Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Two days ago, employees or potential employees of the State of Kansas could not be discriminated against in employment decisions because of their religion, race, color, gender, national origin, ancestry, age, sexual orientation, or gender identity.
Not any more - at least if your gay or transgender. Today, Republican Governor Sam Brownback issued an executive order removing anti-discrimination protections for State employees on the basis of one's sexual orientation or gender identity. From now on, the State of Kansas can fire, refuse to hire, refuse to promote, etc, etc, etc someone simply because he or she is gay or lesbian.
I have worked with several gay men who share explicit details about their sexual encounters. I have worked with a gay man who (had he been straight) would be an HR nightmare. Calling women "lipstick lesbians" and making lots of gay sexual entendres.
These behaviors are inappropriate. If a straight man were to make sexually harassing statements of this nature, he would be fired. But neither of these gay guys were even reprimanded out of fear by HR of a lawsuit.''
THIS IS SO DISGUSTING.
Yeah, sure. As if straight men don't say awkwardly nasty perverted stuff in their groups. I've walked in on men plenty of times sexualizing women. I worked with a doctor that made perverted jokes with the girls that work there all the time. News flash, that's what many men do. If you don't want a sexualized work place, make a rule that sexual topics are strictly off limits.
I also think your HR dept is pretty incompetent that they couldn't document the exact words being said, on the dates and times that they were said, along with witness statements to back it up. Even with anti-discrimination laws, it still has to be shown that it they were discriminated against. It's pretty easy to find reasons to let somebody go.
My city has an anti-discrimination ordinance and gay people get fired here all the time. Lawsuits are rare.
Personally, all of what you've said doesn't bother me. We all have sex, what's the big deal that you have to be *so* disgusted with it?
How is it "simply not true" based on what Brownback actually did?
Gays are not going to be fired in large numbers today simply because they're gay. It just allows ineffective employees to be fired without the excuse of "I was fired because I'm gay", and the same goes for unqualified applicants.
Unless they are trying to pick someone up in the bathroom, there is no way to know their sexual orientation. How do you know someone is gay unless they put it out there???
The same way you know someone is straight.
"Are you married? What's your wife's/husband's name? Got kids? What are you doing on the weekend?" etc etc. You know, normal everyday conversation for humans.
I have worked with several gay men who share explicit details about their sexual encounters. I have worked with a gay man who (had he been straight) would be an HR nightmare. Calling women "lipstick lesbians" and making lots of gay sexual entendres.
These behaviors are inappropriate. If a straight man were to make sexually harassing statements of this nature, he would be fired. But neither of these gay guys were even reprimanded out of fear by HR of a lawsuit.''
THIS IS SO DISGUSTING.
I worked at a red lobster where both the GM and his Assistant Manager had been reported several times, even drawing the attention of district manager and corporate offices a few times. Beyond an apology they made him give out, nothing was done until someone got a lawyer and filed a lawsuit. Once again your theories fail terribly.
Gays are not going to be fired in large numbers today simply because they're gay. It just allows ineffective employees to be fired without the excuse of "I was fired because I'm gay", and the same goes for unqualified applicants.
We all deserve equal rights, not special rights.
I love how anytime someone gets protections some neo con, and likely white man, yaks on about their "special rights". As if the fact he doesn't get them on the basis of race or religion . It doesn't matter if hundreds or only five people are fired for discrimination, people should be protected from that. I would no more want that to happen than some gay employer firing you because you gave out your personal opinions on gay marriage. However, I noticed that people on the right are most often the biggest hypocrites with this kind of stuff. Getting irritated when people want to use the court to purpose anti discrimination claims, yet being the first to do it when someone denies them due to their religion .
That is simply not true. It's another leftie "headlines tell the entire story" reaction.
It's 100% true.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. It doesn't matter if hundreds or only five people are fired for discrimination, people should be protected from that. I would no more want that to happen than some gay employer firing you because you gave out your personal opinions on gay marriage. However, I noticed that people on the right are most often the biggest hypocrites with this kind of stuff. Getting irritated when people want to use the court to purpose anti discrimination claims, yet being the first to do it when someone denies them due to their religion 
