U.S. Senate Approves Anti-Discrimination Bill Endorsed by Tim Cook

[JAT]

I want a bill that protects fat people. No doubt they're discriminated against. Why does everyone pander to gays?

Hopefully this goes nowhere in the house.

What about people with big feet? I haven't been able to find a shoe that actually fits since I was 14. Where's the love?

 

[Demon Hunter]

Does it really make a difference whether homosexuality is a choice or not? Religion is clearly a choice and we protect people from being discriminated against because of their religious choice.

Homosexuality simply possesses so much opportunity to prevent people from having access to employment over something that has nothing to do with the ability to do the job that it deserves to be a protected class.

Just throwing this out as a possibility...

Private Catholic lay employer is hiring. Say it's a wedding cake bakery. Catholics believe marriage is between one man and one woman. That is their sincerely held religious conviction.

Gay person wants to work at bakery. Private Catholic employer declines. Gay person sues Catholic employer and/or government fines business into oblivion. Bakery goes out of business.

Thoughts?

 

[Kurwenal]

Basing our society around the bible and the 10 commandments would benefit society no harm it.

I'm with you, Brother. This is the only sensible solution.

But, I seem to have misplaced the originals of the 10 commandments, so which version are we going to pick to follow? There are many versions, as you know, and, depending on which version we pick, we will have to bring back slavery (that whole "thou shalt not cover thy neighbor's . . . manslave" thing), so we will need to decide who has to be the slaves. The good news is that, once we designate someone as a slave, if they disobey we can stone them to death. That will help keep the local systems in-line.

And, we can't pick only certain parts of Scripture to follow, right? I mean, if its the Scripture, we have to follow it. So, sorry everyone, but eating bacon, steak (all versions of which contains at least some blood), and some shrimp (an aquatic creature with no fins or scales) is now illegal because, well, because God said so. And, raping a virgin is OK so long as you agree to marry her and give her father 50 shekels (don't worry, we'll come up with shekels, the dollar is now out).

Because GOD said so.

 

[iLunar]

Kudos to Apple and Tim Cook for speaking out for ALL people.

The religious bigots will hide behind their chosen religion to justify their own hatred. The idea that they have some superior moral standing is just laughable. Just because you wear a cross and go to a building and believe in a fictitious book doesn't make you a moral person.

If gays founded a church and wanted to perform gay marriages, shouldn't the state protect them? I mean, according to some of the religious arguments in this thread, if it's part of a religion, it must be protected! Scientology must be protected!

 

[Demon Hunter]

Maybe you should read it carefully...

Jesus condemned many behaviors which today's society tolerates. Those teachings are less popular though.

----------

I'm with you, Brother. This is the only sensible solution.

But, I seem to have misplaced the originals of the 10 commandments, so which version are we going to pick to follow? There are many versions, as you know, and, depending on which version we pick, we will have to bring back slavery (that whole "thou shalt not cover thy neighbor's . . . manslave" thing), so we will need to decide who has to be the slaves. The good news is that, once we designate someone as a slave, if they disobey we can stone them to death. That will help keep the local systems in-line.

And, we can't pick only certain parts of Scripture to follow, right? I mean, if its the Scripture, we have to follow it. So, sorry everyone, but eating bacon, steak (all versions of which contains at least some blood), and some shrimp (an aquatic creature with no fins or scales) is now illegal because, well, because God said so. And, raping a virgin is OK so long as you agree to marry her and give her father 50 shekels (don't worry, we'll come up with shekels, the dollar is now out).

Because GOD said so.

Sure, if you're a literal Fundamentalist. Epic fail for lumping the majority of the world's Christians into a belief system that does not reflect their teachings.

 

[JAT]

Separation of church and state...... Religion has no place in politics. If it does, which religion do you choose? How do we know which one is right? What about the people who don't believe in that religion or any religion?

We don't need to be slaves to a book that was written 1000's of years ago by people that said they talked to god. It's your right to believe and have that faith. But to have us be governed by it is 100% wrong.

Considering "marriage" was invented in the Bible, not any other religious or legal writings, why do you want that to still exist in the State? Hetero-, homo-, or whatever?

 

[Demon Hunter]

Considering "marriage" was invented in the Bible, not any other religious or legal writings, why do you want that to still exist in the State? Hetero-, homo-, or whatever?

Virtually every culture around the world has affirmed that marriage is between one man and one woman since the beginning of civilization. Any brief study in anthropology or world history will demonstrate this.

If you actually think marriage was "invented" in the Bible please show us the verse.

 

[Kurwenal]

Sure, if you're a literal Fundamentalist. Epic fail for lumping the majority of the world's Christians into a belief system that does not reflect their teachings.

I agree there is an epic fail floating around here.....but I don't think you have found it yet.

(PS: what you wrote is sort of my point.......but not all of my point.)

 

[rdowns]

Considering "marriage" was invented in the Bible, not any other religious or legal writings, why do you want that to still exist in the State? Hetero-, homo-, or whatever?

Marriage was hardly invented in the bible. Where do people get this stuff?

As for marriage in the bible, which ones are you for?

 

[Demon Hunter]

I agree there is an epic fail floating around here.....but I don't think you have found it yet.

(PS: what you wrote is sort of my point.......but not all of my point.)

Well, I have a couple of minutes for you to elucidate your points. Most Christian denominations are guided by centuries of teaching and interpretation. The old law is satisfied -- why do atheists always think it's so clever to bring up Leviticus?

----------

Marriage was hardly invented in the bible. Where do people get this stuff?

As for marriage in the bible, which ones are you for?

Image

Again, a gross misinterpretation of actual Christianity. But whatever floats your boat!

P.S. Clever use of a search engine! I was not expecting such cleverness.

 

[edk99]

Heres the thing though - companies do crappy things like not call references from the obviously equally qualified gay person. Like for example:

http://www.salon.com/2013/05/23/lawsuit_alleges_anti_gay_hiring_practices_at_exxonmobil/

Exxon is an evil oil company and your story is from a liberal site. Oil and liberals don't mix so I'm not buying the story.

What was on the gay person's resume that told Exxon that she was gay? A rainbow sticker? Why would you put anything on your resume about your non work background that was not related to the position you were applying for? I certainly would never put on my resume that I'm a straight white christian.

 

[FreeState]

Just throwing this out as a possibility...

Private Catholic lay employer is hiring. Say it's a wedding cake bakery. Catholics believe marriage is between one man and one woman. That is their sincerely held religious conviction.

Gay person wants to work at bakery. Private Catholic employer declines. Gay person sues Catholic employer and/or government fines business into oblivion. Bakery goes out of business.

Thoughts?

If the private catholic lay employer is the owner of a bakery that offers goods and or services to the general public and they have over 15 employee's they must follow all federal employment laws.

If you own a business and want to hire or only offer services based on your religious belief you don't open a business offering goods and services to the public. It's as easy as that. Your selling a cake, what the purchaser does with that purchase is none of your business.

 

[e-coli]

Considering "marriage" was invented in the Bible, not any other religious or legal writings, why do you want that to still exist in the State? Hetero-, homo-, or whatever?

Maybe just sit the next round out.

 

[RealSkyDiver]

Those 32 are holding the line against societal degradation. It's homosexuality today. It will be pedophilia tomorrow. Sexual liberation for 13 year olds and up. Transgender, sexual identification are already being pushed into our schools now. It has no place there, but there it is. Pick the bathroom you want to use in middle school. Encourage kids to "figure out" what their sexual identity is. This is a historical calling card of the collapse of society. History backs this up.

I'm pretty disgusted that individuals like this one are even on this forum or the a.holes who voted this hate comment up.
Pretty sad and pathetic how some people prefer hate and violence over anything else.

 

[Kurwenal]

Well, I have a couple of minutes for you to elucidate your points. Most Christian denominations are guided by centuries of teaching and interpretation. The old law is satisfied -- why do atheists always think it's so clever to bring up Leviticus?

Why do you assume I am an atheist? It is possible, you know, to believe in god, and even to be a Christian, without thinking that the 10 commandments should be imposed on society. That whole "render unto Caesar" thing, which, as you no doubt know, came from the boss. And, that is not in the "old law."

Again, a gross misinterpretation of actual Christianity. But whatever floats your boat!

Which version of Christianity? It's a pretty big tent, you know, and there are huge variations in beliefs. Who is going to pick which version of Christianity we are going to impose on everyone else? You?

 

[xdxdaustin]

You always have control and if you say you don't, what do you say about the people who are attracted to little kids? Are you willing to make an exception for them and say that is wrong or are you going to explain how they can't help who they are and we should accept them and stop being hateful?

Homosexuality is something that is observed in thousands of species and is presumed to be nearly universal. Pedophilia is not. Homosexuality is between two consenting adults. Pedophilia rather is taking advantage of a human being (more over, an unsuspecting child) and is sexual coercion to an unsuspecting person.

 

[FreeState]

Exxon is an evil oil company and your story is from a liberal site. Oil and liberals don't mix so I'm not buying the story.

What was on the gay person's resume that told Exxon that she was gay? A rainbow sticker? Why would you put anything on your resume about your non work background that was not related to the position you were applying for? I certainly would never put on my resume that I'm a straight white christian.

So you didn't read the link? The resume mentioned previous employment and service opportunities with gay businesses. Don't trust the source? You have Google - the story was reported by a multitude of outlets:

LA Times: http://articles.latimes.com/2013/may/22/business/la-fi-mo-lgbt-exxon-gay-20130522

NY Times: http://www.nytimes.com/1999/12/07/b...ving-benefits-to-partners-of-gay-workers.html

CNN: http://money.cnn.com/2006/05/09/news/companies/pluggedin_fortune/

USA Today: http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/05/22/exxon-mobil-anti-gay-bias/2350843/

The AP (Via the Blade): http://www.toledoblade.com/Energy/2...e-anti-gay-bias-in-hiring-at-Exxon-Mobil.html

MSN News: http://news.msn.com/us/group-accuses-exxon-of-anti-gay-hiring-practices

 

[TheHateMachine]

Sure, if you're a literal Fundamentalist. Epic fail for lumping the majority of the world's Christians into a belief system that does not reflect their teachings.

You pretty much made his point, who decides which type of Christianity is the right Christianity that provides the rules to follow?

 

[Demon Hunter]

Which version of Christianity? It's a pretty big tent, you know, and there are huge variations in beliefs. Who is going to pick which version of Christianity we are going to impose on everyone else? You?

I don't know, maybe the version with 1.1 billion adherents?

It's a lot easier to find the polygamist Mormon sect in rural Utah than confront the actual teachings of the world's largest religion.

 

[Kurwenal]

I don't know, maybe the version with 1.1 billion adherents?

Name that version. I double dog dare you (grin)....and it will take me 12 seconds to find a doctrinal dispute on a fundamental issue between that version of Christianity and many others. Even on really basic stuff. Like, let's start with an easy one: do all 1.1 billion of these adherents you mention believe that Pope Francis speaks for God?

You cannot get away from the fact that Christianity is fragmented. As soon as you cite Christianity or the Bible as support for almost any position, you are necessarily picking one over the others.

 

[WestonHarvey1]

Just throwing this out as a possibility...

Private Catholic lay employer is hiring. Say it's a wedding cake bakery. Catholics believe marriage is between one man and one woman. That is their sincerely held religious conviction.

Gay person wants to work at bakery. Private Catholic employer declines. Gay person sues Catholic employer and/or government fines business into oblivion. Bakery goes out of business.

Thoughts?

It just doesn't seem like a very likely scenario. Catholic bakery refusing to make a cake for a gay wedding, based on their sincerely held religious convictions? Yeah, I can see that, that happens. But not hiring a gay employee, just because? That's certainly not a particularly *Catholic* conviction.

 

[G51989]

I want a bill that protects fat people. No doubt they're discriminated against. Why does everyone pander to gays?

Hopefully this goes nowhere in the house.

Because being gay is not a choice.

Being fat is. You can't stop being gay, its simply a natural urge.

However, Fat people can stop being FLC* whenever they want.

*FLC = Fatty Loves Cake

 

[phillipduran]

I'm with you, Brother. This is the only sensible solution.

But, I seem to have misplaced the originals of the 10 commandments, so which version are we going to pick to follow? There are many versions, as you know, and, depending on which version we pick, we will have to bring back slavery (that whole "thou shalt not cover thy neighbor's . . . manslave" thing), so we will need to decide who has to be the slaves. The good news is that, once we designate someone as a slave, if they disobey we can stone them to death. That will help keep the local systems in-line.

And, we can't pick only certain parts of Scripture to follow, right? I mean, if its the Scripture, we have to follow it. So, sorry everyone, but eating bacon, steak (all versions of which contains at least some blood), and some shrimp (an aquatic creature with no fins or scales) is now illegal because, well, because God said so. And, raping a virgin is OK so long as you agree to marry her and give her father 50 shekels (don't worry, we'll come up with shekels, the dollar is now out).

Because GOD said so.

Regarding slavery. God saw us all as servants. He put in place rules to treat slaves fairly including to set them free after a time. Treat them as you would want God to treat you since you belong to him as your slaves would belong to you. No two ways about this, slavery was not condemned in the bible.

About the food, this changed with Jesus death. We no longer need to look to the temple for what rules to obey. We go straight to God through Jesus so enjoy your bacon.

Regarding stoning, Jesus said "Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her." Judgement belongs to god, not man. Let me point out though that judgement is not opinion. Letting someone know that what they are doing is wrong according to the bible, is not judging someone, it's making a statement. Stoning someone for what you think they did wrong would be casting judgement.

 

[FrizzleFryBen]

When your religion barring blondes from employment is established, let me know and I'll get back to you.

(Can you provide a more... realistic example?)




I see what you're saying and I agree to some extent. My main issue with the law is its potential abuse and overreach. At the moment, hundreds of religious organizations are suing the federal government over a similar issue (forcing religious groups to provide health services against their beliefs).

If this law provided for churches and religious employers (like church affiliates) I think we'd have a different ballgame.

Sorry, my hypothetical didn't call my anti-blond stance part of my religion. Is that better? (again, born that way. out of ones control. didn't ask or try to be that way.)

Health services is a whole other conversation (and a different law) which I love to debate (another day perhaps)

As for the law providing for church affiliates (churches themselves, I understand and am totally cool with) ...that's my point friend. I feel they are provided too many exemptions. Simple as that.

 

[thekev]

Those 32 are holding the line against societal degradation. It's homosexuality today. It will be pedophilia tomorrow. Sexual liberation for 13 year olds and up. Transgender, sexual identification are already being pushed into our schools now. It has no place there, but there it is. Pick the bathroom you want to use in middle school. Encourage kids to "figure out" what their sexual identity is. This is a historical calling card of the collapse of society. History backs this up.

There is an absolute flaw in your statement. You provide no logical basis to show how one leads to the other. I suspect I know how the discussion would end if you merely view them all as a progression of sexual deviance.

A thought out and reasoned morality. . . based on what. The current thought and culture of the day? What could possibly go wrong with that? Put your faith in men and see where that takes you. It's too susceptible to changes in which way the wind blows. Mankind needs direction and it was given to him. Were choosing to turn from that and it has been to our detriment not our enlightenment.

There's a fundamental problem with this statement. It relies on a belief that the bible conveys the direct message of a deity who exists, and that belief is really backed up by faith. You can't prove or disprove it any more than any other belief.

I don't know, maybe the version with 1.1 billion adherents?

It's a lot easier to find the polygamist Mormon sect in rural Utah than confront the actual teachings of the world's largest religion.

That only narrows it somewhat, and you will still find conflict among scholars of religion regarding various interpretations.