as it's left at home"?


The censorship king from out of state.

User avatar
Rate This
Posts: 13963
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2020 12:17 am

Re: Supreme Court protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination

Post by Rate This » Mon Jun 15, 2020 7:49 pm

Honeyman wrote:
Mon Jun 15, 2020 7:48 pm
Bryce wrote:
Mon Jun 15, 2020 7:46 pm
I'm glad the ruling went the way it did. No one should be fired for their sexual orientation as long as it's left at home.

I'm not sure however, that it was covered in the Civil Rights Act. Mind you, it doesn't mean it shouldn't be, but shouldn't that be up to Congress to fix and not the courts?
What do you mean by..."as long as it's left at home"?
The English translation is “as long as they stay in the closet and I can be oblivious to it”...



Matt
Posts: 9845
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 12:18 pm
Location: Where Ben Zonia couldn't cut it

Re: Supreme Court protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination

Post by Matt » Mon Jun 15, 2020 7:54 pm

Rate This wrote:
Mon Jun 15, 2020 7:49 pm
Honeyman wrote:
Mon Jun 15, 2020 7:48 pm
Bryce wrote:
Mon Jun 15, 2020 7:46 pm
I'm glad the ruling went the way it did. No one should be fired for their sexual orientation as long as it's left at home.

I'm not sure however, that it was covered in the Civil Rights Act. Mind you, it doesn't mean it shouldn't be, but shouldn't that be up to Congress to fix and not the courts?
What do you mean by..."as long as it's left at home"?
The English translation is “as long as they stay in the closet and I can be oblivious to it”...
Its a little more nuanced than that. I think he's talking about over the top flamboyance. I personally don't care who people I work with sleep with or love, as long as they are good workers. Some people aren't as comfortable with that and they have every right to their views as well.


What's more pathetic: harassing an old man who is paying to do a radio show or supporting a grifter like Trump?

User avatar
Lester The Nightfly
Posts: 1727
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 6:19 pm

Re: Supreme Court protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination

Post by Lester The Nightfly » Mon Jun 15, 2020 8:05 pm

Honeyman wrote:
Mon Jun 15, 2020 7:48 pm
Bryce wrote:
Mon Jun 15, 2020 7:46 pm
I'm glad the ruling went the way it did. No one should be fired for their sexual orientation as long as it's left at home.

I'm not sure however, that it was covered in the Civil Rights Act. Mind you, it doesn't mean it shouldn't be, but shouldn't that be up to Congress to fix and not the courts?
What do you mean by..."as long as it's left at home"?
NO BUTT SEX ON THE CLOCK, right?



User avatar
Bryce
Posts: 7141
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 12:04 pm

Re: Supreme Court protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination

Post by Bryce » Mon Jun 15, 2020 8:09 pm

Honeyman wrote:
Mon Jun 15, 2020 7:48 pm


What do you mean by..."as long as it's left at home"?
As a male, I shouldn't, or really am not allowed to, exhibit behavior that would make female co workers uncomfortable. That same standard has to apply to everyone.


New York and Chicago were all in with respect to their sanctuary status — until they were hit with the challenge of actually providing sanctuary. In other words, typical liberal hypocrisy.

bmw
Posts: 6723
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 1:02 am

Re: Supreme Court protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination

Post by bmw » Mon Jun 15, 2020 8:16 pm

The end-around for this is to simply fire somebody for their political beliefs (that remains legal in most states). If I employed people (which I don't), I'd have no problem with firing them (or not hiring them in the first place) if they were obnoxious, raging liberals.



User avatar
Turkeytop
Posts: 8854
Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2010 9:27 pm

Re: Supreme Court protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination

Post by Turkeytop » Mon Jun 15, 2020 8:21 pm

bmw wrote:
Mon Jun 15, 2020 8:16 pm
The end-around for this is to simply fire somebody for their political beliefs (that remains legal in most states). If I employed people (which I don't), I'd have no problem with firing them (or not hiring them in the first place) if they were obnoxious, raging liberals.
Are you allowed to ask about someone's political beliefs before hiring them?


I started out with nothing and I still have most of it.

User avatar
Honeyman
Posts: 5772
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 4:44 pm

Re: Supreme Court protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination

Post by Honeyman » Mon Jun 15, 2020 8:23 pm

Bryce wrote:
Mon Jun 15, 2020 8:09 pm
Honeyman wrote:
Mon Jun 15, 2020 7:48 pm


What do you mean by..."as long as it's left at home"?
As a male, I shouldn't, or really am not allowed to, exhibit behavior that would make female co workers uncomfortable. That same standard has to apply to everyone.
I agree with your "same standard has to apply...", Bryce, but I dont think you answered my question.

Are you saying gay people should not exhibit the same behaviors...hand-holding, kissing...in public that straight people do?


The censorship king from out of state.

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic