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.
And people are people, doesn't matter what ethnic group one belongs to or their sexual orientation. I think Indiana is opening themselves up for huge litigations against discrimination of any kind. Employment Non-Discrimination Act
Qualified, hardworking Americans are denied job opportunities, fired or otherwise discriminated against just because they are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (LGBT). There is no federal law that consistently protects LGBT individuals from employment discrimination; there are no state laws in 29 states that explicitly prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation, and in 32 states that do so based on gender identity. As a result, LGBT people face serious discrimination in employment, including being fired, being denied a promotion and experiencing harassment on the job.
What is the Employment Non-Discrimination Act?
The Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) would provide basic protections against workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. ENDA simply affords to all Americans basic employment protection from discrimination based on irrational prejudice. The bill is closely modeled on existing civil rights laws, including Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Americans with Disabilities Act. The bill explicitly prohibits preferential treatment and quotas and does not permit disparate impact suits. In addition, it exempts small businesses, religious organizations and the military.
The problem is there is no ENDA. "Would" is the key word in the passages above. It has never passed Congress. Even when in 2009-2011 the Democrats had a filibuster proof majority in the U.S. Senate they could not get the law passed and all because of the "transgender" provisions.
If the bill was to protect LBG the bill would pass tomorrow. It is the "T" that is holding up the bill. The LGB community should drop the T because the issues and considerations are not the same.
If the bill was to protect LBG the bill would pass tomorrow. It is the "T" that is holding up the bill. The LGB community should drop the T because the issues and considerations are not the same.
No it wouldn't. The Republicans would never pass it.
Baking the cake certifies you believe that gay marriage is ok with Christianity.
This is what the gay community wants. To shove it in everyones face.
This is a new and novel theory of consumer transactions. When I buy something from, say, Target, the store is certifying that every aspect of my life is AOK with them? I should save my sales receipts, to present to anyone who questions anything about my life? Target, Arco, and my favorite coffee house all say that I am a sterling character, and this pile of receipts proves it?
This is an entirely unknown service that retailers are offering to the general public. You'd think they'd advertise it more often.
Apple chief Tim Cook slammed what he called a wave of “dangerous” laws in several US states that he said promote discrimination and erode equality, in an editorial published Sunday.
"These bills rationalize injustice by pretending to defend something many of us hold dear. They go against the very principles our nation was founded on."
That would be the same Tim Cook who stated: "Apple 'will never tolerate discrimination.' " ...Yet they sell to people/countries who/which execute homosexuals just because they are homosexual.
I think you'll find that Curves operates under a narrowly-defined exception to the law, one that is not necessarily constitutional. However, for a man to join Curves, he would have to be willing to sue for the privilege, and demonstrate both that them turning him down assaulted his dignity and represented some harm (having to travel further to find a suitable alternative; having to pay significantly more for a suitable alternative; etc.) The biggest hurdle a man would have to overcome is that what Curves offers is services designed for women, and therefore almost any other gym would be readily demonstrable to be a superior option for the man. You cannot sue for unjust discrimination when you benefit from it.
So the gay couple that got a free wedding cake should have their case thrown out because in the end they benefited from the discrimination?
That would be the same Tim Cook who stated: "Apple 'will never tolerate discrimination.' " ...Yet they sell to people/countries who/which execute homosexuals just because they are homosexual.
How is selling to countries/people which/who execute homosexuals "never tolerating discrimination?"
So when does the massive boycott of Apple begin? Or is everyone complaining about Indiana's law just a bunch of disgustingly opportunistic hypocrites?
They are selling to everyone, regardless of their personal beliefs. That is a perfect example of non-discriminatory practices.
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.
