- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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: Supreme Court - "Sex discrimination" includes gay and transgender discrimination
Posted on 6/15/20 at 10:46 am to uway
Posted on 6/15/20 at 10:46 am to uway
quote:
Can a business refuse to hire a person with diagnosed schizophrenia?
Nope. That’s a big no-no. You have to provide reasonable accommodations.
Link
Learn the law, you sound like a dumbass. A quick google search answers this for you.
0
Posted on 6/15/20 at 10:47 am to FalseProphet
quote:
Supreme Court - "Sex discrimination" includes gay and transgender discrimination
This is misleading. It's Title VII that they're addressing, which also includes race, color, nationality, religion, pregnancy, age (only over 40), and disabilities. I think it's fair to put sexuality in with it.
But now the gay lobby has nothing to bitch about anymore. They are complete equals in the eyes of the law. So they need to shut the frick up now.
This post was edited on 6/15/20 at 10:52 am
Posted on 6/15/20 at 10:48 am to uway
quote:
Can a business refuse to hire a person with diagnosed schizophrenia?
Can a business refuse to hire a person with gender dysphoria?
Answer those two questions for me, please.
According to EEOC.gov:
"No. It is illegal for an employer to discriminate against you simply because you have a mental health condition. This includes firing you, rejecting you for a job or promotion, or forcing you to take leave.
An employer doesn't have to hire or keep people in jobs they can't perform, or employ people who pose a "direct threat" to safety (a significant risk of substantial harm to self or others). But an employer cannot rely on myths or stereotypes about your mental health condition when deciding whether you can perform a job or whether you pose a safety risk. Before an employer can reject you for a job based on your condition, it must have objective evidence that you can't perform your job duties, or that you would create a significant safety risk, even with a reasonable accommodation (see Question 3)."
Posted on 6/15/20 at 10:49 am to Taxing Authority
quote:
There’s no law that prevents one from being fired for being a white male heterosexual. Nothing. Not part of any protected class.
What are you talking about? Male is a gender, and gender is a protected class. White is a race. Race is a protected class. Heterosexual is a sexual orientation, and sexual orientation is also a protected class now. So, yes, if you were fired for being a straight white male, that would be a violation of your civil rights.
This post was edited on 6/15/20 at 10:50 am
Posted on 6/15/20 at 10:49 am to BRbornandraised
quote:
According to EEOC.gov: "No. It is illegal for an employer to discriminate against you simply because you have a mental health condition. This includes firing you, rejecting you for a job or promotion, or forcing you to take leave. An employer doesn't have to hire or keep people in jobs they can't perform, or employ people who pose a "direct threat" to safety (a significant risk of substantial harm to self or others). But an employer cannot rely on myths or stereotypes about your mental health condition when deciding whether you can perform a job or whether you pose a safety risk. Before an employer can reject you for a job based on your condition, it must have objective evidence that you can't perform your job duties, or that you would create a significant safety risk, even with a reasonable accommodation (see Question 3)."
Yep, I linked it. Uway is a fricking idiot though and will ignore it.
Posted on 6/15/20 at 10:50 am to uway
quote:
Can a business refuse to hire a person with diagnosed schizophrenia?
Can a business refuse to hire a person with gender dysphoria?
It's reasonable accommodations. Like for instance it would be illegal not to hire someone in a wheelchair just because he doesn't want to install a wheelchair ramp. It is not illegal to not hire someone in a wheelchair who can't do the physical requirements of the job like say in construction. I don't see why sexuality would ever come into play for reasonable accommodations
Posted on 6/15/20 at 10:50 am to lsufball19
quote:
What are you talking about? Male is a gender, and gender is a protected class. White is a race. Race is a protected class. Heterosexual is a sexual orientation, and sexual orientation is also a protected class now. So, yes, if you were fired for being a straight white male, that would be a violation of your civil rights
The fact he thought that was some “gotcha” is laughable. It was one of the dumbest things I’ve seen posted on this board.
Posted on 6/15/20 at 10:50 am to MMauler
quote:
There is NO F*CKING WAY that this opinion as written can only be relegated to employment. Gorsuch is a f*cking moron.
Gorsuch deserves every bit of derision that is thrown his way, but even if he voted with Alito, this still would have been the outcome (5-4).
Posted on 6/15/20 at 10:50 am to uway
quote:
Are you equating being black to being insane?
Well....
Posted on 6/15/20 at 10:51 am to Muleriderhog
quote:
Yep, I linked it. Uway is a fricking idiot though and will ignore it.
Thanks for the link and for answering the two questions.
I'll not respond to your personal attack, in the interest of making the world a better place.
Posted on 6/15/20 at 10:53 am to OMLandshark
quote:
I think it's fair to put sexuality in with it.
That's not the court's job.
Posted on 6/15/20 at 10:53 am to OMLandshark
quote:If you want "sexuality" added, the right way is to have your representatives in Congress and the President amend the law. The wrong way is to amend the law by judicial decree.
This is misleading. It's Title VII that they're addressing, which also includes race, color, nationality, religion, pregnancy, age (only over 40), and disabilities. I think it's fair to put sexuality in with it.
Posted on 6/15/20 at 10:54 am to Muleriderhog
quote:
The fact he thought that was some “gotcha” is laughable. It was one of the dumbest things I’ve seen posted on this board.
Yeah, it was pretty bad. I guess he forgot about the straight white male who sued Hooters for discrimination and got paid a lot of money, which is also why you see male waiters at Hooters now.
Posted on 6/15/20 at 10:55 am to OMLandshark
quote:
think it's fair to put sexuality in with it.
Then amend title vii
This creates law out of thin air.
Posted on 6/15/20 at 10:56 am to FalseProphet
Law is the law. The statute was written to be interpreted broadly.
Posted on 6/15/20 at 10:58 am to Parmen
quote:
The statute was written to be interpreted broadly.
Link?
Posted on 6/15/20 at 11:01 am to Parmen
quote:
Law is the law. The statute was written to be interpreted broadly.
Those two statements are completely at odds with each other, and the second one is demonstrably false.
Posted on 6/15/20 at 11:02 am to Turbeauxdog
quote:
Then amend title vii
This creates law out of thin air.
These people either failed civics or they just don't give a shite about the separation of powers as long as they like the outcome.
Posted on 6/15/20 at 11:04 am to Turbeauxdog
quote:
Then amend title vii
This creates law out of thin air.
I really don’t see the argument on why race and sex are protected classes but sexuality isn’t. I’m a libertarian to where I’d revoke Title VII if I had my way and then go shop at other places that weren’t being racist or sexist. But so long we’re playing this game, I think this is a natural extension of what Title VII initially had in mind. I find sexuality to be more plausible under Title VII than pregnancy and certainly over 40.
Posted on 6/15/20 at 11:04 am to lsufball19
quote:
male waiters at Hooters
Page 11 of 16
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News