Author Topic: No homo?  (Read 1908 times)

Perd Hapley

  • Superstar of the Internet
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 62,152
  • My prepositions are on/in
No homo?
« on: November 02, 2017, 06:58:30 PM »
Then no job, either.

http://www.dailywire.com/news/23089/basketball-coach-says-she-was-denied-job-because-james-barrett

As long as we're going to keep pretending that gay is OK, let's keep racking up these stories about how tolerant that makes our society.

Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God?
--Thomas Jefferson

dogmush

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 14,741
Re: No homo?
« Reply #1 on: November 02, 2017, 07:41:44 PM »
Seems like going against the faith will get you fired lickity-split.

Marnoot

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,965
Re: No homo?
« Reply #2 on: November 02, 2017, 08:00:23 PM »
Speaking contrary to prevailing doctrines gets you expelled too, at least across the pond :

http://www.christianconcern.com/our-issues/education/court-rules-student-can-be-expelled-for-quoting-bible-on-facebook

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Hawkmoon

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 27,776
Re: No homo?
« Reply #3 on: November 02, 2017, 08:17:27 PM »
Speaking contrary to prevailing doctrines gets you expelled too, at least across the pond :

http://www.christianconcern.com/our-issues/education/court-rules-student-can-be-expelled-for-quoting-bible-on-facebook

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

So LGBTXYZQED people are to be protected from potential offense by Christians discussing Christian doctrine, but Christians who might be offended by LGBTXYZQED people expressing promoting a LGBTXYZQED lifestyle aren't entitled to any protection.

Got it.
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
100% Politically Incorrect by Design

Perd Hapley

  • Superstar of the Internet
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 62,152
  • My prepositions are on/in
Re: No homo?
« Reply #4 on: November 03, 2017, 12:00:12 AM »
I know this might sound like a snarky, rhetorical question, but I'm totally cereal. I seem to remember that we were told back about 10 or 20 years ago, perhaps not in so many words, that if we were offended by seeing two homosexuals hold hands, etc, that it was our problem. It seems like it was something they (the news/opinion/entertainment media) actually came right out and said, but the memory is a little fuzzy. Does that ring a bell with anyone else?
Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God?
--Thomas Jefferson

RoadKingLarry

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 21,841
Re: No homo?
« Reply #5 on: November 03, 2017, 12:11:53 AM »
Since "sexual orientation" is a protected class does this woman have a EEOC case if she can prove it?
Seems to me that if a LGBTQ type was denied due to orientation they'd have a damn near open and shut case.
Sauce for the goose and all that.
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.

Samuel Adams

T.O.M.

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6,448
Re: No homo?
« Reply #6 on: November 03, 2017, 06:43:34 AM »
Since "sexual orientation" is a protected class does this woman have a EEOC case if she can prove it?
Seems to me that if a LGBTQ type was denied due to orientation they'd have a damn near open and shut case.
Sauce for the goose and all that.

Did I miss legislation and/or a SCOTUS ruling?  I didn't think orientation was getting full 'protected class" status yet.
No, I'm not mtnbkr.  ;)

a.k.a. "our resident Legal Smeagol."...thanks BryanP
"Anybody can give legal advice - but only licensed attorneys can sell it."...vaskidmark

RoadKingLarry

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 21,841
Re: No homo?
« Reply #7 on: November 03, 2017, 07:33:42 AM »
Not sure myself but I did find this -

https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/wysk/enforcement_protections_lgbt_workers.cfm

Seems it would have to go both ways to be fair.
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.

Samuel Adams

Fly320s

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 14,415
  • Formerly, Arthur, King of the Britons
Re: No homo?
« Reply #8 on: November 03, 2017, 08:13:07 AM »
Seems it would have to go both ways to be fair.

Well, this woman seems to go both ways.
Islamic sex dolls.  Do they blow themselves up?

Perd Hapley

  • Superstar of the Internet
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 62,152
  • My prepositions are on/in
Re: No homo?
« Reply #9 on: November 03, 2017, 08:15:56 AM »
Well, this woman seems to go both ways.

 :lol:
Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God?
--Thomas Jefferson

lee n. field

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 13,822
  • tinpot megalomaniac, Paulbot, hardware goon
Re: No homo?
« Reply #10 on: November 03, 2017, 08:27:27 AM »
I know this might sound like a snarky, rhetorical question, but I'm totally cereal. I seem to remember that we were told back about 10 or 20 years ago, perhaps not in so many words, that if we were offended by seeing two homosexuals hold hands, etc, that it was our problem. It seems like it was something they (the news/opinion/entertainment media) actually came right out and said, but the memory is a little fuzzy. Does that ring a bell with anyone else?

Now we're scolded if we have a problem dating "women" with the wrong equipment.
In thy presence is fulness of joy.
At thy right hand pleasures for evermore.

Doggy Daddy

  • Poobah
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,356
  • From the saner side of Las Vegas
Re: No homo?
« Reply #11 on: November 03, 2017, 02:49:02 PM »
Seems like going against the faith will get you fired lickity-split.

ISWYDT!
Would you exchange
a walk-on part in a war
for a lead role in a cage?
-P.F.

Perd Hapley

  • Superstar of the Internet
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 62,152
  • My prepositions are on/in
Re: No homo?
« Reply #12 on: November 03, 2017, 06:31:38 PM »
Now we're scolded if we have a problem dating "women" with the wrong equipment.


Exactly. No safe space for the normals.
Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God?
--Thomas Jefferson