• Post New Message
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. Poll of the Day
  3. Supreme Court is FIERCELY DIVIDED whether EMPLOYERS can FIRE GAY PEOPLE!!!

User Info: aDirtyShisno

aDirtyShisno
4 days ago#41
adjl posted...
aDirtyShisno posted...
That still hasn’t been settled yet as far as the law is concerned. Otherwise it would automatically apply, and yet here we are.


It should automatically apply, because it's very obviously logically identical to other protected classes. It hasn't been allowed to apply automatically, however, because Christian fundies are a tenacious bunch with far too much influence in American politics.

Your argument about whether or not something should be legal really shouldn't hinge on whether or not it's already legal. That's a thoroughly tautological approach.

It’s not that it shouldn’t be legal because it’s 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 don’t 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 isn’t” back and forth that’s created by the judicial process.
Que sera, sera. Whatever happens, happens.
...and he was never heard from again.
(edited 4 days ago)

User Info: wwinterj25

wwinterj25
4 days ago#42
aDirtyShisno posted...
That still hasn’t been settled yet as far as the law is concerned. Otherwise it would automatically apply, and yet here we are.


Seems a open and shut case to me. Discrimination is never welcome and singling out folk due to their sexuality is discrimination no matter what law does or doesn't say.
One who knows nothing can understand nothing.
http://psnprofiles.com/wwinterj - https://i.imgur.com/YvP6isz.gif
(edited 4 days ago)

User Info: LinkPizza

LinkPizza
4 days ago#43
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...
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.

User Info: Aaantlion

Aaantlion
4 days ago#44
adjl posted...
Aaantlion posted...
It's legal to fire people for other things that don't necessarily work performance as well, though.


Why should somebody be made less employable for reasons that don't affect work performance?


But why should some reasons be protected yet not others? And why should employees be allowed to discriminate against where they choose to work but not employers against employees? Work is a voluntary social contract, putting restrictions on who you have to hire or keep violates that arrangement. As it is, employees can freely quit for any number of racist, homophobic, misogynistic/misandrist reasons, yet there are no laws protecting their bosses who are affected by this discrimination. Surely if you promote equality and fairness you'd want things to work both ways, right?

BlackScythe0 posted...
SKARDAVNELNATE posted...
I'm for treating them just like anyone else. And anyone else can be fired. They can't just decide they work someone forever and there's nothing the employer can do about it.


I can't be fired for the reasons they are being fired.


But if they're fired for any reason, they can turn around and claim it was for the reasons cited. And, more saliently, you can be fired for any number of reasons that they wouldn't be fired for. Why is one more right than the other?

wwinterj25 posted...
You would be discriminating against someone based on something that is out of their control. This includes but is not limited to race, sexual orientation and disabilities. You do understand what discrimination is right?


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.
(\/)(\/)|-|
Scientists are finally waking up to what pyramids have known all along.

User Info: LinkPizza

LinkPizza
4 days ago#45
Aaantlion posted...
But if they're fired for any reason, they can turn around and claim it was for the reasons cited. And, more saliently, you can be fired for any number of reasons that they wouldn't be fired for. Why is one more right than the other?

They usually settle that in court. It's easier if you have evidence of some sort, though. For example, if you're fired someone who had an accident in a vehicle that has a camera on it, then you can use the video evidence to show that. Or if you fired them for losing something important that they signed out and never returned, there should be evidence to show that. And in those cases, you can prove you fired them for the reasons you gave instead of something like 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.

User Info: Aaantlion

Aaantlion
4 days ago#46
LinkPizza posted...
Aaantlion posted...
But if they're fired for any reason, they can turn around and claim it was for the reasons cited. And, more saliently, you can be fired for any number of reasons that they wouldn't be fired for. Why is one more right than the other?

They usually settle that in court. It's easier if you have evidence of some sort, though. For example, if you're fired someone who had an accident in a vehicle that has a camera on it, then you can use the video evidence to show that. Or if you fired them for losing something important that they signed out and never returned, there should be evidence to show that. And in those cases, you can prove you fired them for the reasons you gave instead of something like sexual orientation...


No, I mean if somebody got fired for performance or another legitimate issue, they can still claim discrimination.
(\/)(\/)|-|
Scientists are finally waking up to what pyramids have known all along.

User Info: LinkPizza

LinkPizza
4 days ago#47
Aaantlion posted...
LinkPizza posted...
Aaantlion posted...
But if they're fired for any reason, they can turn around and claim it was for the reasons cited. And, more saliently, you can be fired for any number of reasons that they wouldn't be fired for. Why is one more right than the other?

They usually settle that in court. It's easier if you have evidence of some sort, though. For example, if you're fired someone who had an accident in a vehicle that has a camera on it, then you can use the video evidence to show that. Or if you fired them for losing something important that they signed out and never returned, there should be evidence to show that. And in those cases, you can prove you fired them for the reasons you gave instead of something like sexual orientation...


No, I mean if somebody got fired for performance or another legitimate issue, they can still claim discrimination.

Yes. That's why I said it easier to fire them for whatever they fired them for if they have evidence. For performance issues, you could show paperwork that their performance was down. Whether it's a chart showing they were doing worse then co-workers or worse than they were before. Or paperwork showing that you had talked to them multiple times before...
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.

User Info: aDirtyShisno

aDirtyShisno
4 days ago#48
wwinterj25 posted...
aDirtyShisno posted...
That still hasn’t been settled yet as far as the law is concerned. Otherwise it would automatically apply, and yet here we are.


Seems a open and shut case to me. Discrimination is never welcome and singling out folk due to their sexuality is discrimination no matter what law does or doesn't say.

Seems an open and shut case. Discrimination is never welcome and singling out pedophiles / beastiality enthusiasts / polygamists due to their sexuality is discrimination no matter what law does or doesn’t say.

Do you see why including a topic that is literally not in the law to begin with can cause a cascade of unintended consequences? If you want a specific item to be protected then by all means make a law that protects it, but don’t try to suggest that a law that is not open ended is suddenly more broad than it was written to be just because you feel it is too difficult a battle to get passed through the legislature.
Que sera, sera. Whatever happens, happens.
...and he was never heard from again.

User Info: aDirtyShisno

aDirtyShisno
4 days ago#49
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 weren’t 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 people’s preferences change rapidly and some remain the same their whole lives, but preferences absolutely exit.
Que sera, sera. Whatever happens, happens.
...and he was never heard from again.

User Info: EvilMegas

EvilMegas
4 days ago#50
I'm You guys know he's wrong, so why even bother,mm?
Official King of Black People
http://i.imgur.com/Zk3VS3o.jpg http://imgur.com/a/UeQiE https://imgur.com/aSnCUuI
(edited 4 days ago)
  1. Boards
  2. Poll of the Day
  3. Supreme Court is FIERCELY DIVIDED whether EMPLOYERS can FIRE GAY PEOPLE!!!
  • Post New Message