Acceptable registrations in the queue through June 3 at 5:00p 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
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
Supreme Court protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination
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.
Wonderful news! And a 6-3 vote!
I wonder if shit-for-brains trump will try and fire Gorsuch now.
The censorship king from out of state.
- Lester The Nightfly
- Posts: 1794
- Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 6:19 pm
Re: Supreme Court protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination
I'm not quite ready to send Gorsuch flowers and candy for the following reason. From his opinion:Honeyman wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 12:57 pmhttps://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.
“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.
Re: Supreme Court protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination
I see an ends justify the means backstory to this whole thing...Lester The Nightfly wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 3:59 pmI'm not quite ready to send Gorsuch flowers and candy for the following reason. From his opinion:Honeyman wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 12:57 pmhttps://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.
“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.
Re: Supreme Court protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination
Maybe you're right, Les. But I think it's telling that he wrote the majority opinion.Lester The Nightfly wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 3:59 pmI'm not quite ready to send Gorsuch flowers and candy for the following reason. From his opinion:Honeyman wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 12:57 pmhttps://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.
“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.
The censorship king from out of state.
Re: Supreme Court protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination
I agree, why was he selected to do this? He's got to be the most homophobic amongst the justices, or isn't he?
Either way, wait until the few remaining bigoted Kristians who back Trump get wind that he fumbled another issue near and dear to them.
Either way, wait until the few remaining bigoted Kristians who back Trump get wind that he fumbled another issue near and dear to them.
“Blessed are those who are righteous in his name.”
― Matt
Posting Content © 2024 TC Talks Holdings LP.
― Matt
Posting Content © 2024 TC Talks Holdings LP.
- Lester The Nightfly
- Posts: 1794
- Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 6:19 pm
Re: Supreme Court protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination
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*Honeyman wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 4:57 pmMaybe you're right, Les. But I think it's telling that he wrote the majority opinion.Lester The Nightfly wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 3:59 pmI'm not quite ready to send Gorsuch flowers and candy for the following reason. From his opinion:Honeyman wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 12:57 pmhttps://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.
“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.
* 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.
Re: Supreme Court protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination
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?
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.
Re: Supreme Court protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination
What do you mean by..."as long as it's left at home"?Bryce wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 7:46 pmI'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?
The censorship king from out of state.
Re: Supreme Court protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination
The English translation is “as long as they stay in the closet and I can be oblivious to it”...Honeyman wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 7:48 pmWhat do you mean by..."as long as it's left at home"?Bryce wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 7:46 pmI'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?
Re: Supreme Court protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination
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.Rate This wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 7:49 pmThe English translation is “as long as they stay in the closet and I can be oblivious to it”...Honeyman wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 7:48 pmWhat do you mean by..."as long as it's left at home"?Bryce wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 7:46 pmI'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?
Voting for Trump is dumber than playing Russian Roulette with fully loaded chambers.
- Lester The Nightfly
- Posts: 1794
- Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 6:19 pm
Re: Supreme Court protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination
NO BUTT SEX ON THE CLOCK, right?Honeyman wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 7:48 pmWhat do you mean by..."as long as it's left at home"?Bryce wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 7:46 pmI'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?
Re: Supreme Court protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination
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.
Re: Supreme Court protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination
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.
Re: Supreme Court protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination
Are you allowed to ask about someone's political beliefs before hiring them?bmw wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 8:16 pmThe 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.
I don't mean to brag, but I just put a puzzle together in 1 day and the box said 2-4 years.
Re: Supreme Court protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination
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.