Trump Administration Asks SCOTUS To Legalize Firing LGBTQ Workers Based On Sexuality

[Muse]

Eisenhower built the interstate system, which was pretty beneficial.

He'd be far to the left of every elected republican today, though.

I rethinking earlier my statement and yeah, Eisenhower popped out as a possibly decent Republican president after Lincoln... nobody else.

 

[IronWing]

That's not how laws work broceritops.

I can't say things like pedophilia and the likes of beastiality are extreme examples.

And I still have concerns about just generally talking about sexual preferences in the workplace. If someone prefers BDSM, is that not a sexuality? Again, can't say discussing that is appropriate in the workplace.

"I went to the the county fair with my partner, Brian, last weekend."
"I went to the the county fair with my S&M partner, Brian, who I lead around with a ball gag and spank his healthy ass, last weekend."

One of of those statements is appropriate for the work place.

 

[dainthomas]

"I went to the the county fair with my partner, Brian, last weekend."
"I went to the the county fair with my S&M partner, Brian, who I lead around with a ball gag and spank his healthy ass, last weekend."

One of of those statements is appropriate for the work place.

They're both inappropriate for snowflake righties, because it intrudes on their mental safe space.

 

[Muse]

I do, that's a valid point.

But I guess I'm asking is where do you draw the line to differentiate that discussing your sexuality at the workplace isn't appropriate? Or do you think it should be appropriate workplace discussion?

I've worked a lot of jobs and don't recall any such conversations. No, I don't have perfect recall, however in my memory it seems to be something I don't remember even a trace of. In any case, I don't think people should be hired or fired based on any sexual characteristic unless, perhaps, it interferes with their performing their job.

 

[Muse]

Eisenhower built the interstate system, which was pretty beneficial.

He'd be far to the left of every elected republican today, though.

The man could smile. I don't remember seeing a real smile on another Republican president's face. Trump's excuse for a smile is usually an out and out smirk.

 

[VRAMdemon]

The Log Cabin Republicans are standing behind Trump, party before all else.

The USA being a large country. Every demographic group has a lot of Trump supporters in it, even if they're a small minority within that group. Trump's worst demographic in 2016 was black women, and there were probably still a hundred thousand black women who voted for him.

It's entirely possible to endorse a political party that wants to strip you of your rights or even kill you. It's especially possible if you're the kind of person who isn't deeply reliant on those rights, or who has the money to ignore what you're losing. For example: Peter Thiel is rich enough that there's no realistic way his sexuality will really matter to him; if things get bad enough, as they might, he can load up a private jet and skip town.

It's easy enough to think that the Leopards Eating People's Faces Party is only going to feed other people to the Leopards. Some people are single issue voters and that issue doesn’t have to align with a demographic group. If you are LGBTQ and either anti-abortion or anti-immigrant, Trump is pretty much your only candidate.

Hey!..lol. He's Made America Great Again, boosted the economy (DOW over 25000!!) , solved the North Korea problem once and for all, turned the screws on China and rebuilt American manufacturing to its former glory, and generally pissed off the libs on an almost daily basis!

If the LGBTQ+ community can't appreciate all of that, that's their problem.

 

[zinfamous]

Who the fuck feels the need to let their employer know about their sexuality?

I don't think it should be protected either. If I get hired and then tell them I identify as an attack helicopter and am sexually attracted to bronies is that protected? No one gives a shit, no one asked for it, so why share It and why is it "protected"?

Yes, I do think that if you tell someone that, then you should be fired because obviously you are a crazy person.

The problem with nonsense slippery slope arguments is that not only are they often quite fallacious, they are only deployed by stupid people.

 

[zzyzxroad]

Pedophilia is a sexuality. Should you not be able to fire someone for announcing their stance?

To you an adult who is attracted to other adults of the same sex is the same as an adult who wants to bang little kids?