Should it be ok to fire someone for being a vocal member of NAMBLA?
And please don't act as if this is the first judge in this country to make a ruling of this nature. There have been countless judges on the state level who have ruled the same thing regarding their state cons utions. This is merely the first federal judge to apply the fourteenth amendment but most if not all state cons utions seek to protect the same rights the federal cons ution does.
There is a reason gay marriage almost always wins court battles. What do you think that is?
@ comparing something illegal to sexuality. And then you guys wonder why many of you are considered bigots?
In any event, all things being equal, no. If the person is breaking laws then thats a different story.
NO there is a reason that they pick certain COA and judges.
On what basis should a vocal member of NAMBLA be fired if they aren't breaking the law and they have acceptable job performance?
Oh, I see. The only reason sexual marriage wins is because of certain judges.
Gotcha.
why do you keep comparing NAMBLA and gay people? Do you equate the two groups?
the same basis that companies can fire a celebrity that screws up and does something they don't want their company to be associated with.
If I had an employee who at the job, representing my company, did a sexual act (kisses someone of the same-sex for ex) than I should be able to fire that person. I don't think the govt. should be involved in my company. Since it is the act that they were fired for and not their state of being, that they have no control over, it should not be civil rights violation.
"If I had an employee who at the job, representing my company, did a sexual act (kisses someone of the same-sex for ex) than I should be able to fire that person"
many companies forbid and fire employees of different sexes for being involved sexually/romantically.
Are you talking about /lesbo acts off your company premises? If yes, how do you reconcile keeping the govt out of your company with your "right" to interfere in adults' private lives outside of your company?
"I don't think the govt. should be involved in my company."
employees certainly lose many "God-given unalienable rights" when they join a company or any org. But you're "thinking" violates the "synthetic" USA right that citizens will not be subject to discrimination, so your prejudiced, bigoted, narrow-minded self is unAmerican.
Last edited by boutons_deux; 08-06-2010 at 10:10 AM.
So as an employer you will dsicriminate based on sexual orientation.
you're ok with your heterosexual employees public displays of affection but not ok with icky s kissing..
I didn't say I would but I should be able to.So as an employer you will dsicriminate based on sexual orientation.
you're ok with your heterosexual employees public displays of affection but not ok with icky s kissing..
You can fire an employee for smooching on the job.
GGA sounds like Michael Scott.
In the state of TX you can fire anyone without cause so yes you could still legally fire an icky for kissing his boyfriend in public.
Isn't that grand!
No way in this guy has ever been the manager of anything.
comparing this to nambla is epic stupid.
congratulations. another bad thread for you.
He still hasn't answered why he compares the two.
I was using an example of a more extreme lifestyle choice that 99% of people disagree with-NAMBLA. If I knew an employee of a company was a NAMBLA member they would lose my business. That could be the way of thinking with sexual PDA.
terrible example
I don't think 99% of the public views sexualtiy as extreme so this is a terrible example.
no. Being a member of a group with supports grown men having sex with younger boys is the extreme example. i hope 99% are against NAMBLA.
Last edited by spursncowboys; 08-06-2010 at 11:01 AM.
one is a crime. the other isn't.
being a member of NAMBLA is not a crime.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
