- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Anyone watching BR Metro council on Non Discrimination Act?
Posted on 7/23/14 at 9:38 pm to Ghostfacedistiller
Posted on 7/23/14 at 9:38 pm to Ghostfacedistiller
little overview from the advocate the other day
LINK
beware the comments are dark and full of ignorance
reading that shite makes my eyes bleed
quote:
“Baton Rouge is a city filled with caring, compassionate people,” and a poll shows 62 percent in favor of equal rights for gay people.
So says a fact sheet put out by proponents of an ordinance, up for consideration this month, that would ban discrimination in housing, employment and public accommodations.
But the proposition that all God’s children deserve an even break is not one that Christian firebrands are prepared to accept, and spirited opposition is expected yet again. Only two members of the council have warmly embraced the ordinance, so you wouldn’t want to bet against another defeat.
The council has not only rejected similar legislation, but a few years ago could not even bring itself to “publicize its commitment to diversity and equal opportunity” in a nonbinding resolution. Sure, nonbinding resolutions are a waste of time, but that’s not why the council balked.
A majority evidently accepted the preposterous suggestion, advanced by a protesting preacher, that they were fixing to turn this wholesome burg into a “haven for homosexuals.”
LINK
beware the comments are dark and full of ignorance
quote:
Perhaps the title should be "Baton Rouge Leads On Morality Front". New businesses move to Baton Rouge because it is a city that still has some good moral standards left. Baton Rouge sets a good example for the rest of the country and does not follow the immoral crowd over the cliff.
quote:
Baton Rouge From My View
We seemed to miss the place in the US Constitution where it states that USA citizens have a civil right or other right to commit immoral practices. This proposed ordinance in EBR Parish is really just ANOTHER push in Louisiana and in Baton Rouge for the real ultimate issue which is to allow gay marriage in Louisiana. Gays already have enough protections For another example, we suppose the next issue could be that prostitutes deserve equal rights for housing and employment, so lets just make prostitution legal too? Prostitutes also have a different sexual orientation. The are sexually orientated to make money. So let's give them special protections too? The destruction of the moral fabric in the USA will eventually help lead to its destruction from within.
quote:
Gay Affirmative Action? Yep, that's what they want. I think Mark is on to something...
reading that shite makes my eyes bleed
This post was edited on 7/23/14 at 9:40 pm
1
Posted on 7/23/14 at 9:43 pm to Ghostfacedistiller
quote:
I adhere to my beliefs and live my life. This a poor battle to pick IMO and is no threat to religious freedom.
So lets just let it go because it really isn't important. Next thing you know, the next door will be open and so forth. Before you know it ALL traditional values will be on the back burner and the traditionalist will have NO say because their beliefs will infringe upon the beliefs of a minority sect.
This isn't about religion! You don't have to be religious to have traditional values.
Posted on 7/23/14 at 10:01 pm to Lee Chatelain
Friend of mine wrote to his councilwoman, Tara Wicker, in support of the ordinance and got this e-mail in reply:
1 Corinthians 6:9 "Or do you not know that the unrighteousnwill not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality."
There is no hope for this backwater. Watching the proceedings is painful. I had to turn it off.
1 Corinthians 6:9 "Or do you not know that the unrighteousnwill not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality."
There is no hope for this backwater. Watching the proceedings is painful. I had to turn it off.
This post was edited on 7/23/14 at 10:02 pm
Posted on 7/23/14 at 10:06 pm to Layabout
quote:
Friend of mine wrote to his councilwoman, Tara Wicker, in support of the ordinance and got this e-mail in reply:
1 Corinthians 6:9 "Or do you not know that the unrighteousnwill not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality."
There is no hope for this backwater. Watching the proceedings is painful. I had to turn it off.
I'll say this for her, at least she doesn't hedge.
I have no problem with the ordinance. I skimmed its text and it provides for exemptions for religious and religious-affiliated institutions, which would be my main concern. I saw some of the proceedings and Pastor Goza said himself that he knows of no one who would discriminate against anyone for any reason in their place of business. All the ordinance does is codify what he says his own parishioners would do. There shouldn't be any problem with that.
Posted on 7/23/14 at 10:08 pm to Ghostfacedistiller
What a waste of time. They're are already a litany of state and federal laws prohibiting discrimination. Maybe next month the council can pass an ordinance abolishing slavery, or allowing women the right to vote.
This post was edited on 7/23/14 at 10:23 pm
Posted on 7/23/14 at 10:20 pm to Ghostfacedistiller
Did anyone speak up and said that they were discriminated against in a matter that this act would make illegal?
Personally I feel these are hard cases to prove and could be a burden on our court system. All someone has to say is that they require a 750 credit score to rent to someone and the gay couple had a credit score of 725.
Personally I feel these are hard cases to prove and could be a burden on our court system. All someone has to say is that they require a 750 credit score to rent to someone and the gay couple had a credit score of 725.
Posted on 7/23/14 at 10:25 pm to CubsFanBudMan
So if it doesn't pass Delgado says he is going to collect 8,500 signatures to get it on December ballot to be voted on. My question is how did he come up with the 8,500 number when the St. George petition needs 18,000?
Posted on 7/24/14 at 12:10 am to Kramer26
I don't know the rules for the metro council but if that's the figure he used, my guess is any particular councilman only has to petition his district to get something put on a city-wide ballot.
Posted on 7/24/14 at 8:00 am to Kramer26
quote:
So if it doesn't pass Delgado says he is going to collect 8,500 signatures to get it on December ballot to be voted on. My question is how did he come up with the 8,500 number when the St. George petition needs 18,000?
The SG fixture of 18K is roughly 25% of the registered voters in the SG area.
I do not know where Delgado gets his numbers or why it's not more; however, I welcome him to try. It is the American way and it gives power back to the people.
Posted on 7/24/14 at 8:06 am to Dire Wolf
quote:
So says a fact sheet put out by proponents of an ordinance, up for consideration this month, that would ban discrimination in housing, employment and public accommodations.
Oppose.
Lets start respecting private property
Posted on 7/24/14 at 8:12 am to Antonio Moss
quote:
Oppose. Lets start respecting private property
Does an individual have a right to discriminate?
In most cases I believe he does.
Posted on 7/24/14 at 8:13 am to CubsFanBudMan
quote:
Personally I feel these are hard cases to prove and could be a burden on our court system. All someone has to say is that they require a 750 credit score to rent to someone and the gay couple had a credit score of 725.
A local businessman on the Kevin Meeks show said something closely aligned with this statement. Basically he said this ordinance may open up the possibility for frivolous "discrimination" lawsuits.
Posted on 7/24/14 at 8:15 am to doubleb
quote:
Does an individual have a right to discriminate?
Does it involve the use of his property?
If yes, then he has the right to use it as he sees fit.
Posted on 7/24/14 at 8:44 am to Antonio Moss
quote:
Does it involve the use of his property? If yes, then he has the right to use it as he sees fit.
I think a person has the right to hire who they want and rent to who they want based on subjective criteria.
No you can't discriminate based on race, etc. but you can sure discriminate based on looks, behavior, and abilities, etc.
Posted on 7/24/14 at 8:45 am to Tchefuncte Tiger
You know it will.
Posted on 7/24/14 at 9:26 am to CubsFanBudMan
Just because it's hard to prove doesn't mean that people wouldn't try. All of the sudden people that are fired for completely rational reasons start filing lawsuits saying they were fired based on their sexual orientation. Defending that lawsuit, even if frivolous, still costs the business owner money. It'll probably cost $10,000 to get an easy case through trial. As an aside, in order to prove that you were discriminated against due to sexual orientation, do you first have to prove that you are in fact homosexual or heterosexual? That would lead to some interesting oral arguments.
Posted on 7/24/14 at 9:27 am to Alt26
quote:
What a waste of time. They're are already a litany of state and federal laws prohibiting discrimination. Maybe next month the council can pass an ordinance abolishing slavery, or allowing women the right to vote.
Posted on 7/24/14 at 9:30 am to Ghostfacedistiller
the main argument I've seen is that passing such a law opens the door for "sexual orientation" to be used in frivolous discrimination lawsuits where sexual orientation really played no part (unqualified, poor work ethic, ect).
The other issue is the slippery slope argument that "sexual orientation" will be expanded to include pedophilia and bestiality, creating a system where you can't bar people who have absolutely no right to be working in certain situations (like a bestiality enthusiast running an animal shelter or a pedophile teaching at an elementary school). I say the second one seems ludicrous, but you never know how judges are going to interpret some things.
The other issue is the slippery slope argument that "sexual orientation" will be expanded to include pedophilia and bestiality, creating a system where you can't bar people who have absolutely no right to be working in certain situations (like a bestiality enthusiast running an animal shelter or a pedophile teaching at an elementary school). I say the second one seems ludicrous, but you never know how judges are going to interpret some things.
Posted on 7/24/14 at 9:38 am to kingbob
What about a business who doesn't want to hire a person because of their looks, their behavior, etc?
Would that be illegal????
Would that be illegal????
Posted on 7/24/14 at 9:44 am to doubleb
quote:
What about a business who doesn't want to hire a person because of their looks, their behavior, etc?
Would that be illegal????
Is it already? Should it be?
Page 2 of 3
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News