H.R. 2015 would prohibit employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.
Detailed Summary
Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2007 - Prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity by covered entities (employers, employment agencies, labor organizations, or joint labor-management committees). Prohibits preferential treatment or quotas. Allows only disparate treatment claims.
Prohibits related retaliation.
Makes this Act inapplicable to: (1) religious organizations; and (2) the relationship between the United States and members of the armed forces. States that this Act does not repeal or modify any federal, state, territorial, or local law creating a special right or preference concerning employment for a veteran.<br>
Provides for the construction of this Act with regard to: (1) enforcement by employers of rules and policies; (2) sexual harassment; (3) certain shared facilities such as showers or dressing facilities; (4) dress and grooming standards; and (5) certain matters relating to marriage.
Prohibits the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) from collecting statistics from covered entities on actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity or compelling the collection by covered entities of such statistics.
Provides for enforcement, including giving the EEOC, the Librarian of Congress, the Attorney General, and U.S. courts the same enforcement powers as they have under specified provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Government Employee Rights Act of 1991, and other specified laws.
Allows actions and proceedings against state governments and, subject to limitation, the federal government.
Status of the Legislation
Latest Major Action: 4/24/2007: Referred to House committee. Status: Referred to the Committee on Education and Labor, and in addition to the Committees on House Administration, Oversight and Government Reform, and the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Points in Favor
From the American Civil Liberties Union:
The Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) is a bill that would ban discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity in all aspects of employment, including hiring, firing, promotion, compensation, and most terms and conditions of employment.
Hardworking Americans should not be kept from supporting their families and contributing to the economy because of characteristics that have no bearing whatsoever on their ability to perform a job.
Employment is essential, even necessary for survival, for most Americans. To deprive GLBT individuals of employment based on characteristics unrelated to the job can spell disaster for them and their families. It can also deprive workplaces of qualified employees.
The vast majority of GLBT workers receive no employment protection from state or local laws. It remains legal in 33 states to fire or refuse to hire based on an individual's sexual orientation, and in 42 states to do so solely based on an individual's gender identity.
Anti-discrimination laws are not "special rights." Most Americans already possess the right to have and keep a job they perform well, and for which they are qualified - either because they're already protected against discrimination or they don't face discrimination in the workplace. But for GLBT people who do, there is nothing "special" about a law aimed at preserving one's right to be treated the same as one's colleagues.
Points Against
(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)
Visitor Comments
Kellen Giraud
I am against HR 2015. I am not against homosexuals by any means, but there are some institutions in which I think that hiring a homosexual could be a big deal, such as the Boy Scouts. I don't think the Boy Scouts should be forced to have to hire homosexuals. Homosexuals can find other jobs that aren't so sensitive to sexual orientation. And if a homosexual really wants a job with the Boy Scouts, he can change his sexual orientation appropriately. The rights of institutions and businesses need to be protected too.
Valentine
I am for HR 2015. The purpose of this bill is not force groups to such as the Boy Scouts to hire homosexuals, but to prevent prejudice against minority groups from being depriving them of work.
Campster
I am also for the passage H.R. 2015.
I disagree with some previous comments as according to the American Psychiatric Association, American Psychological Association, The American Academy of Pediatrics, and the American Medical Association, an individual can no more change their sexual orientation anymore than a blossom my change into a tree frog.
In the specific case of the Boy Scouts: the Boy Scouts of America is a non-profit private corporation (who in the past has had specific court rulings declaring it may continue its ban on members of the LGBT community, Atheists, Agnostics, and girls) administered mostly by volunteers and members. I highly doubt H.R. 2015 effects volunteers, members of a private organization, or the Boy Scout organization at all. Furthermore, the Supreme Court has ruled that as a private organization, it my set its membership guidelines, requirements, and standards as it pleases.
Nerissa Belcher
The Boy Scouts was founded by Robert Baden-Powell. He happened to have been bisexual (http://www.nndb.com/people/049/000044914/ ). He was also a cross-dresser. Read all about it:
http://www.bolerium.com/cgi-bin/bol48/89762.html?id=4FVhtFXM
It seems to me the Scouts have done just fine despite having such a person found them.
Nerissa Belcher
Kelley Molinari
I am against H.R. 2015! I don't believe homosexuals should have specific protected class status. Why not include senior citizens,disabled, pregnant women,& minors? An employer should not be forced to hire anyone just because of sexual orientation. It is already illegal to discriminate. We don't need another bill that will limit the rights of employers/companies or private organizations.
Campster
HR 2015 does not create any specific class of citizen, it merely helps protect members of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender community from experiencing discrimination in the workforce based SOLELY on their sexual orientation.
The above poster, Kelley Molinari is correct, discrimination is already illegal. Unfortunately discrimination against a person's sexual orientation and/or gender identity is actually quite legal, alive, and well. This bill merely makes it illegal to discriminate against a person based on their sexual orientation, as it is already illegal to discriminate against a person based on their gender, age, disability, and ethnicity.
Kimmylou
I agree with you Kelley, the rights of those who own business will be taken away. Another question.... if crossdressers or gender confused people have to be hired, should (real) women have to be intimadated to go to the bathroom because of a man who enjoys dressing up as a woman? It's disturbing how many rights the whole gay and lesbian movement is trying to get and take away from those who aren't....why should they get special treatment?
Bret Scott
Wind the clock back 50 years, and our discussion today about non-discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity could have easily applied to african americans and women. If the Inernet and blogs existed then, we'd see almost exactly the same comments. It's very intersting to me that Kelley and Kimmylou don't see that connection. Take a moment to read through this bill's 22 pages, and you'll see that its crafters have made great efforts NOT to provide special rights, any more so than are already provided to women, people of color, differently-abled people, and so on. If anything, it is quite clear about its opposition to quotas and the measurement of numbers of people that fit these classifications (see Sections 4.f.1 and 10).
Robbi Cohn
Regarding Kimmylou's comment...this issue is well known within the trans community, and is nothing more than a straw man argument. There is no reason to be intimidated while in the bathroom with a transgender person. There is no evidence that would give creedence to the existence of danger, in a public restroom, from transgenders. A woman stands to be in far greater danger from heterosexual sexual predators, who know just where to go to find "defenseless" women. The solution is gender neutral bathrooms which, in no way jeopardize the safety of any person. In fact, studies show that they are far safer!! It is important to remember that public restrooms have historically been used to discriminate and separate...most recently, persons with disbilities were the targets...and...before them, persons of color were discriminated against by forcing them to use separate bathroom facilities.
Matt Brunner
This is for Kelley M. It is perfectly legal to fire someone because of sexual orientation in 33 states and transgender in 44 states. This is why ENDA is needed. All americas deserve the same employment oppurtunities and should be free from discrimination and bias when it comes to employment issues. The Civil Rights act of 1964 does not include sexual orientation so its not already illegal to discriminaate.
Barry
The issue is, if people knew they would lose their jobs, they would think twice about being homosexual. A paycheck (and health insurance and retirement) is a good way to control behavior.
Jessica
Kelly M.
I assume you are being extremely sarcastic, as all of those things you just mentioned ARE covered under current EEOC laws.
Being a homosexual is not a choice, nor should be acceptable for someone to fire a homosexual because they think it is a great way to control behavior and keep them from being gay. That is idiotic.
Alfred J. Lemire
This issue brings out the worst in arguments. As to Robert Baden-Powell, he did not nor does he spend weekends in the woods with 14-year-old boys. Other arguments favoring the legislation are similarly flawed, e.g., analogizing GLBTs to blacks.
One recognizes the worth of legal protection for people denied work because of their sexual orientation. But how can the law also recognize the dangers inherent to human sexuality? A straight young man living in a tent with other straight young men: not much of a problem. A gay sergeant in a tent with straight young men, at the peak of their physical fitness: a problem.
It would be nice if the span of the legislation could be less sweeping and the power of the State limited. Neither is likely. As in other polities with State oppression, one expects brutish police smashing heads if they chance upon "secret" meetings of Boy Scouts and other nonconformists.
It can happen here. Good intentions. Bad results.
Jerry
They will all burn in hell...next.
John
This bill in effect will require a religion to "make its case" with text and/or official commentary with regard to its position on homosexuality - and the state court wil decide if the case is valid or not. In this, the state will become the judge of the validity of a religion. On this alone, we should all be against this bill.
library
Attention Kimmylou,and Kelly Bret was right these same comments could have applied to blacks and they did why should I have to be forced to go to school with blacks. Sound familiar to anyone. I frankly don't use the bathroom in front of anyone and no one has done so in front of me.Why are people so consumed that Gay people tend to be supersexed beings of some kind. As far as women are concerned the predators that kill, rape or abuse most of us are men heterosexual men. You truly have less not more to fear from Gay people of any kind. You don't see anyone straight out banning the idea of straight men being dangerous when they probably should. You probably have been looked at by a gay woman and not have known it. Inside our skin you have no idea who we are. Black, White, Gay whatever. In nature you never see the animals worrying of such trivialities. And to John WWJD live and let live. We will all see the end of our days. Who died and made you boss.
krikey
I used to not care. Flame away! Live and let live. Now the deviant community is blitzing against normal society. Look at the media. In nearly every TV show, there is some mention of homosexuality! As if it's normal?! Never in my world, which is much bigger than yours. What's H.R. 2015? A Hollywood powered boost to a miniscule sub-culture, flexing its newly found muscle to feel better about itself. I don't care what lifestyle you choose(yes choose) because I do mine. Just stop forcing it on me and my children! It could get ugly because I'm reaching my tolerance limit. I wish I could live and let live again, but I can't because of this onslaught. Sigh.
Heidi
All we want is to have our employers evaluate us on our work perfomance, not our sexual preference.
Lisa
A private or religious institution has a right to hire or fire so to protect their interests. Homosexuals are complaining about discrimination but they are pushing discrimination against anyone who doesn't accept their livestyle. Most children in religious schools are there so that they are not forced to witness and accept as norm issues that their parents don't believe in. There are plenty of jobs available. Work were you are already accepted.
Chris Pruet
As a heterosexual Christian, Christ has the strength to protect your children and teach them the Way, Truth, and Life. We don't have to ardently suppress the sinners in order to shelter our children. The goodness of Christ, the depth of his love, and the magnanimous benefits of following him should be enough to choose Him.
In other words, love your neighbor despite his sin, have the faith to believe that God will work it out and change hearts. It rains on the righteous and the unrighteous just the same.
Mic
Campster, You say "gender, age, disability, and ethnicity". I accept those. Those are something you cannot deny. Homosexuality is a personal choice that should not be classified as an undeniable status. This resolution, if made law, will allow ANYONE to claim they've been violated. Think about it.
Geoff
Chris, have you never read Romans 1:26-27? Paul is very specific, “For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet.” If you choose to play the religious tolerance card, at least look up where your religion stands on the issue. Here is a cut and dry answer for you and others who would defame my faith with your empty words and flawed logic: Leviticus 18:22, “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.” Remember, God and sin have nothing in common.
Geoff
PS, Chris, Christ never said he would teach you THE WAY, THE TRUTH, and LIFE; but rather stated: I am THE WAY, THE TRUTH, AND THE LIFE, and no man comes unto the father except by way of the Son.
Bruce Watson
I am against this bill for many reasons. First I'll mention the fact of how absurd it is that homosexuals are considered a Minority Group. A minority as defined is what a person IS, not what he DOES. A person is a minority because he was born into a particular race. A person is a homosexual because he has chosen it. Despite what we are told, they are NOT born that way. I cannot support any bill that would approve of this behavior and basically for me to approve as well.
Rebecca Martinez
A person can not choose his or her ethnicity, gender, age, or ability/disability, and that is the difference in this argument.
Sexual choice/preference is not grounds for special classification.
Skeptic
IF God created everything (and man in his own image), didn't he(?) create sin, homosexuals etc.? How do you explain that Geoff?
It seems to me that the point here is that people should be judged in the workplace by what the DO rather than who they ARE. As long as it does not affect their work, what does it matter what they do with their private life?
By the same token, if people do choose to be gay, etc. why should they be punished? You can't get fired for choosing to be a Christian, right?
Dan
That fact is that homosexual practices are immoral and sinful, just the same as adultery, prostitution, drunkenness, stealing, lying and other such practices. I don’t think if you were an employer you would want to hire someone that came to you and said, “I’m a habitual stealer.” Nonetheless, the Bible says that all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. (Romans 3:23) Because of our sin, we deserve the punishment of death. (Romans 6:23) However, God loved us so much that He gave his only Son to die in our place to give us a way of escape. (John 3:16 & Romans 5:8) All we have to do to obtain this salvation is repent of our sins, believe in Jesus as our Savior, and confess Him as our Savior. (Act 3:19, Romans 10:9-10) After obtaining true salvation, we demonstrate our love for God by striving to obey His commands. Individuals who do this will generally make the best employees unless the employer prefers to have someone who is immoral.
Geoff
Part 1
Dear Skeptic, Actually, God did not create sin. To sin, comes from the Greek word hamartia (ἁμαρτία) which is usually translated as sin in the New Testament. In Classical Greek, it means "to miss the mark" or "to miss the target." In reality, man created sin through disobedience. Thus, homosexuality would be, depraved man acting in a disobedient manner to the will of God and the direction or normality of nature. I really appreciate the question, unless of course it was rhetorical and you did not expect a response. A further, or rather better informed look into HR 2015 would show you that this legislation is actually set up to be a precedent for litigation against religious organizations and their hiring practices/ free speech. I believe that this legislation is a stretch of governmental power, a flexing of media muscle and an attempt to liberalize America.
Geoff
Part 2
Whether anyone will admit the truth or not, homosexuality is abhorrent behavior (deviant), it was classified as a mental illness until public protest overturned science. I will not, nor can I afford to allow this radical change to my culture. In the end: ENDA affords special protection to a group that is not disadvantaged.
The issue is not job discrimination, but whether private businesses will be forced by law to accommodate homosexual activists' attempts to legitimize homosexual behavior. ENDA violates employers' and employees' Constitutional freedoms of religion, speech and association. The proposed legislation would prohibit employers from taking their most deeply held beliefs into account when making hiring, management, and promotion decisions. This would pose an unprecedented intrusion by the federal government into people's lives.
Geoff
Part 3
ENDA would approvingly bring private behavior considered immoral by many (Islam, Christianity, Judaism, to name but three) into the public square. By declaring that all sexual preferences are equally valid, ENDA would change national policy supporting marriage and family. I hope this explained my views, and answered your questions. Geoff
J Beany
I read the bill. It comes down to; Where you take it in the bedroom should not afford you special treatment in the work place.
SKEPTIC, you should not be in the conversation. Do you hear yourself?
Bob
Jessica, of course homosexuality is a choice. I am a heterosexual because I choose to be. I do not choose to be a homosexual because it is unnatural.
Tyler
Oh, I love how some people try to say that homosexuality is a choice. As a gay man, I can tell you: I never chose to be discriminated against. I never chose to be beat up in 10th grade for being a "fag". Please, stop the bigotry and try to expand beyond your nearsighted world.
And the Bible is a 2000 year old document that has been changed numerous times, translated through language after language, and wasn't even written by Jesus. Try finding some better evidence.
Dan
Homosexuality is like obesity. People may have a tendency toward these, but they do not have to become these. As I said earlier, we all have sinned, so we need to repent. Part of repentence is a striving to refrain from sinning.
Geoff
Dear Tyler, I am very sorry to hear about the issues you had in 10th grade; but I got into fights in tenth grade, of which I lost a few, for being Irish. You say that homosexuality is not a choice, but the reality is: everything is a choice. By the way, the Bible is actually about 3,300 years old, and modern translations are translated directly from the original Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic texts. Geoff
Dear Geoff
Being Irish is a choice. If you got beat up in school because of it, maybe you should have stopped being Irish.
honestly...
i just love arguments that say, 'homosexuals can find another job'- what would you say if someone said to you 'just find another job. we don't want to hire you because you're married'? Conservative critics crawl all over this site and smear bigotry in every proposed legislation. Equal rights = equal protection under law.
And stop saying there's a choice! "everything is a choice"? Did you CHOOSE to be Irish, Geoff?
It's time to take your heads out and accept that not everyone in this world is a heterosexual WASP.
oh p.s.--
As a gay man, I certainly don't group myself into the same category as a thief or adulterer (and I'd love to just meet someone who would have the guts/balls to tell me to my face that I am)
Also, did we forget that Dick Cheney's daughter is a lesbian? I guess that just proves her weakness at the feet of our heavenly creator- who, by the way, created her as a lesbian.
in response
one post above mentioned the benefits of "control[ling] behavior". Isn't that what communism/fascism and dictatorships are all about? What happened to democracy? Or is democracy only for some- those privileged enough to have the upstanding moral character (which, homosexuals are automatically excluded from having)?
Dan
Gay man, I would have no problem saying to you that you are in the same category as a thief or adulterer. As a matter of fact, we were all in that same category called "sinners". Please re-read my earlier posts to find out what you can do about it.
Responder, controlling behavior is called civilization. Otherwise, it would be called lawlessness. Everybody would just do what they wanted, and the talk of "rights" would not matter.
DJ
Religion is a choice and we can't fire people for that. The sex of the person I choose to spend my life with has nothing to do with my ability to do my job.
Nadia
The act does not apply to religious organizations, so the Boy Scouts can continue to do whatever they want.
Legal Butch
It's wonderful that so many of you find meaning, comfort and guidance through Christianity. In this country, however, church and state are separate, which means that no religious institution has the authority to dictate policy.
So far discrimination has not succeeded in preventing people from being gay, lesbian or transgendered. By the same token, both gender presentation and sexual orientation are covered by employment non-discrimination laws in Illinois, and I don't believe that it has caused a mass exodus from evangelical Christianity to same-sex liasons and sexual reassignment. Of course, if the only thing holding you back from expressing your true, fabulous self is concern about being able to support yourself, I can see why you might be worried.
Geoff
Dear Honestly,
This may sound harsh but, this bill is a matter of changing American culture. As a Christian, Father, Husband and Defender of my rights (USMC-Ret.), I say no way. I will not allow 5% of this country to dictate legislation for the other 95%. This law is a precedent meant to challenge free speech and the rights of 95% to voice their disgust with a lifestyle they find to be immoral. What’s next, protection for child molesters and sexual predators, (which I am well aware, does not represent the vast majority of homosexuals or heterosexuals), but does constitute a minority group in American culture. Enough is enough! If you don’t like the way things are, you are welcome to leave. We can always replace you with a Hard Working Mexican Heterosexual Catholic or (HWMC).
Jim
Dear Kelley Molinari,
I urge you to inform yourself better. Our country's laws do protect senior citizens, disabled, pregnant women and minors. The laws are the EEOC (Title VII), ADEA, ADA and the FSLA. Everyone one of the categories you mentioned are protected under federal law. Before making claims, please understand the issue first.
Thank you.
Alex
The second "religious exemption" clause fails to offer protection for all hiring by church-related organizations or businesses. The position of a teacher of religion at a church-related school would be exempt, but, e.g., that of a biology teacher would not. Thus, most of the teachers and staff at a religious school would be covered by ENDA, which means that the church would be forced to hire homosexual applicants for such positions-despite the fact that their lifestyle would be in direct opposition to the religious beliefs of the organization or company. ENDA violates employers' and employees' Constitutional freedoms of religion, speech and association. The proposed legislation would prohibit employers from taking their most deeply held beliefs into account when making hiring, management, and promotion decisions. This would pose an unprecedented intrusion by the federal government into people's lives. From: http://www3.capwiz.com/afanet/callalert/index.tt?alertid=10345511&type=CO
Kellen Giraud Hitler
I am against HR 2015. I am not against Jews by any means, but there are some institutions in which I think that hiring a Jew could be a big deal. I don't think institutions should be forced to have to hire Jews. Jews can find other jobs that aren't so sensitive to religion. And if a Jew really wants a job, he can change his religion appropriately. The rights of institutions and businesses need to be protected too.
Geoff Mengele
Dear Honestly,
This may sound harsh but, this bill is a matter of changing culture. As a Nazi, Father, Husband and Defender of my rights, I say no way. I will not allow 5% of this country to dictate legislation for the other 95%. This law is a precedent meant to challenge free speech and the rights of 95% to voice their disgust with a lifestyle they find to be immoral. What’s next, protection for fags and gypsies? Enough is enough! If you don’t like the way things are, you are welcome to leave. We can always replace you with a Hard Working African Slave (HWAS).
Jesus loves your children
Jesus loves the little children.
All the children of the world.
So do the priests.
Go and do likewise.
All this uproar about homosexuality...what does the Bible say about pedophilia?
It's remarkably silent.
L
When is employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, religion, race, or gender identity justified?
Dear Geoff Mengele
Perhaps you should sit down and think up your own argument instead of ridiculing, plagiarizing, and otherwise attempting to thwart the free speech of someone who actually did something to deserve theirs. The answer was a public response to a private discussion. Find your own friends. Oh, and don’t be afraid to use your own name, perhaps then you wont look like a child playing on mommies "puter." Geoff
Katie
I'm confused, at what point of my life does the choice of heterosexuality or homosexuality come up? Is that a class in school? How silly to say that you chose to be heterosexual. Pedophilia and homosexuality are not the same thing. Being gay doesnt mean you are going to pray on young children. Stop reading the writings of Jerry Falwell and the 700 Club. Discrimination of all kinds is unjust.
Heather Van Wilde
I would highly recommend that people actually look at the language of the bill here: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-2015 - Find out who is covered under this before you start slamming it. And for the record, I am a male to female transgendered person who has been discrimated in my employment for over 2 years now because of who I am. I am stuck in a dead end position because even though I perform at or better than most other people I work with, I'm continuously denied the chance to advance without being given any reason as to why.
Just think about it. How would you like if that happened to you?
Aly
Since when is it okay to deny ANY human being their basic rights in a free society? This is not an issue of companies being "forced to hire" homosexuals, as Kelley Molinari stated, but to keep them from DENYING EMPLOYMENT (whether the person is currently employed or still under consideration)to people based simply on their sexual orientation. As well, though I understand the comments regarding the umbrella term "transgender", the simple fact is that when a person undergoes gender reassignment it's not small decision, and it's not based at all on the desire to spend a few disparate minutes in a public restroom with women. When was the last time you heard of ANY transgendered person preying on or attacking women? I swear, people will come up with the most inane dilemmas to support their paranoia and prejudice.
Fee Tenkiller
I think Aly has made some good points. The transgendered community is in a unique position. They also have to contend with the fact that their own history can be used discriminatorily against them. A person applying for a job cannot be asked, legaly, if he or she is gay, but if a transgendered person is asked for a birth certificate then that can provide the employer a reason to turn that person down. A transgendered person has less privacy than a gay person in this situation.
Fee Tenkiller 2
I am a lesbian, but that information does not show up on my birth certificate. I have a deep and committed relationship to my partner, who I consider to be my wife. I don't cruise. I don't pick up in restrooms or bars. I struggled for years with my sexual identity because I had to lie and pretend I was straight when everything in me told me, compelled me that I was and am a woman who loves women. I can't change that. Even if I chose celibacy, I would still be attracted to other women. I am fortunate to have found a woman who is a wonderful partner, friend, and a lover and we have pledged our lives to each other. There is very little different from our relationship and the relationships of devoted and loving straight couples. The only difference is that we are both female.
Jocelyne
What it all boils down to is that they are all "people". If this is not passed "all inclusively" than we are sending a message that it is OK to discriminate. Another point, is that this will not "force" anyone to hire someone that is not qualified, it just means that they have to be given an "equal" consideration.
Riona
Lisa
"Most children in religious schools are there so that they are not forced to witness and accept as norm issues that their parents don't believe in." You’re right. I experienced 12 years (grades 1 through 12) of religious education. All the time I was "transsexual and had to hide." The atmosphere in those institutions is nothing but brain washing. to impose their values on people. They and their teaching are responsible for people having psychiatric problems, being torn between what is natural and what others want them to believe. So many denominations of churches preach so many different things much of which are hurtful and divisive to society in general. If we really want to make this country a better place it might be best to ban religion. Hell, Catholic priests are probably the biggest threat to young boys in school. You simply Can't Understand Normal Thinking, Girl. Think about what you're saying.
Louise
Anyone who thinks that someone would "choose" to be ostracized just so they could sleep with members of their same sex, isn't thinking.
entrepreneur
I’m not conservative or liberal, but I do like to see our country progress and this bill progresses the fundamental principle that federal class protection applies to persons who meet three standards: an obvious, immutable characteristic; a history of discrimination evidenced by economic disenfranchisement; and political powerlessness.
So, this bill is consistent with the principles and intents we have established as we progress toward a more compassionate, intelligent society.
Also, I understand that employers don’t like additional restrictions. I’m an employer too. But regardless of what they’d like to think, business owners don’t individually create value in this economy – it’s a complex, interrelated system. There are competent people all over the world who seldom realize wealth because they didn’t have the good fortune to be born in the world’s most robust, dynamic economy. We all in this together – let’s treat each other with respect.
Maia Cudhea
FYI Ms. Kelley Molinari
senior citizens, the disabled, pregnant women, & minors DO all enjoy special protections. For sneiors, the differently abled, and pregnant women this includes protection from job discrimination. For minors, it does not, but it does include many other special class protections. But no, let's not give the gays the civil rights- then EVERYONE will want them!
Michael L. Gooch, SPHR
I have only one rule when it comes to ANY discrimination....“There is no longer Jew or Gentile, slave or free, male and female. For you are all one in Christ Jesus.” Sad to say, this ancient rule is rarely seen in the modern arena. Do we discriminate against people that are ‘different’ from us? Why they were made different is known only to the Good Lord. How we treat them while on earth is left up to us. While we pour more stupid laws into the books to prevent such painful actions, we fail to fix the real problem, that is, the root. Whenever a human is treated differently than the masses, we should take a cold, hard look at the situation. A hard look indeed. Maybe even the mirror. Michael L. Gooch, SPHR Author - Wingtips with Spurs http://www.michaellgooch.com