Religion and Ethics Forum
General Category => Politics & Current Affairs => Topic started by: Outrider on June 16, 2020, 08:43:09 AM
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-53055632 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-53055632)
I can honestly say I didn't see this one going that way, particularly not Kavanaugh's stance. A win for decency is a surprise, a 6-3 split is remarkable. The potential fall-out from this is considerable, especially given that it falls back on legislation that's been on the books for some time.
O.
-
Yes it is very heartening.
-
Very good news indeed. :)
-
Yep, ir's excellent news. I posted the link on the trans rights thread last night.
-
Yep, ir's excellent news. I posted the link on the trans rights thread last night.
Good news but rather shocking that in 2020 there could be any suggestion that someone could be discriminated in employment for being gay or transgender.
-
Good news but rather shocking that in 2020 there could be any suggestion that someone could be discriminated in employment for being gay or transgender.
I agree.
-
Good news but rather shocking that in 2020 there could be any suggestion that someone could be discriminated in employment for being gay or transgender.
Indeed, but as Outrider notes the 6-3 is a surprise and may mean that the attempts by the Republicans to pack the court have been way less successful than might have been thought.
What I've seen of the majority verdict by Gorsuch is very good.
-
Good news but rather shocking that in 2020 there could be any suggestion that someone could be discriminated in employment for being gay or transgender.
I agree.
So do I.
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-53055632 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-53055632)
I can honestly say I didn't see this one going that way, particularly not Kavanaugh's stance. A win for decency is a surprise, a 6-3 split is remarkable. The potential fall-out from this is considerable, especially given that it falls back on legislation that's been on the books for some time.
O.
Kavanaugh dissented. He's part of the three
-
Kavanaugh dissented. He's part of the three
Apologies, I meant Gorsuch, of course - probably an indication that I don't spend enough time differentiating between the more conservative justices!
O.
-
Apologies, I meant Gorsuch, of course - probably an indication that I don't spend enough time differentiating between the more conservative justices!
O.
I think Gorsuch would look on this as a individual civil liberties question. He leans more to that than the more corporate conservatism of the dissenters. There is a lot of moaning from some on the more right wing wing of the gender critical that this redefines sex but it seems to me Gorsuch has made it clear that it precisely does not do that.
-
Franklin Graham self combusts
https://www.rawstory.com/2020/06/franklin-graham-fumes-over-scotus-ruling-my-rights-to-fire-lgbtq-people-are-the-freedoms-our-nation-was-founded-on/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
-
I did not realise that people could be fired in the US for being gay. Good decision by SCOTUS. It just goes to show how laws/ text/ rules can lead to widely different interpretations depending on how someone interprets the legal text and the context the words apply to.
-
Franklin Graham self combusts
https://www.rawstory.com/2020/06/franklin-graham-fumes-over-scotus-ruling-my-rights-to-fire-lgbtq-people-are-the-freedoms-our-nation-was-founded-on/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
That man is an nasty sewer rat. >:( >:( >:(
-
I did not realise that people could be fired in the US for being gay. Good decision by SCOTUS. It just goes to show how laws/ text/ rules can lead to widely different interpretations depending on how someone interprets the legal text and the context the words apply to.
I didn't know that too. I imagine there are places that won't hire someone they know is gay without giving that as a reason but not firing. I on't understand the reasoning, how is someone's sexuality impact their work ability.
Good result.
-
I didn't know that too. I imagine there are places that won't hire someone they know is gay without giving that as a reason but not firing. I on't understand the reasoning, how is someone's sexuality impact their work ability.
Good result.
This decision, as I understand it, would extend to recruitment, given that it's a work activity (from a pragmatic point of view, though, it's often difficult to establish why you weren't successful in a particular job application).
Unfortunately, this prohibition on discrimination doesn't extend to other areas of life, so it's still entirely possible to be turned down by landlords when seeking to rent accommodation, by adoption agencies, by private venues or sporting clubs...
O.