Get HuskerMax™ on your iPhone. Click here for details. Get tickets for all home and away games here.
Page 6 of 10 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 120 of 182

Thread: Ron Brown issue/discussion wonderfully articulated...

  1. #101
    Quote Originally Posted by hskrdavey View Post
    I Do Not think it should be a law. I think the At-Will doctrine needs protected. I agree 100% with current Title VII...all of it. I don't think sexual ORIENTATION should be included. If that means it's LEGALLY acceptable...then so be it. Do I think it's ACCEPTABLE...No. I don't think it's FAIR either. People get fired for less than being Gay all the time. Is that FAIR? NO. But life isn't always fair. People get fired for NO REASON at all. Again. I think the At-Will Doctrine needs to be protected.

    Great. When the company you work for gets taken over by homosexual investment bankers from New York, you'll understand when they can you for being a hetrosexual.

  2. #102
    Quote Originally Posted by hskrdavey View Post
    I Do Not think it should be a law. I think the At-Will doctrine needs protected. I agree 100% with current Title VII...all of it. I don't think sexual ORIENTATION should be included. If that means it's LEGALLY acceptable...then so be it. Do I think it's ACCEPTABLE...No. I don't think it's FAIR either. People get fired for less than being Gay all the time. Is that FAIR? NO. But life isn't always fair. People get fired for NO REASON at all. Again. I think the At-Will Doctrine needs to be protected.
    The at-will doctrine is alive and well, and functioning in my workplace this very week. Unfortunately. As much as I hate what happened to coworkers, I agree with the doctrine and support it. I completely understand that employers should have wide latitude in making hiring and firing decisions, and they do. Many states and municipalities include sexual orientation as a protected class, and the viability of at-will employment has chugged right along in each of those jurisdictions.

    Adding sexual orientation as a protected class is not going to open the floodgates to the addition of other protected classes. It meets the criteria I set forth in this thread: historical systemic discrimination, which lacks any rational, secular basis. There are no other unprotected classes out there that meet those criteria, except possibly for Nebraska fans working in Texas.
    "The distinctive mark of the Christian, today more than ever, must be love for the poor, the weak, the suffering." Pope John Paul II


  3. #103
    Guest

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Aurora, NE
    Posts
    1,598
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPhoenix View Post
    ..
    Attached Images Attached Images

  4. #104
    Guest

    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    19,545
    Quote Originally Posted by hskrdavey View Post
    I Do Not think it should be a law. I think the At-Will doctrine needs protected. I agree 100% with current Title VII...all of it. I don't think sexual ORIENTATION should be included. If that means it's LEGALLY acceptable...then so be it. Do I think it's ACCEPTABLE...No. I don't think it's FAIR either. People get fired for less than being Gay all the time. Is that FAIR? NO. But life isn't always fair. People get fired for NO REASON at all. Again. I think the At-Will Doctrine needs to be protected.
    I wonder if you would feel differently if your gay son or daughter got fired for their sexual preference. At the end of the day, you're not coming anywhere close to making cogent or consistent points and probably want to bow out at some point soon.

  5. #105
    All Legend
    huskernut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Louisville, CO
    Posts
    16,675
    I wish more Christians would view Christ's teachings as being inclusive of all people who simply are the way they are, more or less.

    Still, I understand that many Christians feel homosexual acts are proscribed by the bible. I agree with Stryker that, "It's a huge leap of logic to say that because someone oppose a certain public policy proposal, he hates the people who support that proposal,"

    But where I find many Christians who are against homosexuality ultimately fail is not in simply deciding that what they believe is a sin doesn't have to be outlawed or discriminated against by the rest of society. They are free to have the standards they have, and to prosyletize to others to share their beliefs and adopt their standards, but there's nothing to say society generally or the government has to adopt those and impose them on everyone.
    "It just shows that we're changing the program," Petteway said. "Coach Miles and the guys we have on our staff and our players, we're changing the culture of Nebraska basketball, and this is just the beginning for us." - HuskerOnline.com 2-16-2014

  6. #106
    Guest

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Papillion, NE
    Posts
    3,743
    Quote Originally Posted by huskernut View Post
    They are free to have the standards they have, and to prosyletize to others to share their beliefs and adopt their standards...
    Unless you're a football coach at NU.

  7. #107
    Guest

    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    19,545
    Quote Originally Posted by ChitownHusker View Post
    The at-will doctrine is alive and well, and functioning in my workplace this very week. Unfortunately. As much as I hate what happened to coworkers, I agree with the doctrine and support it. I completely understand that employers should have wide latitude in making hiring and firing decisions, and they do. Many states and municipalities include sexual orientation as a protected class, and the viability of at-will employment has chugged right along in each of those jurisdictions.

    Adding sexual orientation as a protected class is not going to open the floodgates to the addition of other protected classes. It meets the criteria I set forth in this thread: historical systemic discrimination, which lacks any rational, secular basis. There are no other unprotected classes out there that meet those criteria, except possibly for Nebraska fans working in Texas.
    Curse you and your logical...logic. Oh and curse the Longhorns while we're at it.

  8. #108
    All Legend

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    16,030
    Quote Originally Posted by hskrdavey View Post
    Nope Sorry RP. Guess it was more of a gut reaction since most Left Wingers immediately move to the "Your a Homophobe" or "Your just scared of homosexuals...??" when you disagree with them on this subject... Typically that's how it works. So thought I'd beat them to the punch... (and I noticed I just made the post in time....(CM's "What do you fear when it come to homosexuals>....)
    I asked that question because you are afraid of what may happen if homosexual activity is seen as acceptable.

    You made the statement, and questioning your reasoning is completely justified.

    So, feel free to answer: What are you afraid will happen if we don't discriminate against homosexuals?
    "We need education in the obvious more than investigation of the obscure."

    "If you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect."

    “A stupid man's report of what a clever man says can never be accurate, because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand.”

  9. #109
    All Legend

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    16,030
    Quote Originally Posted by hskrdavey View Post
    I Do Not think it should be a law. I think the At-Will doctrine needs protected. I agree 100% with current Title VII...all of it. I don't think sexual ORIENTATION should be included. If that means it's LEGALLY acceptable...then so be it. Do I think it's ACCEPTABLE...No. I don't think it's FAIR either. People get fired for less than being Gay all the time. Is that FAIR? NO. But life isn't always fair. People get fired for NO REASON at all. Again. I think the At-Will Doctrine needs to be protected.
    This right here implies that there is something wrong with being gay. And I'm just not understanding that position.
    "We need education in the obvious more than investigation of the obscure."

    "If you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect."

    “A stupid man's report of what a clever man says can never be accurate, because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand.”

  10. #110
    Guest

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Aurora, NE
    Posts
    1,598


    http://www.jeffjacoby.com/5637/shoul...homosexuals-be

    ....... It is not the role of government to criminalize everything that some people, or even a lot of people, don't like. As important a virtue as nondiscrimination is, the preservation of individual freedom is more important. Liberals tend to favor freedom only when it comes to behavior they don't object to. But a true commitment to liberty means allowing individuals to do as they like even when you do object -- so long as they don't commit coercion or fraud against others.
    But look here, says the gay-rights lobby. If Jones discriminates against Smith for no better reason than Smith's homosexuality -- by not giving him a job, let's say -- Smith will be hurt. That's not fair.
    No, it isn't fair, and (assuming sexual orientation has no relevance to the job) Jones' behavior is indefensible. But Smith has not been cheated. That job was Jones's to give or withhold, and he withheld it. For a stupid reason? Perhaps. But part of being free is being free to be stupid. If Jones doesn't want to hire Smith because he's gay -- or because he has freckles, or likes heavy metal, or smokes -- that is his right. We don't curtail freedom of speech because someone might express foolish opinions. Nor should we curtail an employer's freedom to hire whomever he chooses (or a landlord's to rent to whomever he chooses) because he might base his choice on foolishness or prejudice.
    The great exception to that principle is the civil rights laws. We made it illegal to discriminate on the basis of race, gender, color, ethnic origin, and religion because there was a broad national consensus that it was necessary to do so. The 1964 Civil Rights Act was passed with bipartisan majorities in Congress, and only after most Americans had concluded that racial/ethnic discrimination was so harmful to the nation's well-being that it had to be stopped, and so entrenched in the culture that it would take a law to stop it.
    Homosexuality isn't in that category. There is clearly no consensus that gays need special legal protections. I doubt whether most Americans believe that antigay discrimination -- while real - is that huge a problem, either for the nation or for most gays. Bigotry there is, but oppression -- quotas to keep gays out of colleges, restaurants refusing to serve them, ghettoes they are forced to live in, redlining that cuts them off from credit -- there isn't.
    The discrimination faced by gays should not be minimized. But it is not analogous to the deep-rooted persecution of other minorities that made the Civil Rights Act necessary. Antigay discrimination should be opposed because it is wrong. But just because something is wrong does not mean it should be illegal.

  11. #111
    All Legend

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    16,030
    I only have to read the first sentence to know that the author isn't really "dialed in" to the debate. No one has proposed "criminalizing" homosexual discrimination in the workplace.

    Beyond that, the entire section could have been written in 1950 in opposition to civil rights. I realize he tries to distance himself from that conclusion, but I don't think he's at all accurate in saying that there was a "broad national consensus that it was necessary." (the votes were 290-130 and 71-29... with Republicans actually leading the way in passing the bill) There were lengthy debates and filibusters and amendments. Even today people argue that was improper legislation, even if was done with good intentions.

    It's interesting that he minimizes prejudice against gays by listing the things that were done to blacks, and then says "discrimination faced by gays should not be minimized," though.

    One last thing, I do think society, through the apparatus of lawmaking, sends important messages about the culture and conduct that our country stands for. And right now, most communities are pressing for bans on anti-gay discrimination. That is a good thing.
    "We need education in the obvious more than investigation of the obscure."

    "If you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect."

    “A stupid man's report of what a clever man says can never be accurate, because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand.”

  12. #112
    Guest

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Aurora, NE
    Posts
    1,598
    Quote Originally Posted by cm husker View Post
    This right here implies that there is something wrong with being gay. And I'm just not understanding that position.
    Are you asking if I think being gay is wrong? My personal conviction is yes. I have that right to an opinion whether you are offended of it or not. If my son becomes gay, I would express how I think it's wrong and my opinion of it but I would certainly still love him as I always have and accept it...I also think Adultery is wrong. Does it happen all around me all the time...Yep..Doesn't mean I'm Adultery-phobic or think it has to be discriminated against. Just don't believe it should be in the category of "Civil Rights". I think the article above articulates that well.

  13. #113
    All Legend

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    16,030
    Quote Originally Posted by hskrdavey View Post
    So what if it does? Do I think being gay is wrong? My personal conviction is yes. I have that right to an opinion whether you are offended of it or not. I also think Adultery is wrong. Does it happen all around me all the time...Yep..Doesn't mean I'm Adultery-phobic or think it has to be discriminated against. Just don't believe it should be in the category of "Civil Rights". I think the article above articulates that well.
    I understand it is your personal opinion. I asked you to justify it. Asking for reasoning to support a position isn't a personal attack or a display of intolerance toward that opinion.
    "We need education in the obvious more than investigation of the obscure."

    "If you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect."

    “A stupid man's report of what a clever man says can never be accurate, because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand.”

  14. #114
    That's just the way it is...some things will never change...that's just the way it is...ah, but don't you believe them...

    "Always be ready to make your defense to anyone who demands from you an accounting for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and reverence." 1 Peter 3:15-16 (NRSV)

  15. #115
    Guest

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Aurora, NE
    Posts
    1,598
    Quote Originally Posted by cm husker View Post
    I understand it is your personal opinion. I asked you to justify it. Asking for reasoning to support a position isn't a personal attack or a display of intolerance toward that opinion.
    No Problem here.

  16. #116
    All Legend
    huskernut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Louisville, CO
    Posts
    16,675
    Quote Originally Posted by OmaHusker View Post
    Unless you're a football coach at NU.
    Strictly speaking, Brown was seeking more than to proyletize when he spoke before the city council. He was asking them to keep it legal to discriminate. But you do have a point to the degree that some want him gone for simply speaking out that he thinks homosexuality is a sin. I think employers are free to hire and fire who they want based on their beliefs, particularly when they are public about it, so UNL may eventually fire him only for speaking publicly against homosexuality. But they haven't so far. And he' been doing it a while now.
    "It just shows that we're changing the program," Petteway said. "Coach Miles and the guys we have on our staff and our players, we're changing the culture of Nebraska basketball, and this is just the beginning for us." - HuskerOnline.com 2-16-2014

  17. #117
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPhoenix View Post
    So it's ok for 80% of America to discriminate based solely on the fact they are Christian. And you don't think that is "wholesale" discrimination?
    Well, I specifically related this to employment in a religious organization or small family business, so I doubt it applies to anything remotely "wholesale". I was trying to say, that outside of those two instances off the top of my head...I am not supportive of simple wholesale discrimination. I think there's a need to balance the rights of of both homosexuals and religious practice.

  18. #118
    Red Shirt
    Redrobin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Des Moines (BigRed-born)
    Posts
    1,349
    Prior to 1857-ish -- homosexuality bad, outlawed by the government; slavery is just fine and upheld by the government; genocide (Native Americans), a little gray, but what the hey, it kind of fixes some problems. Thank God for social evolution.
    “It was almost like being the president.” - Jack Hoffman, in the White House.

  19. #119
    God of Huskermax

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Overland Park, KS
    Posts
    58,841
    Quote Originally Posted by SealBeachHusker View Post
    Well, I specifically related this to employment in a religious organization or small family business, so I doubt it applies to anything remotely "wholesale". I was trying to say, that outside of those two instances off the top of my head...I am not supportive of simple wholesale discrimination. I think there's a need to balance the rights of of both homosexuals and religious practice.
    Whats the percentage of small businesses in this country?

  20. #120
    Quote Originally Posted by Redrobin View Post
    Prior to 1857-ish -- homosexuality bad, outlawed by the government; slavery is just fine and upheld by the government; genocide (Native Americans), a little gray, but what the hey, it kind of fixes some problems. Thank God for social evolution.
    Yes, because a Catholic adoption agency not wanting to place children in homosexual couple's homes (while also offering a reference to an alternative adoption agency) is akin to slavery.

    Somewhere between gays are evil, and Christians are hatemongers, is a middle ground that both sides seem unwilling to look at. Sad.


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •