Texas Legislators vote to ban gay foster parents

[Ripper 0]

There are plenty of people trying to push laws that wouldn't allow Gays to teach children at any level. And these laws are gaining support and could possibly pass in some states if they are ever put to the vote. Just let a certain party need some extra votes and you could see that happen in alot of states.

 

And when I say a certain party, I mean either one of the fuckers. Republicrats or Democlicans.

[SuperJerk 0]

So far we have legislation proposed that would:

 

-ban gays from being foster parents.

 

-ban gays from teaching.

 

-ban books about homosexuality.

 

-keep gays from getting married.

 

And gays still aren't allowed to serve openly in the military.

 

Not to metion its still perfectly legal to fire someone for being gay.

 

Yes, in no way does this resemble the Nuremberg Laws.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

I was reading part of a James Dobson book at work the other day. This one, Bringing Up Boys:

 

When discussing gays he spares no detail, no matter how prurient. In Bringing Up Boys, he gleefully reprints a letter he received from  a 13-year-old boy who describes wiggling his naked body in front of the mirror to "make my genitals bounce up and down" and admits to having "tried more than once to suck my own penis (to be frank)." Dobson believes that such adolescents suffer from what he calls "pre-homosexuality," a formative stage which results from having a weak father figure. Dobson further contends that homosexuality, especially in such an early stage, can be "cured." His ministry runs a program called Love Won Out that seeks to convert "ex-gays" to heterosexuality. (Alas, the program's director, a self-proclaimed "ex-gay" himself, was spotted at a gay bar in 2000, an episode Dobson downplayed as "a momentary setback.")

 

It sickens me that this guy has so much influence.

 

Hey Dobson, I didn't have a father at all and I didn't "catch" "pre-homosexuality."

[Guest MikeSC]

So far we have legislation proposed that would:

 

-ban gays from being foster parents.

 

-ban gays from teaching.

 

-ban books about homosexuality.

 

-keep gays from getting married.

 

And gays still aren't allowed to serve openly in the military.

 

Not to metion its still perfectly legal to fire someone for being gay.

 

Yes, in no way does this resemble the Nuremberg Laws.

Care to show the legislation that would ban books about homosexuality?

 

How about the one preventing gays from teaching?

 

And when are people fired for being openly gay?

 

Yes, it's JUST like Nazi Germany.

 

Apparently, you don't learn that fucking moronic comparisons are a bad idea.

-=Mike

...If it makes you feel better, there were some Nazi homosexuals...

[Ripper 0]

You being from South Carolina you can't pretend not to have heard of Jim DeMint.

 

And there are plenty of places that fire gay employees for being gay. They say it goes against their "moral standing". But to be fair, the same companies have been known to fire employees for having affairs.

 

and...Gaylord v. Tacoma School Dist, Morrison v. State Board of Education, Rowland v. Mad River Local School all had something to do with gays being fired for being gay and it being upheld by the higher courts. I guess that something...

[Guest MikeSC]

You being from South Carolina you can't pretend not to have heard of Jim DeMint.

I'm quite aware of DeMint. And when he proposes legislation to prevent gays from teaching, I'll be concerned.

And there are plenty of places that fire gay employees for being gay.  They say it goes against their "moral standing".  But to be fair, the same companies have been known to fire employees for having affairs. 

Can you reveal one of these places?

and...Gaylord v. Tacoma School Dist, Morrison v. State Board of Education, Rowland v. Mad River Local School all had something to do with gays being fired for being gay and it being upheld by the higher courts.  I guess that something...

And something tells me there's more to those cases than just that.

-=Mike

[Ripper 0]

Golden State Container, and Cracker Barrel are two that I can remember their cases making the news. I think the company won in both cases, because honestly, they CAN fire you for whatever the fuck they want to. its not right, but the court will more than likely uphold it.

[Your Paragon of Virtue 0]

The thread title looked like ban gay "Posters".

 

It would be relevant to this board anyway.

[SuperJerk 0]

Care to show the legislation that would ban books about homosexuality?

 

How about the one preventing gays from teaching?

 

And when are people fired for being openly gay?

First of all, there are lots of states that have no laws protecting people against homosexual discrimination.

 

Second, Tennessee is the state where the book ban legislation was proposed.

[Ted the Poster 0]

And when I say a certain party, I mean either one of the fuckers. Republicrats or Democlicans.

Are those new Transformers?

[Ripper 0]

And when I say a certain party, I mean either one of the fuckers.  Republicrats or Democlicans.

Are those new Transformers?

They are known to look one way at election time and another during office.

 

LIARS IN DISGUISE~!

[Vyce 0]

There is no federal statutory protection for discrimination by employers on the basis of one's sexual orientation. There just isn't. Homosexuals are not considered a protected class (which is more than a little ridiculous, because should you read the actual definition of what a "protected class" really is, they more than qualify for that status), so they don't get any real protection.

 

The only exception, which is really the only protection you're going to get, is if you somehow prove to the court that the discrimination is based upon your gender. Let me explain that. If your employer fires you because you're gay......sorry, you really don't have a cause of action against them for wrongful termination (at least under a disparate treatment / discrimination theory). But if you can somehow show that their anti-homosexual bias also included issues as to your gender - say, for example, you're a gay man, and your supervisor constantly makes discriminatory remarks about your sexual orientation, and uses comments like "where's your purse, fag?" or "shouldn't you be wearing a nice sun dress, queer?".

 

But those kind of arguments are difficult to make and do not often win.

 

The Supreme Court has been showing an increasing trend towards protecting homosexuals, however. And many companies are writing into their anti-discrimination policies clauses which forbid discrimination against homosexuals. But in the forseeable future, gays won't be provided with he same type of employment protection as heteros until Congress either writes a new law or amends some of the current ones to specifically include them as a protected class. It would seem to me that such a law would be worthwhile to pass, instead of a rather cruel and invidious anti-gay marriage amendment or an entirely frivolous bill that would do away with the national weather service.

 

All of that said, RobotJerk is descending into MikeSC levels of noselling in this thread. Dude, face facts, your Nazi analogy sucked, GET OVER IT.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

RobotJerk is descending into MikeSC levels of noselling in this thread. Dude, face facts, your Nazi analogy sucked, GET OVER IT.

Amen.

[Styles 0]

RobotJerk is descending into MikeSC levels of noselling in this thread.  Dude, face facts, your Nazi analogy sucked, GET OVER IT.

Amen.

Ditto. It's borderline offensive that he keeps pushing it as a comparison. The Nurenberg laws were to make Jews second class citizens in every sense of the word, to seperate them from their community and humanity as a whole and to prepare them for deportation and eventual slaughter. That does not equal, "gays face some inconveniance in certain areas because their lifestyle is not yet fully accepted by society".

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

RobotJerk is descending into MikeSC levels of noselling in this thread.  Dude, face facts, your Nazi analogy sucked, GET OVER IT.

Amen.

Ditto. It's borderline offensive that he keeps pushing it as a comparison. The Nurenberg laws were to make Jews second class citizens in every sense of the word, to seperate them from their community and humanity as a whole and to prepare them for deportation and eventual slaughter. That does not equal, "gays face some inconveniance in certain areas because their lifestyle is not yet fully accepted by society".

"Some Inconveniences":

 

On October 6, 1998, 21-year-old college student Matthew Shepard was tied to a fence in Laramie, Wyoming, pistol-whipped, then left for dead in the freezing night.  He died six days later.

 

Born Teena Brandon and raised as a girl, he was living as a man known as Brandon Teena in Falls City, Nebraska, when he was murdered at age 21. In December of 1993, two men who discovered his gender raped him. His attackers later shot and killed him after learning Brandon had reported the rape and was to help police in the investigation.

 

On September 22, 2000, a man looking to "waste some faggots" entered a gay bar in Roanoke, Virginia and opened fire, killing Danny Overstreet, and injuring 6 others.

 

On the fourth of July, 2000, JR Warren, 26, who was black and gay, was beaten to death by three men in West Virginia, then run over by a car to make it look like a hit and run.

 

Pfc. Barry Winchell, 21, was beaten to death by fellow servicemembers while sleeping in his cot on July 5, 1999 at Fort Campbell, Ky.  His Army colleagues thought (correctly) that he was gay, so they killed him.

 

Billy Jack Gaither, 39, of Sylacauga, Alabama was bludgeoned to death by two men on Feb. 19, 1999, then set on fire with automobile tires because he was gay.

 

On May 8, 1995, Bill Clayton, 17,  committed suicide after having been brutally assaulted for being bisexual.

 

On August 7, 1995, Tyra Hunter died after DC fire department emergency medical technicians called her epithets, backed away, and refused to render treatment on discovering that she was a transgendered woman.

[Guest MikeSC]

Care to show the legislation that would ban books about homosexuality?

 

How about the one preventing gays from teaching?

 

And when are people fired for being openly gay?

First of all, there are lots of states that have no laws protecting people against homosexual discrimination.

 

Second, Tennessee is the state where the book ban legislation was proposed.

I could not care less about proposed legislation. Hell, the Senate Dems proposed to end ALL filibusters back in 1995, and we see how well that proposal turned out.

 

PASSED legislation is what matters.

 

And, again, you've not really provided any, ya know, evidence of people being fired for being gay.

 

And, smitty, unless the people who committed the CRIMES were not only not punished but even rewarded --- then, no, it's not comparable.

 

These comparisons to Nazi Germany only serve to diminish what happened in Nazi Germany.

-=Mike

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Care to show the legislation that would ban books about homosexuality?

 

How about the one preventing gays from teaching?

 

And when are people fired for being openly gay?

First of all, there are lots of states that have no laws protecting people against homosexual discrimination.

 

Second, Tennessee is the state where the book ban legislation was proposed.

I could not care less about proposed legislation. Hell, the Senate Dems proposed to end ALL filibusters back in 1995, and we see how well that proposal turned out.

 

PASSED legislation is what matters.

 

And, again, you've not really provided any, ya know, evidence of people being fired for being gay.

 

And, smitty, unless the people who committed the CRIMES were not only not punished but even rewarded --- then, no, it's not comparable.

 

These comparisons to Nazi Germany only serve to diminish what happened in Nazi Germany.

-=Mike

Wasn't making the comparison to Nazi Germany. Just pointing out the absurdity of Slapnuts!'s assertion that homosexuals face only "some inconveniences."

[Guest MikeSC]

That is all they face, hate to break it to you. The fact that you found 10 crimes over the span of a decade isn't quite damning.

-=Mike

[LessonInMachismo 0]

Replace the word "Jews" with "gays" and the resemblance is uncanny.

 

Wow.

 

So does blacks, hispanics, women, arabs, etc.

 

Damn you Loss and Jobber for making me lose my job.

 

Also, if you replace "Nazi" with "Left-wing academics" and "Jews" with "conservatives" the resemblance is even MORE uncany...

Bullshit.

 

Conservatives aren't even close to being persecuted the way gays are.

Except that free speech is hindered both privately and publicly by "Human Resources" and courts, respectively. At work, if I say anything about illegal aliens, then I'd be "farred" or written up, but if a Mexican says that white people are "just racist," then he'd be pouring his heart out to us.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

That is all they face, hate to break it to you. The fact that you found 10 crimes over the span of a decade isn't quite damning.

        -=Mike

There were 1,430 "sexual orientation" motivated crimes in 2003 alone.

 

Source: Crime in the United States, 2003, FBI, Uniform Crime Reports.

[EricMM 0]

and of course mike knew that or something like it.

 

the fact that he made such a claim is odd.

 

do you seriously not want to prevent queer bashing mike?

[Jobber of the Week 0]

These comparisons to Nazi Germany only serve to diminish what happened in Nazi Germany.

          -=Mike

Agreeing... With MikeSC... In a political thread.... About gays... Help..

 

[Slayer 0]

Cleanup in Aisle 3

 

In other news: Jobber cutlets available in the deli

[Vyce 0]

Cleanup in Aisle 3

 

In other news: Jobber cutlets available in the deli

Hey, tastes like tofu.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.....cause he's a hippie liberal. Get it? Cause.....you know, a lot of hippies are vegitarians / vegans.......they don't eat meat, they only eat tofu, and......

 

.......yeah, I got nothing.

[Guest MikeSC]

That is all they face, hate to break it to you. The fact that you found 10 crimes over the span of a decade isn't quite damning.

        -=Mike

There were 1,430 "sexual orientation" motivated crimes in 2003 alone.

 

Source: Crime in the United States, 2003, FBI, Uniform Crime Reports.

As we have seen with "hate crimes" --- the stat is of virtually no use, whatsoever.

-=Mike

...Any crime against a gay person is a "sexal orientation"-motivated crime --- even if it's not actually the case...

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

Cleanup in Aisle 3

 

In other news: Jobber cutlets available in the deli

Hey, tastes like tofu.

Tastes like the AIDS...

[Ripper 0]

That is all they face, hate to break it to you. The fact that you found 10 crimes over the span of a decade isn't quite damning.

        -=Mike

There were 1,430 "sexual orientation" motivated crimes in 2003 alone.

 

Source: Crime in the United States, 2003, FBI, Uniform Crime Reports.

As we have seen with "hate crimes" --- the stat is of virtually no use, whatsoever.

-=Mike

...Any crime against a gay person is a "sexal orientation"-motivated crime --- even if it's not actually the case...

Well thats just a bunch of bullshit.

[Guest MikeSC]

It's the fact of the matter. It's the same methodolgy they used to develop their "number of people killed by a gun in the home".

-=Mike

[Ripper 0]

It's the fact of the matter. It's the same methodolgy they used to develop their "number of people killed by a gun in the home".

-=Mike

Its not a "fact". You think that, you have nothing to back that up what soever. When a crime is motivated by race, sexual orientation, or religion, it is usually awfully obvious.

[Guest MikeSC]

It's the fact of the matter. It's the same methodolgy they used to develop their "number of people killed by a gun in the home".

                -=Mike

Its not a "fact". You think that, you have nothing to back that up what soever. When a crime is motivated by race, sexual orientation, or religion, it is usually awfully obvious.

No, it is not. What they determine as the reason for the crime is sketchy. The methodology used is that ANY time a straight man assaults a gay man, it's a "sexual orientation" crime, even if the straight man has NO idea the gay man is, in fact, gay.

 

It is not that "obvious" when a "hate crime" is committed. It's even less obvious why the reporting of it is so horribly skewed.

-=Mike