Poll of the Day > Supreme Court is FIERCELY DIVIDED whether EMPLOYERS can FIRE GAY PEOPLE!!!

Topic List	Page List: 1, 2
SunWuKung420 10/10/19 7:13:26 AM #51:	Lol, I can't believe he is really trying to argue that being gay is a preference that might change over time. That's some 1950's, "we can pray the gay away" shit right there. --- Align your chakras, it starts with your breathing. http://www.arfalpha.com/ScienceOfBreath/ScienceOfBreath.htm <cite>SunWuKung420 posted [p:928582326] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>Lol, I can't believe he is really trying to argue that being gay is a preference that might change over time. That's some 1950's, "we can pray the gay away" shit right there.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
aDirtyShisno 10/10/19 7:44:27 AM #52:	SunWuKung420 posted... Lol, I can't believe he is really trying to argue that being gay is a preference that might change over time. That's some 1950's, "we can pray the gay away" shit right there. You cannot argue that some people dont go through transitions through life when first theyre gay then later straight or vice versa. Some even literally get surgery to fix themselves and then come to regret it later in life. To ignore those facts is to discount years worth of research and goddamn common sense. Just because you choose to stick your fingers in your ears doesnt mean nothing is being said around you. --- Que sera, sera. Whatever happens, happens. ...and he was never heard from again. <cite>aDirtyShisno posted [p:928582812] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>SunWuKung420 posted...</cite> <quote>Lol, I can't believe he is really trying to argue that being gay is a preference that might change over time. That's some 1950's, "we can pray the gay away" shit right there.</quote> You cannot argue that some people dont go through transitions through life when first theyre gay then later straight or vice versa. Some even literally get surgery to fix themselves and then come to regret it later in life. To ignore those facts is to discount years worth of research and goddamn common sense. Just because you choose to stick your fingers in your ears doesnt mean nothing is being said around you.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SunWuKung420 10/10/19 8:30:38 AM #53:	Lol, he's doubling down on being wrong. Good for him. He's in a transitory phase. --- Align your chakras, it starts with your breathing. http://www.arfalpha.com/ScienceOfBreath/ScienceOfBreath.htm <cite>SunWuKung420 posted [p:928583678] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>Lol, he's doubling down on being wrong. Good for him. He's in a transitory phase.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
EvilMegas 10/10/19 8:49:00 AM #54:	I remember when I transitioned from being black --- Official King of Black People https://imgur.com/Zk3VS3o http://imgur.com/a/UeQiE https://imgur.com/aSnCUuI <cite>EvilMegas posted [p:928584108] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>I remember when I transitioned from being black</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LinkPizza 10/10/19 9:44:15 AM #55:	aDirtyShisno posted... LinkPizza posted... aDirtyShisno posted... Today you feel like dating women but in 5 years you decide you want to date men, then years later you date both, and so on, and so on... You do realize that you don't just choose who you like? Most people can't just decide to be gay or straight. You do understand that they are born that way, correct? Because it kind of sounds like you think everyone can just pick and choose at will... Dating preferences are dating preferences and absolutely change over time. Someone may grow up loving nothing but white women, years later be absolutely in love with black women, and years after that only dating Asian women. The same is true of people who come out as gay late in life yet were dating exclusively women early in life. Their preferences went from women to men over time. They werent simply born hating women even if they choose to date men early in life. Preferences absolutely exist and are not the same for everyone. Some peoples preferences change rapidly and some remain the same their whole lives, but preferences absolutely exit. Of course they do. But I never said they didn't. I said you don't choose them. For example, those people that come out after only dating women weren't straight and then became gay. They came out of the closet. Also, gay people don't hate women. In the end, what I said still stands. You don't choose your preferences. You don't decide who you like. Have you ever met a gay person? Because it honestly sounds like you haven't. You also make it sound like being gay is a choice. You have to be trolling at this point, right? --- Official King of Kings Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around. <cite>LinkPizza posted [p:928585541] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>aDirtyShisno posted...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>aDirtyShisno posted...</cite> <quote>Today you feel like dating women but in 5 years you decide you want to date men, then years later you date both, and so on, and so on...</quote> You do realize that you don't just choose who you like? Most people can't just decide to be gay or straight. You do understand that they are born that way, correct? Because it kind of sounds like you think everyone can just pick and choose at will...</quote> Dating preferences are dating preferences and absolutely change over time. Someone may grow up loving nothing but white women, years later be absolutely in love with black women, and years after that only dating Asian women. The same is true of people who come out as gay late in life yet were dating exclusively women early in life. Their preferences went from women to men over time. They werent simply born hating women even if they choose to date men early in life. Preferences absolutely exist and are not the same for everyone. Some peoples preferences change rapidly and some remain the same their whole lives, but preferences absolutely exit.</quote> Of course they do. But I never said they didn't. I said you don't choose them. For example, those people that come out after only dating women weren't straight and then became gay. They came out of the closet. Also, gay people don't hate women. In the end, what I said still stands. You don't choose your preferences. You don't decide who you like. Have you ever met a gay person? Because it honestly sounds like you haven't. You also make it sound like being gay is a choice. You have to be trolling at this point, right?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LinkPizza 10/10/19 9:50:39 AM #56:	aDirtyShisno posted... SunWuKung420 posted... Lol, I can't believe he is really trying to argue that being gay is a preference that might change over time. That's some 1950's, "we can pray the gay away" shit right there. You cannot argue that some people dont go through transitions through life when first theyre gay then later straight or vice versa. Some even literally get surgery to fix themselves and then come to regret it later in life. To ignore those facts is to discount years worth of research and goddamn common sense. Just because you choose to stick your fingers in your ears doesnt mean nothing is being said around you. Yes. I can argue. Because you know they don't actually "fix" themselves, right? It's not a choice to be gay or not. If you think it is, you're the one ignoring research. Those little torture camps that help you pray away the gay doesn't do anything like that. They are literal torture camps. The ones that come out the camp fixed just start hiding the fact that they're gay again. If being gay was a choice, there wouldn't be many gay people, if any at all. Kids would have switched. There are kids who kill themselves because they're gay. If being gay was like a light switch like you seem to think, they would have flipped the switch first. There are people that will try to live like they are straight, even though they hate it, just to fake it. But Idk why we're even responding. You know you're wrong, but doubling down like Sunny said. And like EvilMegas said, I don't know why we'r'e even bothering. You can be serious at this point... --- Official King of Kings Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around. <cite>LinkPizza posted [p:928585730] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>aDirtyShisno posted...</cite> <quote>SunWuKung420 posted...</cite> <quote>Lol, I can't believe he is really trying to argue that being gay is a preference that might change over time. That's some 1950's, "we can pray the gay away" shit right there.</quote> You cannot argue that some people dont go through transitions through life when first theyre gay then later straight or vice versa. Some even literally get surgery to fix themselves and then come to regret it later in life. To ignore those facts is to discount years worth of research and goddamn common sense. Just because you choose to stick your fingers in your ears doesnt mean nothing is being said around you.</quote> Yes. I can argue. Because you know they don't actually "fix" themselves, right? It's not a choice to be gay or not. If you think it is, you're the one ignoring research. Those little torture camps that help you pray away the gay doesn't do anything like that. They are literal torture camps. The ones that come out the camp fixed just start hiding the fact that they're gay again. If being gay was a choice, there wouldn't be many gay people, if any at all. Kids would have switched. There are kids who kill themselves because they're gay. If being gay was like a light switch like you seem to think, they would have flipped the switch first. There are people that will try to live like they are straight, even though they hate it, just to fake it. But Idk why we're even responding. You know you're wrong, but doubling down like Sunny said. And like EvilMegas said, I don't know why we'r'e even bothering. You can be serious at this point...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
HornedLion 10/10/19 10:02:43 AM #57:	This is BS. If being gay is just who you are: Then getting fired for that personal trait, especially since it does not interfere with your work performance, is illegal. If being gay is a mental issue, which it is not but certain haters of the LBGT community like to say it is: Then firing them for a medical issue that, again, does not interfere with their work performance is also illegal! Im not gay but I love working with them. I love making HR inappropriate jokes, and they do too. For example, the other day he said something like, I hate going to Jesses(a restaurant) their portions are too small. And I was like, Size queen. We had a good laugh and the day went by faster because of it. --- Don't runaway from troubles... instead meet them Hedons. <cite>HornedLion posted [p:928586101] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>This is BS. If being gay is just who you are: Then getting fired for that personal trait, especially since it does not interfere with your work performance, is illegal. If being gay is a mental issue, which it is not but certain haters of the LBGT community like to say it is: Then firing them for a medical issue that, again, does not interfere with their work performance is also illegal! Im not gay but I love working with them. I love making HR inappropriate jokes, and they do too. For example, the other day he said something like, I hate going to Jesses(a restaurant) their portions are too small. And I was like, Size queen. We had a good laugh and the day went by faster because of it.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Muscles 10/10/19 11:57:17 AM #58:	Why do we even need this law? Why can't employers just not be dicks to their employees? I thought this was already a law, but I suppose if people can't be nice without a law we might need to make one --- Muscles Chicago Bears \| Chicago Blackhawks \| Chicago Bulls \| Chicago Cubs \| NIU Huskies <cite>Muscles posted [p:928589932] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>Why do we even need this law? Why can't employers just not be dicks to their employees? I thought this was already a law, but I suppose if people can't be nice without a law we might need to make one</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
aDirtyShisno 10/10/19 12:39:46 PM #59:	LinkPizza posted... aDirtyShisno posted... LinkPizza posted... aDirtyShisno posted... Today you feel like dating women but in 5 years you decide you want to date men, then years later you date both, and so on, and so on... You do realize that you don't just choose who you like? Most people can't just decide to be gay or straight. You do understand that they are born that way, correct? Because it kind of sounds like you think everyone can just pick and choose at will... Dating preferences are dating preferences and absolutely change over time. Someone may grow up loving nothing but white women, years later be absolutely in love with black women, and years after that only dating Asian women. The same is true of people who come out as gay late in life yet were dating exclusively women early in life. Their preferences went from women to men over time. They werent simply born hating women even if they choose to date men early in life. Preferences absolutely exist and are not the same for everyone. Some peoples preferences change rapidly and some remain the same their whole lives, but preferences absolutely exit. Of course they do. But I never said they didn't. I said you don't choose them. For example, those people that come out after only dating women weren't straight and then became gay. They came out of the closet. Also, gay people don't hate women. In the end, what I said still stands. You don't choose your preferences. You don't decide who you like. Have you ever met a gay person? Because it honestly sounds like you haven't. You also make it sound like being gay is a choice. You have to be trolling at this point, right? Also, probably one of the only way your preference is changing between genders or sex is if you were already bi or in denial... Most preferences that change are like "I liked blondes and now I like brunettes" rather than "I use to like females, then I realized that guys were my jam"... You cant say that one type of preference changes but another is hardwired at birth. Otherwise it must be hardwired that someone likes blonde or brunettes, same for blacks or whites, and so on. In fact it would seem that under that mindset racism itself might just be hardwired at birth. Cant change, might as well accept it. Its why some people only date within their race. Preferences are preferences are preferences. They can change. Im not saying they change all the time for everyone, Im just saying that literally they *can* change. --- Que sera, sera. Whatever happens, happens. ...and he was never heard from again. <cite>aDirtyShisno posted [p:928591536] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>aDirtyShisno posted...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>aDirtyShisno posted...</cite> <quote>Today you feel like dating women but in 5 years you decide you want to date men, then years later you date both, and so on, and so on...</quote> You do realize that you don't just choose who you like? Most people can't just decide to be gay or straight. You do understand that they are born that way, correct? Because it kind of sounds like you think everyone can just pick and choose at will...</quote> Dating preferences are dating preferences and absolutely change over time. Someone may grow up loving nothing but white women, years later be absolutely in love with black women, and years after that only dating Asian women. The same is true of people who come out as gay late in life yet were dating exclusively women early in life. Their preferences went from women to men over time. They werent simply born hating women even if they choose to date men early in life. Preferences absolutely exist and are not the same for everyone. Some peoples preferences change rapidly and some remain the same their whole lives, but preferences absolutely exit.</quote> Of course they do. But I never said they didn't. I said you don't choose them. For example, those people that come out after only dating women weren't straight and then became gay. They came out of the closet. Also, gay people don't hate women. In the end, what I said still stands. You don't choose your preferences. You don't decide who you like. Have you ever met a gay person? Because it honestly sounds like you haven't. You also make it sound like being gay is a choice. You have to be trolling at this point, right? Also, probably one of the only way your preference is changing between genders or sex is if you were already bi or in denial... Most preferences that change are like "I liked blondes and now I like brunettes" rather than "I use to like females, then I realized that guys were my jam"...</quote> You cant say that one type of preference changes but another is hardwired at birth. Otherwise it must be hardwired that someone likes blonde or brunettes, same for blacks or whites, and so on. In fact it would seem that under that mindset racism itself might just be hardwired at birth. Cant change, might as well accept it. Its why some people only date within their race. Preferences are preferences are preferences. They can change. Im not saying they change all the time for everyone, Im just saying that literally they can change.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
aDirtyShisno 10/10/19 12:43:21 PM #60:	LinkPizza posted... aDirtyShisno posted... SunWuKung420 posted... Lol, I can't believe he is really trying to argue that being gay is a preference that might change over time. That's some 1950's, "we can pray the gay away" shit right there. You cannot argue that some people dont go through transitions through life when first theyre gay then later straight or vice versa. Some even literally get surgery to fix themselves and then come to regret it later in life. To ignore those facts is to discount years worth of research and goddamn common sense. Just because you choose to stick your fingers in your ears doesnt mean nothing is being said around you. Yes. I can argue. Because you know they don't actually "fix" themselves, right? It's not a choice to be gay or not. If you think it is, you're the one ignoring research. Those little torture camps that help you pray away the gay doesn't do anything like that. They are literal torture camps. The ones that come out the camp fixed just start hiding the fact that they're gay again. If being gay was a choice, there wouldn't be many gay people, if any at all. Kids would have switched. There are kids who kill themselves because they're gay. If being gay was like a light switch like you seem to think, they would have flipped the switch first. There are people that will try to live like they are straight, even though they hate it, just to fake it. But Idk why we're even responding. You know you're wrong, but doubling down like Sunny said. And like EvilMegas said, I don't know why we'r'e even bothering. You can be serious at this point... Fix, as in literally mutilate their bodies through surgery. Not fix as in some sort of mental conditioning, like you keep going on about despite me never talking about religious anything. Many people get surgery or other medical procedures then completely regret it later, especially children who grow up to want children of their own and its become impossible. --- Que sera, sera. Whatever happens, happens. ...and he was never heard from again. <cite>aDirtyShisno posted [p:928591682] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>aDirtyShisno posted...</cite> <quote>SunWuKung420 posted...</cite> <quote>Lol, I can't believe he is really trying to argue that being gay is a preference that might change over time. That's some 1950's, "we can pray the gay away" shit right there.</quote> You cannot argue that some people dont go through transitions through life when first theyre gay then later straight or vice versa. Some even literally get surgery to fix themselves and then come to regret it later in life. To ignore those facts is to discount years worth of research and goddamn common sense. Just because you choose to stick your fingers in your ears doesnt mean nothing is being said around you.</quote> Yes. I can argue. Because you know they don't actually "fix" themselves, right? It's not a choice to be gay or not. If you think it is, you're the one ignoring research. Those little torture camps that help you pray away the gay doesn't do anything like that. They are literal torture camps. The ones that come out the camp fixed just start hiding the fact that they're gay again. If being gay was a choice, there wouldn't be many gay people, if any at all. Kids would have switched. There are kids who kill themselves because they're gay. If being gay was like a light switch like you seem to think, they would have flipped the switch first. There are people that will try to live like they are straight, even though they hate it, just to fake it. But Idk why we're even responding. You know you're wrong, but doubling down like Sunny said. And like EvilMegas said, I don't know why we'r'e even bothering. You can be serious at this point...</quote> Fix, as in literally mutilate their bodies through surgery. Not fix as in some sort of mental conditioning, like you keep going on about despite me never talking about religious anything. Many people get surgery or other medical procedures then completely regret it later, especially children who grow up to want children of their own and its become impossible.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Fam_Fam 10/10/19 12:52:09 PM #61:	long story short, these should be protected classes, but the law does not include them. if you argue based on current law, then you should not include these categories as "sex" imo but the law should be changed but it won't be at this point <cite>Fam_Fam posted [p:928592012] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>long story short, these should be protected classes, but the law does not include them. if you argue based on current law, then you should not include these categories as "sex" imo but the law should be changed but it won't be at this point</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
adjl 10/10/19 1:05:47 PM #62:	aDirtyShisno posted... Its not that it shouldnt be legal because its not already legal, remember that laws work in the opposite. They make things expressly illegal and then everything else is legal. This means you are attempting to declare that something that is legal now is actually not legal. Not by actively changing the laws to incorporate the item in question, but rather by just pointing at something it was not covered by before and saying that it should be covered by that too and so it will be. Laws just dont work like that. The judiciary never was meant to create or change laws, only to enforce the laws as they are written by the legislature. If you want ironclad protection for something get them to make a law, not any of this it is, it isnt back and forth thats created by the judicial process. And the argument here is "this is logically identical to the things covered by the existing laws, so the existing laws should be amended to include it and/or can already cover it without explicit amendments." Aaantlion posted... But why should some reasons be protected yet not others? Because some reasons have no bearing on job performance and are not things people can change about themselves. Additionally, protected classes are typically classes of people that have been subject to harmful discrimination on a large scale, meaning their designation is a matter of trying to prevent further such discrimination and therefore harm. There's not much motivation to protect a class that doesn't have anything to protect against. Aaantlion posted... And why should employees be allowed to discriminate against where they choose to work but not employers against employees? Because employers have more power than employees. At every level, employment regulations exist to correct that imbalance. This is no exception. Aaantlion posted... No, I mean if somebody got fired for performance or another legitimate issue, they can still claim discrimination. They can indeed, which is why documentation of legitimate issues is important (for both sides of the issue). aDirtyShisno posted... Dating preferences are dating preferences and absolutely change over time. They do indeed. Why would that make discriminating against gay people any more legitimate? --- This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts. <cite>adjl posted [p:928592526] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>aDirtyShisno posted...</cite> <quote>Its not that it shouldnt be legal because its not already legal, remember that laws work in the opposite. They make things expressly illegal and then everything else is legal. This means you are attempting to declare that something that is legal now is actually not legal. Not by actively changing the laws to incorporate the item in question, but rather by just pointing at something it was not covered by before and saying that it should be covered by that too and so it will be. Laws just dont work like that. The judiciary never was meant to create or change laws, only to enforce the laws as they are written by the legislature. If you want ironclad protection for something get them to make a law, not any of this it is, it isnt back and forth thats created by the judicial process.</quote> And the argument here is "this is logically identical to the things covered by the existing laws, so the existing laws should be amended to include it and/or can already cover it without explicit amendments." Aaantlion posted...</cite> <quote>But why should some reasons be protected yet not others?</quote> Because some reasons have no bearing on job performance and are not things people can change about themselves. Additionally, protected classes are typically classes of people that have been subject to harmful discrimination on a large scale, meaning their designation is a matter of trying to prevent further such discrimination and therefore harm. There's not much motivation to protect a class that doesn't have anything to protect against. Aaantlion posted...</cite> <quote>And why should employees be allowed to discriminate against where they choose to work but not employers against employees?</quote> Because employers have more power than employees. At every level, employment regulations exist to correct that imbalance. This is no exception. Aaantlion posted...</cite> <quote>No, I mean if somebody got fired for performance or another legitimate issue, they can still claim discrimination.</quote> They can indeed, which is why documentation of legitimate issues is important (for both sides of the issue). aDirtyShisno posted...</cite> <quote>Dating preferences are dating preferences and absolutely change over time.</quote> They do indeed. Why would that make discriminating against gay people any more legitimate?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LinkPizza 10/10/19 1:09:42 PM #63:	\aDirtyShisno posted... You cant say that one type of preference changes but another is hardwired at birth. Otherwise it must be hardwired that someone likes blonde or brunettes, same for blacks or whites, and so on. In fact it would seem that under that mindset racism itself might just be hardwired at birth. Cant change, might as well accept it. Its why some people only date within their race. Preferences are preferences are preferences. They can change. Im not saying they change all the time for everyone, Im just saying that literally they can change. Except who you like it not just something that you can change. I can easily say I like blonde or brunettes. If I'm attracted to a gender, I can like or dislike different hing about that gender. But it does mean that just because I'm more attracted to brunettes, I can't be attracted to blondes. And you preference can change. But it's not my choice on what I like more. I can do certain things that may make me like one more than the other, but that's about it. But the same can be said for which gender you like. You aren't choosing. It's not like people can wake and and decide to be gay or straight. If you can do that, awesome. But most people aren't like that. Do you really think people are choosing to be gay? Also, some people are hardwired like that. I know people who will only date people of a specific race, or with a specific hair color. I've know girls who would only date black dudes. Or guy who would only date blondes. Though whether it's hardwired or nurture, Idk. But being straight or gay is really a choice for the person. What you find attractive in a person probably isn't really a choice, either. Preferences can change. You're sexuality isn't usually the same. It's not something people "decide" to do, like you stated earlier. aDirtyShisno posted... Fix, as in literally mutilate their bodies through surgery. Not fix as in some sort of mental conditioning, like you keep going on about despite me never talking about religious anything. Many people get surgery or other medical procedures then completely regret it later, especially children who grow up to want children of their own and its become impossible. Ar you talking about being gay or transgender? Because those are 2 different things. Usually, the "fix for being gay isn't body mutilation, but torture. And I figured you were talking about being gay since you mentioned that in the first sentence. aDirtyShisno posted... You cannot argue that some people dont go through transitions through life when first theyre gay then later straight or vice versa. This is why I assumed you were talking about being gay and not transgender. They are different things... And again, people don't "choose" which one to be... I don't understand why you think that is possible. Unless you're bi. Like another poster said, maybe people who are bi and choose to date whoever think that they are choosing to be either straight or gay when it's really that they are bi and like both. The it's understandable, but still wrong to think people can choose their sexual orientation... --- Official King of Kings Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around. <cite>LinkPizza posted [p:928592680] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>\aDirtyShisno posted...</cite> <quote>You cant say that one type of preference changes but another is hardwired at birth. Otherwise it must be hardwired that someone likes blonde or brunettes, same for blacks or whites, and so on. In fact it would seem that under that mindset racism itself might just be hardwired at birth. Cant change, might as well accept it. Its why some people only date within their race. Preferences are preferences are preferences. They can change. Im not saying they change all the time for everyone, Im just saying that literally they can change.</quote> Except who you like it not just something that you can change. I can easily say I like blonde or brunettes. If I'm attracted to a gender, I can like or dislike different hing about that gender. But it does mean that just because I'm more attracted to brunettes, I can't be attracted to blondes. And you preference can change. But it's not my choice on what I like more. I can do certain things that may make me like one more than the other, but that's about it. But the same can be said for which gender you like. You aren't choosing. It's not like people can wake and and decide to be gay or straight. If you can do that, awesome. But most people aren't like that. Do you really think people are choosing to be gay? Also, some people are hardwired like that. I know people who will only date people of a specific race, or with a specific hair color. I've know girls who would only date black dudes. Or guy who would only date blondes. Though whether it's hardwired or nurture, Idk. But being straight or gay is really a choice for the person. What you find attractive in a person probably isn't really a choice, either. Preferences can change. You're sexuality isn't usually the same. It's not something people "decide" to do, like you stated earlier. aDirtyShisno posted...</cite> <quote>Fix, as in literally mutilate their bodies through surgery. Not fix as in some sort of mental conditioning, like you keep going on about despite me never talking about religious anything. Many people get surgery or other medical procedures then completely regret it later, especially children who grow up to want children of their own and its become impossible.</quote> Ar you talking about being gay or transgender? Because those are 2 different things. Usually, the "fix for being gay isn't body mutilation, but torture. And I figured you were talking about being gay since you mentioned that in the first sentence. aDirtyShisno posted...</cite> <quote>You cannot argue that some people dont go through transitions through life when first theyre gay then later straight or vice versa.</quote> This is why I assumed you were talking about being gay and not transgender. They are different things... And again, people don't "choose" which one to be... I don't understand why you think that is possible. Unless you're bi. Like another poster said, maybe people who are bi and choose to date whoever think that they are choosing to be either straight or gay when it's really that they are bi and like both. The it's understandable, but still wrong to think people can choose their sexual orientation...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
wwinterj25 10/10/19 1:26:40 PM #64:	Aaantlion posted... Do you understand what discrimination is? Because it can be for any number of reasons, some of which are also largely out of a person's control yet aren't protected. So you're agreeing with me while questioning if I know what discrimination is? Good post Zeus. aDirtyShisno posted... If you want a specific item to be protected then by all means make a law that protects it I'll be right on that item! SunWuKung420 posted... Lol, I can't believe he is really trying to argue that being gay is a preference that might change over time. Well he does pay for his girlfriends so I'm not surprised. --- One who knows nothing can understand nothing. http://psnprofiles.com/wwinterj - https://imgur.com/YvP6isz <cite>wwinterj25 posted [p:928593378] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>Aaantlion posted...</cite> <quote>Do you understand what discrimination is? Because it can be for any number of reasons, some of which are also largely out of a person's control yet aren't protected.</quote> So you're agreeing with me while questioning if I know what discrimination is? Good post Zeus. aDirtyShisno posted...</cite> <quote>If you want a specific item to be protected then by all means make a law that protects it</quote> I'll be right on that item! SunWuKung420 posted...</cite> <quote>Lol, I can't believe he is really trying to argue that being gay is a preference that might change over time.</quote> Well he does pay for his girlfriends so I'm not surprised.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Fam_Fam 10/10/19 2:55:19 PM #65:	whether or not you are gay "by choice", you should be protected religion is something that you choose and that changes over time, and yet it is protected <cite>Fam_Fam posted [p:928597113] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>whether or not you are gay "by choice", you should be protected religion is something that you choose and that changes over time, and yet it is protected</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
DDirtyDastard 10/10/19 3:07:02 PM #66:	Only if it affects business. Say you were in some really traditional community and you having a gay employee had a significant impact on whether or not people came to your establishment. <cite>DDirtyDastard posted [p:928597578] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>Only if it affects business. Say you were in some really traditional community and you having a gay employee had a significant impact on whether or not people came to your establishment.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Fam_Fam 10/10/19 3:20:07 PM #67:	DDirtyDastard posted... Only if it affects business. Say you were in some really traditional community and you having a gay employee had a significant impact on whether or not people came to your establishment. and how would people know who was gay or not? <cite>Fam_Fam posted [p:928598066] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>DDirtyDastard posted...</cite> <quote>Only if it affects business. Say you were in some really traditional community and you having a gay employee had a significant impact on whether or not people came to your establishment.</quote> and how would people know who was gay or not?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
EvilMegas 10/10/19 3:44:49 PM #68:	I like how I got modded lol --- Official King of Black People https://imgur.com/Zk3VS3o http://imgur.com/a/UeQiE https://imgur.com/aSnCUuI <cite>EvilMegas posted [p:928599038] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>I like how I got modded lol</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LinkPizza 10/10/19 3:46:41 PM #69:	Fam_Fam posted... DDirtyDastard posted... Only if it affects business. Say you were in some really traditional community and you having a gay employee had a significant impact on whether or not people came to your establishment. and how would people know who was gay or not? Gossip. If one person finds out, they can spread that news around... --- Official King of Kings Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around. <cite>LinkPizza posted [p:928599109] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>Fam_Fam posted...</cite> <quote>DDirtyDastard posted...</cite> <quote>Only if it affects business. Say you were in some really traditional community and you having a gay employee had a significant impact on whether or not people came to your establishment.</quote> and how would people know who was gay or not?</quote> Gossip. If one person finds out, they can spread that news around...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SunWuKung420 10/10/19 4:05:55 PM #70:	EvilMegas posted... I like how I got modded lol That's sad moderators. Shinso is saying preferring blondes over redheads is the same has preferring men over women. Facepalm.jpg --- Align your chakras, it starts with your breathing. http://www.arfalpha.com/ScienceOfBreath/ScienceOfBreath.htm <cite>SunWuKung420 posted [p:928599843] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>EvilMegas posted...</cite> <quote>I like how I got modded lol</quote> That's sad moderators. Shinso is saying preferring blondes over redheads is the same has preferring men over women. Facepalm.jpg</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LinkPizza 10/10/19 5:15:52 PM #71:	SunWuKung420 posted... EvilMegas posted... I like how I got modded lol That's sad moderators. Shinso is saying preferring blondes over redheads is the same has preferring men over women. Facepalm.jpg And that you can choose your sexual orientation, as well... --- Official King of Kings Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around. <cite>LinkPizza posted [p:928602475] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>SunWuKung420 posted...</cite> <quote>EvilMegas posted...</cite> <quote>I like how I got modded lol</quote> That's sad moderators. Shinso is saying preferring blondes over redheads is the same has preferring men over women. Facepalm.jpg</quote> And that you can choose your sexual orientation, as well...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
wwinterj25 10/10/19 5:56:57 PM #72:	LinkPizza posted... And that you can choose your sexual orientation, as well... To be fair he does get to choose his as he throws money at folk. --- One who knows nothing can understand nothing. http://psnprofiles.com/wwinterj - https://imgur.com/YvP6isz <cite>wwinterj25 posted [p:928604110] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>And that you can choose your sexual orientation, as well...</quote> To be fair he does get to choose his as he throws money at folk.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
GastroFan 10/10/19 6:10:32 PM #73:	LinkPizza posted... Fam_Fam posted... DDirtyDastard posted... Only if it affects business. Say you were in some really traditional community and you having a gay employee had a significant impact on whether or not people came to your establishment. and how would people know who was gay or not? Gossip. If one person finds out, they can spread that news around... I wouldn't trust gossip as a legit way to learn if someone's gay or not. For instance, say that I'm a woman who hasn't gotten over an abusive relationship with a man. She might choose to stay away from them; then people would gossip that she was lesbian because she's not dating. You see what I'm saying here? Gossip is subjective, that is what the truth is or not depends on the perspective of the person who either starts or spreads that gossip. If someone dislikes a person they might spread a story that the person's gay in order to get them fired; that's happened before too. <cite>GastroFan posted [p:928604573] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>Fam_Fam posted...</cite> <quote>DDirtyDastard posted...</cite> <quote>Only if it affects business. Say you were in some really traditional community and you having a gay employee had a significant impact on whether or not people came to your establishment.</quote> and how would people know who was gay or not?</quote> Gossip. If one person finds out, they can spread that news around...</quote> I wouldn't trust gossip as a legit way to learn if someone's gay or not. For instance, say that I'm a woman who hasn't gotten over an abusive relationship with a man. She might choose to stay away from them; then people would gossip that she was lesbian because she's not dating. You see what I'm saying here? Gossip is subjective, that is what the truth is or not depends on the perspective of the person who either starts or spreads that gossip. If someone dislikes a person they might spread a story that the person's gay in order to get them fired; that's happened before too.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LinkPizza 10/10/19 6:26:30 PM #74:	GastroFan posted... LinkPizza posted... Fam_Fam posted... DDirtyDastard posted... Only if it affects business. Say you were in some really traditional community and you having a gay employee had a significant impact on whether or not people came to your establishment. and how would people know who was gay or not? Gossip. If one person finds out, they can spread that news around... I wouldn't trust gossip as a legit way to learn if someone's gay or not. For instance, say that I'm a woman who hasn't gotten over an abusive relationship with a man. She might choose to stay away from them; then people would gossip that she was lesbian because she's not dating. You see what I'm saying here? Gossip is subjective, that is what the truth is or not depends on the perspective of the person who either starts or spreads that gossip. If someone dislikes a person they might spread a story that the person's gay in order to get them fired; that's happened before too. I wouldnt trust it, either. But people who decide to not go to a business because an employee is gay probably would... --- Official King of Kings Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around. <cite>LinkPizza posted [p:928605157] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>GastroFan posted...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>Fam_Fam posted...</cite> <quote>DDirtyDastard posted...</cite> <quote>Only if it affects business. Say you were in some really traditional community and you having a gay employee had a significant impact on whether or not people came to your establishment.</quote> and how would people know who was gay or not?</quote> Gossip. If one person finds out, they can spread that news around...</quote> I wouldn't trust gossip as a legit way to learn if someone's gay or not. For instance, say that I'm a woman who hasn't gotten over an abusive relationship with a man. She might choose to stay away from them; then people would gossip that she was lesbian because she's not dating. You see what I'm saying here? Gossip is subjective, that is what the truth is or not depends on the perspective of the person who either starts or spreads that gossip. If someone dislikes a person they might spread a story that the person's gay in order to get them fired; that's happened before too.</quote> I wouldnt trust it, either. But people who decide to not go to a business because an employee is gay probably would...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Aaantlion 10/11/19 3:05:53 AM #75:	SunWuKung420 posted... Lol, I can't believe he is really trying to argue that being gay is a preference that might change over time. That's some 1950's, "we can pray the gay away" shit right there. To be fair, there are numerous cases of a previously-gay individual getting into straight relationships. Bill de Blasio's wife was a lesbian, for instance; in fact, she went so far as to publish an essay literally titled "I am a Lesbian" in 1979 before meeting and marrying BdB in 1991. \ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chirlane_McCray adjl posted... Because some reasons have no bearing on job performance and are not things people can change about themselves. ...and why should some of those things be protected but not others? adjl posted... Additionally, protected classes are typically classes of people that have been subject to harmful discrimination on a large scale, meaning their designation is a matter of trying to prevent further such discrimination and therefore harm. There's not much motivation to protect a class that doesn't have anything to protect against. Height and weight discrimination have both been widely practiced throughout history (albeit with weight you can at least partly argue that it can be changed, even though people naturally have certain body types) yet, last I checked, neither one is being pushed as a protected class. Hell, even gingers -- whose discrimination was ironically further cemented by South Park's attempts to mock ginger discrimination -- likely wouldn't even be protected under current or proposed revisions. adjl posted... Because employers have more power than employees. At every level, employment regulations exist to correct that imbalance. This is no exception. Considering that employees are free to find employment wherever because countless employers exist, it seems quite the opposite. wwinterj25 posted... So you're agreeing with me while questioning if I know what discrimination is? Good post Zeus. So you're ignoring the actual point being made while simultaneously failing to address your misperceptions involving discrimination? Awesome post, winter. Fam_Fam posted... religion is something that you choose and that changes over time, and yet it is protected And, like many things that are protected, it probably shouldn't be. --- (\/)(\/)\|-\| Scientists are finally waking up to what pyramids have known all along. <cite>Aaantlion posted [p:928621677] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>SunWuKung420 posted...</cite> <quote>Lol, I can't believe he is really trying to argue that being gay is a preference that might change over time. That's some 1950's, "we can pray the gay away" shit right there.</quote> To be fair, there are numerous cases of a previously-gay individual getting into straight relationships. Bill de Blasio's wife was a lesbian, for instance; in fact, she went so far as to publish an essay literally titled "I am a Lesbian" in 1979 before meeting and marrying BdB in 1991. \ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chirlane_McCray adjl posted...</cite> <quote>Because some reasons have no bearing on job performance and are not things people can change about themselves. </quote> ...and why should some of those things be protected but not others? adjl posted...</cite> <quote>Additionally, protected classes are typically classes of people that have been subject to harmful discrimination on a large scale, meaning their designation is a matter of trying to prevent further such discrimination and therefore harm. There's not much motivation to protect a class that doesn't have anything to protect against.</quote> Height and weight discrimination have both been widely practiced throughout history (albeit with weight you can at least partly argue that it can be changed, even though people naturally have certain body types) yet, last I checked, neither one is being pushed as a protected class. Hell, even gingers -- whose discrimination was ironically further cemented by South Park's attempts to mock ginger discrimination -- likely wouldn't even be protected under current or proposed revisions. adjl posted...</cite> <quote>Because employers have more power than employees. At every level, employment regulations exist to correct that imbalance. This is no exception. </quote> Considering that employees are free to find employment wherever because countless employers exist, it seems quite the opposite. wwinterj25 posted...</cite> <quote>So you're agreeing with me while questioning if I know what discrimination is? Good post Zeus.</quote> So you're ignoring the actual point being made while simultaneously failing to address your misperceptions involving discrimination? Awesome post, winter. Fam_Fam posted...</cite> <quote>religion is something that you choose and that changes over time, and yet it is protected</quote> And, like many things that are protected, it probably shouldn't be.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kyuubi4269 10/11/19 3:24:00 AM #76:	Aaantlion posted... To be fair, there are numerous cases of a previously-gay individual getting into straight relationships. Bill de Blasio's wife was a lesbian, for instance; in fact, she went so far as to publish an essay literally titled "I am a Lesbian" in 1979 before meeting and marrying BdB in 1991. \ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chirlane_McCray She presented as lesbian but she actually wasn't, like how traps present as women. Aaantlion posted... ...and why should some of those things be protected but not others? Because we have no problem with Arabs and women, but gingers and manlets are an issue we don't agree with. Also legal protections are made when there's substantial need, there's not as much upset about laughing at gungers. Aaantlion posted... Considering that employees are free to find employment wherever because countless employers exist, it seems quite the opposite. It's a buyer's market primarily; there's more good workers than good work so good workers require assistance. Aaantlion posted... And, like many things that are protected, it probably shouldn't be. Also you don't choose religion, it's thrust upon you by family and friends. --- Doctor Foxx posted... The demonizing of soy has a lot to do with xenophobic ideas. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted [p:928621931] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>Aaantlion posted...</cite> <quote>To be fair, there are numerous cases of a previously-gay individual getting into straight relationships. Bill de Blasio's wife was a lesbian, for instance; in fact, she went so far as to publish an essay literally titled "I am a Lesbian" in 1979 before meeting and marrying BdB in 1991. \ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chirlane_McCray</quote> She presented as lesbian but she actually wasn't, like how traps present as women. Aaantlion posted...</cite> <quote>...and why should some of those things be protected but not others?</quote> Because we have no problem with Arabs and women, but gingers and manlets are an issue we don't agree with. Also legal protections are made when there's substantial need, there's not as much upset about laughing at gungers. Aaantlion posted...</cite> <quote>Considering that employees are free to find employment wherever because countless employers exist, it seems quite the opposite.</quote> It's a buyer's market primarily; there's more good workers than good work so good workers require assistance. Aaantlion posted...</cite> <quote>And, like many things that are protected, it probably shouldn't be.</quote> Also you don't choose religion, it's thrust upon you by family and friends.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SunWuKung420 10/11/19 6:53:59 AM #77:	Aaantlion posted... Considering that employees are free to find employment wherever because countless employers exist, it seems quite the opposite. This is incorrect since capitalist moved all the manufacturing to china. But thanks for trying. --- Align your chakras, it starts with your breathing. http://www.arfalpha.com/ScienceOfBreath/ScienceOfBreath.htm <cite>SunWuKung420 posted [p:928624504] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>Aaantlion posted...</cite> <quote>Considering that employees are free to find employment wherever because countless employers exist, it seems quite the opposite. </quote> This is incorrect since capitalist moved all the manufacturing to china. But thanks for trying.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kyuubi4269 10/11/19 7:32:43 AM #78:	SunWuKung420 posted... Aaantlion posted... Considering that employees are free to find employment wherever because countless employers exist, it seems quite the opposite. This is incorrect since market forces moved all the manufacturing to china. But thanks for trying. Fixed. --- Doctor Foxx posted... The demonizing of soy has a lot to do with xenophobic ideas. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted [p:928625090] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>SunWuKung420 posted...</cite> <quote>Aaantlion posted...</cite> <quote>Considering that employees are free to find employment wherever because countless employers exist, it seems quite the opposite. </quote> This is incorrect since market forces moved all the manufacturing to china. But thanks for trying.</quote> Fixed.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
BeerOnTap 10/11/19 8:34:41 AM #79:	Im a freedom of association absolutist. You should be able to fire anyone for any reason. With that said, at that point the public should vote with their wallets, and choose not to do business with such a company. I, for one, would not patronize a business that did such a thing. <cite>BeerOnTap posted [p:928626192] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>Im a freedom of association absolutist. You should be able to fire anyone for any reason. With that said, at that point the public should vote with their wallets, and choose not to do business with such a company. I, for one, would not patronize a business that did such a thing.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SunWuKung420 10/11/19 10:58:50 AM #80:	Kyuubi4269 posted... SunWuKung420 posted... Aaantlion posted... Considering that employees are free to find employment wherever because countless employers exist, it seems quite the opposite. This is incorrect since market forces moved all the manufacturing to china. But thanks for trying. Fixed. Thanks proving you're ok with removing local jobs. --- Align your chakras, it starts with your breathing. http://www.arfalpha.com/ScienceOfBreath/ScienceOfBreath.htm <cite>SunWuKung420 posted [p:928629893] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>SunWuKung420 posted...</cite> <quote>Aaantlion posted...</cite> <quote>Considering that employees are free to find employment wherever because countless employers exist, it seems quite the opposite. </quote> This is incorrect since market forces moved all the manufacturing to china. But thanks for trying.</quote> Fixed.</quote> Thanks proving you're ok with removing local jobs.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kyuubi4269 10/11/19 12:38:15 PM #81:	SunWuKung420 posted... Thanks proving you're ok with removing local jobs. I made no stance either way, but well done proving you'll make your own arguments to fight from literally nothing. --- Doctor Foxx posted... The demonizing of soy has a lot to do with xenophobic ideas. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted [p:928633464] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>SunWuKung420 posted...</cite> <quote>Thanks proving you're ok with removing local jobs.</quote> I made no stance either way, but well done proving you'll make your own arguments to fight from literally nothing.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
C-Raine 10/11/19 2:56:39 PM #82:	_AdjI_ posted... aDirtyShisno posted... Sexual orientation however is constantly changing. Today you feel like dating women but in 5 years you decide you want to date men, then years later you date both, and so on, and so on... Making it illegal to discriminate based upon your preferences opens up a can of worms when your preferences are something untoward, such as animals, objects, or children. In this case it would appear to be mostly harmless since all this does is protect against job discrimination but as the justices are pointing out it would create legal precedence that would apply in many other areas that can see individual preferences protected when they are otherwise harmful to society as a whole. It's not really setting a slippery slope of legal precedent to say "gay sex is okay because it's between consenting adults." Animals and children are not consenting adults, so they're not fair game, and in fact are illegal to have sex with (in which case, you're not discriminating based on their sexual preference, but on their criminal record). Objects? It's weird, but it's not hurting anybody, so there's no reason to discriminate on that basis (unless they start **ing random objects at work, which is unsanitary and an unauthorized use of work time and therefore a justifiable reason to fire them). You missed the point. Gay men are attracted to men sexually, no actual sex has to take place for someone to be gay, they just have to be attracted to their same sex. Pedophiles are attracted to little kids sexually, no actual sex has to take place for someone to be a pedophile, that would make them a child molesting pedophile scumstain. The point was that employers can currently ban people for being attracted to things they find distasteful, like men or dogs or children, so they should fire all the straight women for being attracted to icky men. <cite>C-Raine posted [p:928638434] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>_AdjI_ posted...</cite> <quote>aDirtyShisno posted...</cite> <quote>Sexual orientation however is constantly changing. Today you feel like dating women but in 5 years you decide you want to date men, then years later you date both, and so on, and so on... Making it illegal to discriminate based upon your preferences opens up a can of worms when your preferences are something untoward, such as animals, objects, or children. In this case it would appear to be mostly harmless since all this does is protect against job discrimination but as the justices are pointing out it would create legal precedence that would apply in many other areas that can see individual preferences protected when they are otherwise harmful to society as a whole.</quote> It's not really setting a slippery slope of legal precedent to say "gay sex is okay because it's between consenting adults." Animals and children are not consenting adults, so they're not fair game, and in fact are illegal to have sex with (in which case, you're not discriminating based on their sexual preference, but on their criminal record). Objects? It's weird, but it's not hurting anybody, so there's no reason to discriminate on that basis (unless they start **ing random objects at work, which is unsanitary and an unauthorized use of work time and therefore a justifiable reason to fire them).</quote> You missed the point. Gay men are attracted to men sexually, no actual sex has to take place for someone to be gay, they just have to be attracted to their same sex. Pedophiles are attracted to little kids sexually, no actual sex has to take place for someone to be a pedophile, that would make them a child molesting pedophile scumstain. The point was that employers can currently ban people for being attracted to things they find distasteful, like men or dogs or children, so they should fire all the straight women for being attracted to icky men.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
aDirtyShisno 10/11/19 6:46:51 PM #83:	verb: mutilate; 3rd person present: mutilates; past tense: mutilated; past participle: mutilated; gerund or present participle: mutilating inflict serious damage on. "the 14th-century church had been partly mutilated in the 18th century" This is a textbook definition and is only posted to define a word. --- Que sera, sera. Whatever happens, happens. ...and he was never heard from again. <cite>aDirtyShisno posted [p:928647041] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote><quote>verb: mutilate; 3rd person present: mutilates; past tense: mutilated; past participle: mutilated; gerund or present participle: mutilating inflict serious damage on. "the 14th-century church had been partly mutilated in the 18th century"</quote> This is a textbook definition and is only posted to define a word.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
aDirtyShisno 10/11/19 6:51:29 PM #84:	LinkPizza posted... aDirtyShisno posted... SunWuKung420 posted... Lol, I can't believe he is really trying to argue that being gay is a preference that might change over time. That's some 1950's, "we can pray the gay away" shit right there. You cannot argue that some people dont go through transitions through life when first theyre gay then later straight or vice versa. Some even literally get surgery to fix themselves and then come to regret it later in life. To ignore those facts is to discount years worth of research and goddamn common sense. Just because you choose to stick your fingers in your ears doesnt mean nothing is being said around you. Yes. I can argue. Because you know they don't actually "fix" themselves, right? It's not a choice to be gay or not. If you think it is, you're the one ignoring research. Those little torture camps that help you pray away the gay doesn't do anything like that. They are literal torture camps. The ones that come out the camp fixed just start hiding the fact that they're gay again. If being gay was a choice, there wouldn't be many gay people, if any at all. Kids would have switched. There are kids who kill themselves because they're gay. If being gay was like a light switch like you seem to think, they would have flipped the switch first. There are people that will try to live like they are straight, even though they hate it, just to fake it. But Idk why we're even responding. You know you're wrong, but doubling down like Sunny said. And like EvilMegas said, I don't know why we'r'e even bothering. You can be serious at this point... Fix, as in literally cut pieces off of their bodies through surgery. Not fix as in some sort of mental conditioning, like you keep going on about despite me never talking about religious anything. Many people get surgery or other medical procedures then completely regret it later, especially children who grow up to want children of their own and its become impossible. And way to go being offended by a definition. OffensiveFAQs at its best. --- Que sera, sera. Whatever happens, happens. ...and he was never heard from again. <cite>aDirtyShisno posted [p:928647182] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>aDirtyShisno posted...</cite> <quote>SunWuKung420 posted...</cite> <quote>Lol, I can't believe he is really trying to argue that being gay is a preference that might change over time. That's some 1950's, "we can pray the gay away" shit right there.</quote> You cannot argue that some people dont go through transitions through life when first theyre gay then later straight or vice versa. Some even literally get surgery to fix themselves and then come to regret it later in life. To ignore those facts is to discount years worth of research and goddamn common sense. Just because you choose to stick your fingers in your ears doesnt mean nothing is being said around you.</quote> Yes. I can argue. Because you know they don't actually "fix" themselves, right? It's not a choice to be gay or not. If you think it is, you're the one ignoring research. Those little torture camps that help you pray away the gay doesn't do anything like that. They are literal torture camps. The ones that come out the camp fixed just start hiding the fact that they're gay again. If being gay was a choice, there wouldn't be many gay people, if any at all. Kids would have switched. There are kids who kill themselves because they're gay. If being gay was like a light switch like you seem to think, they would have flipped the switch first. There are people that will try to live like they are straight, even though they hate it, just to fake it. But Idk why we're even responding. You know you're wrong, but doubling down like Sunny said. And like EvilMegas said, I don't know why we'r'e even bothering. You can be serious at this point...</quote> Fix, as in literally cut pieces off of their bodies through surgery. Not fix as in some sort of mental conditioning, like you keep going on about despite me never talking about religious anything. Many people get surgery or other medical procedures then completely regret it later, especially children who grow up to want children of their own and its become impossible. And way to go being offended by a definition. OffensiveFAQs at its best.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LinkPizza 10/11/19 7:21:50 PM #85:	aDirtyShisno posted... LinkPizza posted... aDirtyShisno posted... SunWuKung420 posted... Lol, I can't believe he is really trying to argue that being gay is a preference that might change over time. That's some 1950's, "we can pray the gay away" shit right there. You cannot argue that some people dont go through transitions through life when first theyre gay then later straight or vice versa. Some even literally get surgery to fix themselves and then come to regret it later in life. To ignore those facts is to discount years worth of research and goddamn common sense. Just because you choose to stick your fingers in your ears doesnt mean nothing is being said around you. Yes. I can argue. Because you know they don't actually "fix" themselves, right? It's not a choice to be gay or not. If you think it is, you're the one ignoring research. Those little torture camps that help you pray away the gay doesn't do anything like that. They are literal torture camps. The ones that come out the camp fixed just start hiding the fact that they're gay again. If being gay was a choice, there wouldn't be many gay people, if any at all. Kids would have switched. There are kids who kill themselves because they're gay. If being gay was like a light switch like you seem to think, they would have flipped the switch first. There are people that will try to live like they are straight, even though they hate it, just to fake it. But Idk why we're even responding. You know you're wrong, but doubling down like Sunny said. And like EvilMegas said, I don't know why we'r'e even bothering. You can be serious at this point... Fix, as in literally cut pieces off of their bodies through surgery. Not fix as in some sort of mental conditioning, like you keep going on about despite me never talking about religious anything. Many people get surgery or other medical procedures then completely regret it later, especially children who grow up to want children of their own and its become impossible. And way to go being offended by a definition. OffensiveFAQs at its best. Sunny was talking about being gay and praying the gay away. Which is normally a religious thing. Though, other people can use it, too. And I dont know what you think Im offended by, but youre wrong about what you think it is. I dont get offended easily, but I am offended by how you seem to think homosexuals and transsexuals are the same thing. Because Sunny is talking about gay people, but youre talking about transexuals as if thats what he was talking about... And they ARE NOT the same thing. Im gay, but definitely dont want to be a woman... --- Official King of Kings Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around. <cite>LinkPizza posted [p:928648385] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>aDirtyShisno posted...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>aDirtyShisno posted...</cite> <quote>SunWuKung420 posted...</cite> <quote>Lol, I can't believe he is really trying to argue that being gay is a preference that might change over time. That's some 1950's, "we can pray the gay away" shit right there.</quote> You cannot argue that some people dont go through transitions through life when first theyre gay then later straight or vice versa. Some even literally get surgery to fix themselves and then come to regret it later in life. To ignore those facts is to discount years worth of research and goddamn common sense. Just because you choose to stick your fingers in your ears doesnt mean nothing is being said around you.</quote> Yes. I can argue. Because you know they don't actually "fix" themselves, right? It's not a choice to be gay or not. If you think it is, you're the one ignoring research. Those little torture camps that help you pray away the gay doesn't do anything like that. They are literal torture camps. The ones that come out the camp fixed just start hiding the fact that they're gay again. If being gay was a choice, there wouldn't be many gay people, if any at all. Kids would have switched. There are kids who kill themselves because they're gay. If being gay was like a light switch like you seem to think, they would have flipped the switch first. There are people that will try to live like they are straight, even though they hate it, just to fake it. But Idk why we're even responding. You know you're wrong, but doubling down like Sunny said. And like EvilMegas said, I don't know why we'r'e even bothering. You can be serious at this point...</quote> Fix, as in literally cut pieces off of their bodies through surgery. Not fix as in some sort of mental conditioning, like you keep going on about despite me never talking about religious anything. Many people get surgery or other medical procedures then completely regret it later, especially children who grow up to want children of their own and its become impossible. And way to go being offended by a definition. OffensiveFAQs at its best.</quote> Sunny was talking about being gay and praying the gay away. Which is normally a religious thing. Though, other people can use it, too. And I dont know what you think Im offended by, but youre wrong about what you think it is. I dont get offended easily, but I am offended by how you seem to think homosexuals and transsexuals are the same thing. Because Sunny is talking about gay people, but youre talking about transexuals as if thats what he was talking about... And they ARE NOT the same thing. Im gay, but definitely dont want to be a woman...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
aDirtyShisno 10/11/19 7:22:29 PM #86:	Fam_Fam posted... whether or not you are gay "by choice", you should be protected religion is something that you choose and that changes over time, and yet it is protected For the record, its freedom to practice any religion that you choose, not the religion itself. While a great berth of freedom is given in that practice there are still hardlines. For example you cannot kill someone in the name of religion and get off scott free. --- Que sera, sera. Whatever happens, happens. ...and he was never heard from again. <cite>aDirtyShisno posted [p:928648409] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>Fam_Fam posted...</cite> <quote>whether or not you are gay "by choice", you should be protected religion is something that you choose and that changes over time, and yet it is protected</quote> For the record, its freedom to practice any religion that you choose, not the religion itself. While a great berth of freedom is given in that practice there are still hardlines. For example you cannot kill someone in the name of religion and get off scott free.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SKARDAVNELNATE 10/11/19 10:45:31 PM #87:	Fam_Fam posted... religion is something that you choose and that changes over time, and yet it is protected This is the opposite of the purpose of a protected class. It's meant to criminalize discrimination over something that a person can't change. --- No locked doors, no windows barred. No more things to make my brain seem SKARD. Look at Mr. Technical over here >.> -BTB <cite>SKARDAVNELNATE posted [p:928656030] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>Fam_Fam posted...</cite> <quote>religion is something that you choose and that changes over time, and yet it is protected </quote> This is the opposite of the purpose of a protected class. It's meant to criminalize discrimination over something that a person can't change.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LinkPizza 10/11/19 10:47:01 PM #88:	SKARDAVNELNATE posted... Fam_Fam posted... religion is something that you choose and that changes over time, and yet it is protected This is the opposite of the purpose of a protected class. It's meant to criminalize discrimination over something that a person can't change. I believe thats what theyre saying... --- Official King of Kings Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around. <cite>LinkPizza posted [p:928656092] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>SKARDAVNELNATE posted...</cite> <quote>Fam_Fam posted...</cite> <quote>religion is something that you choose and that changes over time, and yet it is protected </quote> This is the opposite of the purpose of a protected class. It's meant to criminalize discrimination over something that a person can't change.</quote> I believe thats what theyre saying...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Fam_Fam 10/11/19 11:08:26 PM #89:	aDirtyShisno posted... Fam_Fam posted... whether or not you are gay "by choice", you should be protected religion is something that you choose and that changes over time, and yet it is protected For the record, its freedom to practice any religion that you choose, not the religion itself. While a great berth of freedom is given in that practice there are still hardlines. For example you cannot kill someone in the name of religion and get off scott free. sure but my point is that you can't fire someone because of what religion they practice, which is a choice <cite>Fam_Fam posted [p:928656789] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>aDirtyShisno posted...</cite> <quote>Fam_Fam posted...</cite> <quote>whether or not you are gay "by choice", you should be protected religion is something that you choose and that changes over time, and yet it is protected</quote> For the record, its freedom to practice any religion that you choose, not the religion itself. While a great berth of freedom is given in that practice there are still hardlines. For example you cannot kill someone in the name of religion and get off scott free.</quote> sure but my point is that you can't fire someone because of what religion they practice, which is a choice</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SKARDAVNELNATE 10/12/19 1:47:16 PM #90:	LinkPizza posted... SKARDAVNELNATE posted... Fam_Fam posted... religion is something that you choose and that changes over time, and yet it is protected This is the opposite of the purpose of a protected class. It's meant to criminalize discrimination over something that a person can't change. I believe thats what theyre saying... Fam_Fam was using the comparison to say it doesn't matter if being gay is a choice, since religion is a choice and is protected. But I say the comparison demonstrates that religion shouldn't be protected. An individual can identify as a race other what an observer would identify as that individual's race. An individual can identify as a sex other what an observer would identify as that individual's sex. As long as they don't act like they are in a parade it is far more difficult to be seen as gay. Likewise it is difficult to discern an individual's beliefs unless they are actively trying to make them known. The individual would have to display that aspect with behaviors such as type of clothing or openly discussing it. The trend is to protect aspects that would be evident to an observer without an effort on behalf of the individual to display it. Sexual orientation and religion don't fit this trend. Additionally, in an age when words have no meaning and anyone can personally identify as anything, why would anyone choose to identify as gay if the think they will face discrimination for it? --- No locked doors, no windows barred. No more things to make my brain seem SKARD. Look at Mr. Technical over here >.> -BTB <cite>SKARDAVNELNATE posted [p:928674387] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>SKARDAVNELNATE posted...</cite> <quote>Fam_Fam posted...</cite> <quote>religion is something that you choose and that changes over time, and yet it is protected </quote> This is the opposite of the purpose of a protected class. It's meant to criminalize discrimination over something that a person can't change.</quote> I believe thats what theyre saying...</quote> Fam_Fam was using the comparison to say it doesn't matter if being gay is a choice, since religion is a choice and is protected. But I say the comparison demonstrates that religion shouldn't be protected. An individual can identify as a race other what an observer would identify as that individual's race. An individual can identify as a sex other what an observer would identify as that individual's sex. As long as they don't act like they are in a parade it is far more difficult to be seen as gay. Likewise it is difficult to discern an individual's beliefs unless they are actively trying to make them known. The individual would have to display that aspect with behaviors such as type of clothing or openly discussing it. The trend is to protect aspects that would be evident to an observer without an effort on behalf of the individual to display it. Sexual orientation and religion don't fit this trend. Additionally, in an age when words have no meaning and anyone can personally identify as anything, why would anyone choose to identify as gay if the think they will face discrimination for it?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LinkPizza 10/12/19 4:01:27 PM #91:	SKARDAVNELNATE posted... LinkPizza posted... SKARDAVNELNATE posted... Fam_Fam posted... religion is something that you choose and that changes over time, and yet it is protected This is the opposite of the purpose of a protected class. It's meant to criminalize discrimination over something that a person can't change. I believe thats what theyre saying... Fam_Fam was using the comparison to say it doesn't matter if being gay is a choice, since religion is a choice and is protected. But I say the comparison demonstrates that religion shouldn't be protected. An individual can identify as a race other what an observer would identify as that individual's race. An individual can identify as a sex other what an observer would identify as that individual's sex. As long as they don't act like they are in a parade it is far more difficult to be seen as gay. Likewise it is difficult to discern an individual's beliefs unless they are actively trying to make them known. The individual would have to display that aspect with behaviors such as type of clothing or openly discussing it. The trend is to protect aspects that would be evident to an observer without an effort on behalf of the individual to display it. Sexual orientation and religion don't fit this trend. Additionally, in an age when words have no meaning and anyone can personally identify as anything, why would anyone choose to identify as gay if the think they will face discrimination for it? Its not only identifying as it, though. The problem is you can be seen doing something not straight. Such as going on a date with a member of the same sex. Maybe just out for dinner or something. Or someone drops by your house for some reason and notices picture of you and your significant other. The problem is when they see that youre gay without you telling them, and they fire you for it. Or if someone does know and others find out. Personally, I dont think people should just be able to fire you for only that. But I do know what you are saying about the whole religion aspect. But they have reasons for it. I feel like if them being gay or whatever religion is not affects the business, then it shouldnt matter... --- Official King of Kings Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around. <cite>LinkPizza posted [p:928679340] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>SKARDAVNELNATE posted...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>SKARDAVNELNATE posted...</cite> <quote>Fam_Fam posted...</cite> <quote>religion is something that you choose and that changes over time, and yet it is protected </quote> This is the opposite of the purpose of a protected class. It's meant to criminalize discrimination over something that a person can't change.</quote> I believe thats what theyre saying...</quote> Fam_Fam was using the comparison to say it doesn't matter if being gay is a choice, since religion is a choice and is protected. But I say the comparison demonstrates that religion shouldn't be protected. An individual can identify as a race other what an observer would identify as that individual's race. An individual can identify as a sex other what an observer would identify as that individual's sex. As long as they don't act like they are in a parade it is far more difficult to be seen as gay. Likewise it is difficult to discern an individual's beliefs unless they are actively trying to make them known. The individual would have to display that aspect with behaviors such as type of clothing or openly discussing it. The trend is to protect aspects that would be evident to an observer without an effort on behalf of the individual to display it. Sexual orientation and religion don't fit this trend. Additionally, in an age when words have no meaning and anyone can personally identify as anything, why would anyone choose to identify as gay if the think they will face discrimination for it?</quote> Its not only identifying as it, though. The problem is you can be seen doing something not straight. Such as going on a date with a member of the same sex. Maybe just out for dinner or something. Or someone drops by your house for some reason and notices picture of you and your significant other. The problem is when they see that youre gay without you telling them, and they fire you for it. Or if someone does know and others find out. Personally, I dont think people should just be able to fire you for only that. But I do know what you are saying about the whole religion aspect. But they have reasons for it. I feel like if them being gay or whatever religion is not affects the business, then it shouldnt matter...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
MirMiros 10/14/19 10:36:43 PM #92:	No, of course not, and I cannot understand why anyone would think that doing so would be right. <cite>MirMiros posted [p:928777136] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>No, of course not, and I cannot understand why anyone would think that doing so would be right.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
aDirtyShisno 10/15/19 12:08:18 AM #93:	Fam_Fam posted... aDirtyShisno posted... Fam_Fam posted... whether or not you are gay "by choice", you should be protected religion is something that you choose and that changes over time, and yet it is protected For the record, its freedom to practice any religion that you choose, not the religion itself. While a great berth of freedom is given in that practice there are still hardlines. For example you cannot kill someone in the name of religion and get off scott free. sure but my point is that you can't fire someone because of what religion they practice, which is a choice The point is that you cannot fire someone because they are not [my religion] or because they are [specific religion]. It doesnt matter what you choose to fill in the blanks they are all protected equally. Christian, Jewish, Islamic, and even Atheist are all protected equally, just to name a few. It doesnt matter what you choose or do not choose, you are protected all the same. --- Que sera, sera. Whatever happens, happens. ...and he was never heard from again. <cite>aDirtyShisno posted [p:928781291] in Supreme Co... [t:78073474]...</cite> <quote>Fam_Fam posted...</cite> <quote>aDirtyShisno posted...</cite> <quote>Fam_Fam posted...</cite> <quote>whether or not you are gay "by choice", you should be protected religion is something that you choose and that changes over time, and yet it is protected</quote> For the record, its freedom to practice any religion that you choose, not the religion itself. While a great berth of freedom is given in that practice there are still hardlines. For example you cannot kill someone in the name of religion and get off scott free.</quote> sure but my point is that you can't fire someone because of what religion they practice, which is a choice</quote> The point is that you cannot fire someone because they are not [my religion] or because they are [specific religion]. It doesnt matter what you choose to fill in the blanks they are all protected equally. Christian, Jewish, Islamic, and even Atheist are all protected equally, just to name a few. It doesnt matter what you choose or do not choose, you are protected all the same.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1, 2

Poll of the Day > Supreme Court is FIERCELY DIVIDED whether EMPLOYERS can FIRE GAY PEOPLE!!! (+) Yeah! (+)

Poll of the Day > Supreme Court is FIERCELY DIVIDED whether EMPLOYERS can FIRE GAY PEOPLE!!!