Started By
Message
locked post

USCCB: Obama's "gender identity" regulation is a "serious threat"

Posted on 12/10/14 at 7:37 am
Posted by TN Bhoy
San Antonio, TX
Member since Apr 2010
60589 posts
Posted on 12/10/14 at 7:37 am
To freedom of conscience
quote:


(CNSNews.com) – The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) condemned new regulations to implement President Obama’s July 21 executive order prohibiting federal contractors from discriminating "on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.”

These regulations were put in place by the Department of Labor last week in an update “to add gender identity and sexual orientation to the classes it protects” against discrimination.

"This rule will extend protections to millions of workers who are employed by or seek jobs with federal contractors and subcontractors, ensuring that sexual orientation and gender identity are never used as justification for workplace discrimination by those that profit from taxpayer dollars," said Patricia A. Shiu, director of the department's Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs.

However the bishops called these regulations “a serious threat to freedom of conscience and religious liberty.”

“Additionally, the regulations advance the false ideology of ‘gender identity,’ which ignores biological reality and harms the privacy and associational rights of both contractors and their employees,” the bishops noted.

“Our Church teaches that '[e]very sign of unjust discrimination' against those who experience same-sex attraction 'should be avoided' (Catechism of the Catholic Church, CCC 2358)--but it appears on an initial reading that these regulations would prohibit far more than that ‘unjust discrimination,’” the bishops said in a statement on Friday.

“In particular, they appear also to prohibit employers’ religious and moral disapproval of same-sex sexual conduct, which creates a serious threat to freedom of conscience and religious liberty,” the bishops explain.
Posted by JEAUXBLEAUX
Bayonne, NJ
Member since May 2006
55358 posts
Posted on 12/10/14 at 7:43 am to
I would think that all non discrimination laws covered by this order only effect those companies that do business with the federal Government. I guess it says if you do business you can't discriminate. Anything contrary would give license to discriminate if I read that right.

The Bishops can do what they want but I guess as long as they are a Fed Gov provider no discrimination is allowed.
What am I missing?
Posted by TN Bhoy
San Antonio, TX
Member since Apr 2010
60589 posts
Posted on 12/10/14 at 7:47 am to
quote:

The Bishops can do what they want but I guess as long as they are a Fed Gov provider no discrimination is allowed.
What am I missing?




That there are plenty of companies that do federal contracts but have religious backgrounds/policies. All of them would be discriminated against through these regulations.
Posted by mostbesttigerfanever
TD platinum member suite in TS
Member since Jan 2010
5016 posts
Posted on 12/10/14 at 7:49 am to
just get with the times

we're turning into France

DWI
Posted by JEAUXBLEAUX
Bayonne, NJ
Member since May 2006
55358 posts
Posted on 12/10/14 at 7:54 am to
I guess their discriminatory days are behind them if they want to continue to work with the Fed. I bet though that any Defense Contractor operating in the Middle East would never post a Jewish person in Saudi Arabia. I bet this is one area of discrimination Obama would never address.
Posted by UGATiger26
Jacksonville, FL
Member since Dec 2009
9044 posts
Posted on 12/10/14 at 7:55 am to
quote:

That there are plenty of companies that do federal contracts but have religious backgrounds/policies. All of them would be discriminated against through these regulations.


It also seems like it could affect the bidding process. A company with a religious affiliation could come in much lower, but fail to be a contender with another business who knows they don't have to worry about being outbid by the "religious company."
Posted by Antonio Moss
Baton Rouge
Member since Mar 2006
48294 posts
Posted on 12/10/14 at 8:54 am to
quote:

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) condemned new regulations to implement President Obama’s July 21 executive order prohibiting federal contractors from discriminating "on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.”


I don't have a problem with this. In this matter, the federal government is the principle setting terms of the agreement to the independent contractor. There is nothing forcing the contractor to accept the deal.
Posted by Antonio Moss
Baton Rouge
Member since Mar 2006
48294 posts
Posted on 12/10/14 at 8:56 am to
quote:

That there are plenty of companies that do federal contracts but have religious backgrounds/policies. All of them would be discriminated against through these regulations.


These companies are not entitled to the contracts.
Posted by JEAUXBLEAUX
Bayonne, NJ
Member since May 2006
55358 posts
Posted on 12/10/14 at 8:56 am to
If they won't comply, I guess they are saying discrimination is more important than the business.
Posted by Antonio Moss
Baton Rouge
Member since Mar 2006
48294 posts
Posted on 12/10/14 at 9:01 am to
quote:

If they won't comply, I guess they are saying discrimination is more important than the business.


Frankly, that's irrelevant. There is no point arguing as to what constitutes discrimination and what doesn't or if it's justified. This is basic contract law. And, this is an instance of the correct usage of an EO.
Posted by Zephyrius
Wharton, La.
Member since Dec 2004
7932 posts
Posted on 12/10/14 at 9:18 am to
quote:

Frankly, that's irrelevant. There is no point arguing as to what constitutes discrimination and what doesn't or if it's justified. This is basic contract law. And, this is an instance of the correct usage of an EO.

Maybe I'm missing something... but that's a pretty narrow view unless of course you believe its ok for government to choose which liberties can be discarded whether religious or skin color or political thought...
Posted by Antonio Moss
Baton Rouge
Member since Mar 2006
48294 posts
Posted on 12/10/14 at 10:05 am to
quote:

Maybe I'm missing something... but that's a pretty narrow view unless of course you believe its ok for government to choose which liberties can be discarded whether religious or skin color or political thought...


This has nothing to do with civil liberties. The EO doesn't promulgate a blanket stance against gender/sexual identity discrimination in all courses of business. It only affects the federal government as it concerns the awarding of contracts.
Posted by Hawkeye95
Member since Dec 2013
20293 posts
Posted on 12/10/14 at 10:11 am to
quote:

Maybe I'm missing something... but that's a pretty narrow view unless of course you believe its ok for government to choose which liberties can be discarded whether religious or skin color or political thought...


the gov't can decide who they give contracts to based on executive oversight. I am sure they have all sorts of rules on who can get a contract, based on a variety of things the executive branch determines is important.
Posted by ocelot4ark
Dallas, TX
Member since Oct 2009
12458 posts
Posted on 12/10/14 at 1:13 pm to
quote:

That there are plenty of companies that do federal contracts but have religious backgrounds/policies. All of them would be discriminated against through these regulations.


Does the USCCB want Congress to pass a law that will prevent them from having to hire people who are fornicators? Adulterers? Drunkards?

Posted by boosiebadazz
Member since Feb 2008
80182 posts
Posted on 12/10/14 at 1:24 pm to
If you want to suck at the federal teet then play by the federal rules.

I have no problem with this.
This post was edited on 12/10/14 at 1:27 pm
Posted by roygu
Member since Jan 2004
11718 posts
Posted on 12/10/14 at 2:02 pm to
quote:

These companies are not entitled to the contracts.


No! They are entitled to equal opportunity. Contracts are supposed to be given to the company who can perform the task according to the specs, on time, and cheapest.
That seldom happens.
Posted by GoBigOrange86
Meine sich're Zuflucht
Member since Jun 2008
14486 posts
Posted on 12/10/14 at 2:10 pm to
As others have rightly pointed out, this only compels people to abide by these rules if they want federal money. If they refuse federal money, they can behave as they please. There is nothing worth getting upset over here.
Posted by Paluka
One State Over
Member since Dec 2010
10763 posts
Posted on 12/10/14 at 2:10 pm to
quote:

the gov't can decide who they give contracts to based on executive oversight. I am sure they have all sorts of rules on who can get a contract, based on a variety of things the executive branch determines is important.


Agreed. There are lots of reasons the feds use to award contracts...kickbacks, campaign donations, gifts, self-profit. etc.

The USCCB are speaking on what they believe in. No problem with this either.
Posted by the808bass
The Lou
Member since Oct 2012
111498 posts
Posted on 12/10/14 at 2:11 pm to
quote:

I don't have a problem with this. In this matter, the federal government is the principle setting terms of the agreement to the independent contractor. There is nothing forcing the contractor to accept the deal.

Do you have any idea what "discrimination" with respect to "gender identity" is?
This post was edited on 12/10/14 at 2:12 pm
Posted by Antonio Moss
Baton Rouge
Member since Mar 2006
48294 posts
Posted on 12/10/14 at 2:17 pm to
quote:

No! They are entitled to equal opportunity. Contracts are supposed to be given to the company who can perform the task according to the specs, on time, and cheapest.


You're going to have to point to law that says that.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 2Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram