Get HuskerMax™ on your iPhone. Click here for details. Get tickets for all home and away games here.
Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 910111213 LastLast
Results 151 to 165 of 182

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

  1. #151
    Quote Originally Posted by LutheranHusker View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by SealBeachHusker View Post
    I think we're probably not as far off as you might think. The exemption of religious organizations seems like an obvious point to me, but I understand the hesitation with small family businesses. It just seems that, for instance, a small mom and pop operation offers a unique situation, in that owners personal lives are often completely commingled with their business. So, forcing accommodation in this case would be forcing one to personally accommodate a behavior they might find in direct contradiction with their faith.
    That's a situation where an accomodation makes complete sense (to me at least), but would just be difficult to figure out how to effectively legislate.
    I agree. Besides, the pull from the hard left would be that's it's still allowing "hate" and the hard right would seek to keep expanding it. So instead, we'll have one side " winning" and one side "losing" and the polarization continues. It's so frustrating to literally see it happening, but no way to change it.

  2. #152
    Quote Originally Posted by blkshrts View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by hskrdavey View Post
    50 years ago most people thought Homosexuality was a horrible sin and not accepted...and even against the law in some places. Now it's accepted.

    Whats going to be accepted 50 years from now?

    Have we gotten "smarter" over these 50 years...or just more ignorant...
    I doubt that the victimization of a child will be accepted in 50 yrs. It has nothing to do with how smart we are as a society. We have come to the realization that homosexuality isn't evil and won't be the end of civilization.
    And, yet you have the research I provided that suggests otherwise. Not saying it's around the corner or even highly likely, but cultures that accepted it did so based on the belief that it was not victimization but simply an extension of affection. The researches that hypothesize that sexual abuse of males who grow up to identify as gay may in-fact be healthy probably don't feel like accepting that practice would end society either.

  3. #153
    Quote Originally Posted by huskernut View Post
    That's a good point, and I was thinking I would have to agree with it. So it actually made me get some facts.

    Incredibly, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which is the Federal level statute which covers most kinds of discrimination, including religious, exempts:

    1. religious entities; and
    2l businesses with fewer than 15 employees.

    I think that's hilarious because I arrived at something very similar through a torturous process of analysis and debate. But all I did was re-invent the wheel. I could have saved myself a whole lot of thinking and writing if I had just looked up the law in the first place.
    I feel kind of foolish.

    So in comparison to current law, I am 33% more progressive, by proposing a threshold ot 10 employees, instead of 15.

    So let's add sexual orientation to Title VII. I'm happy.
    That. Is. Awesome.

    "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)

  4. #154
    Quote Originally Posted by huskernut View Post
    Right? I mean, we're hilarious.

    In all honesty though, we're not bad debaters when we want to be. And I will say when we're on, y'all help me improve my thinking on a subject.
    Agreed on all counts. Including the hilarity.

    "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)

  5. #155
    Quote Originally Posted by huskernut View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cardinal View Post
    So let me see if I am understanding this.

    You otherwise rational people think it is proper to allow a religious businessman to discriminate based on sexual orientation, but a homosexual businessman may not discriminate based on religion?

    Might be time for some to go back to the drawing board, 'cause that just ain't right.
    That's a good point, and I was thinking I would have to agree with it. So it actually made me get some facts.

    Incredibly, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which is the Federal level statute which covers most kinds of discrimination, including religious, exempts:

    1. religious entities; and
    2l businesses with fewer than 15 employees.

    I think that's hilarious because I arrived at something very similar through a torturous process of analysis and debate. But all I did was re-invent the wheel. I could have saved myself a whole lot of thinking and writing if I had just looked up the law in the first place.
    I feel kind of foolish.

    So in comparison to current law, I am 33% more progressive, by proposing a threshold ot 10 employees, instead of 15.

    So let's add sexual orientation to Title VII. I'm happy.
    Whew. Well, that was a lot of unnecessary typing by a lot of us..lol.

  6. #156
    Guest

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Aurora, NE
    Posts
    1,598
    Quote Originally Posted by huskernut View Post
    That's a good point, and I was thinking I would have to agree with it. So it actually made me get some facts.

    Incredibly, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which is the Federal level statute which covers most kinds of discrimination, including religious, exempts:

    1. religious entities; and
    2l businesses with fewer than 15 employees.

    I think that's hilarious because I arrived at something very similar through a torturous process of analysis and debate. But all I did was re-invent the wheel. I could have saved myself a whole lot of thinking and writing if I had just looked up the law in the first place.
    I feel kind of foolish.

    So in comparison to current law, I am 33% more progressive, by proposing a threshold ot 10 employees, instead of 15.

    So let's add sexual orientation to Title VII. I'm happy.

    I should have probably read it closer too.....As long as it excepts small business/religious institutions I'm kosher with it too.

    (I'm not quite as bull-headed as some might think from my comments in this thread)

  7. #157
    Travel Squad
    Husker Mort's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    9,351
    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.
    Quote Originally Posted by hskrdavey View Post
    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.
    Quote Originally Posted by hskrdavey View Post
    I should have probably read it closer too.....As long as it excepts small business/religious institutions I'm kosher with it too.

    (I'm not quite as bull-headed as some might think from my comments in this thread)
    “If it is not right do not do it; if it is not true do not say it.” Marcus Aurelius

  8. #158
    Quote Originally Posted by LutheranHusker View Post
    That's a situation where an accomodation makes complete sense (to me at least), but would just be difficult to figure out how to effectively legislate.
    I disagree. On the train ride in this morning, I had a completely independent idea that we could just exempt employers with fewer than a certain number of employees, say hypothetically 15. I think I am going to call my legislator this morning with my idea.

    By the way, I haven't had the opportunity to read the last 12 hours of posts in this thread, but I am sure there was nothing important in there.

    "The distinctive mark of the Christian, today more than ever, must be love for the poor, the weak, the suffering." Pope John Paul II


  9. #159
    God of Huskermax

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Overland Park, KS
    Posts
    58,799
    Quote Originally Posted by ChitownHusker View Post
    I disagree. On the train ride in this morning, I had a completely independent idea that we could just exempt employers with fewer than a certain number of employees, say hypothetically 15. I think I am going to call my legislator this morning with my idea.

    By the way, I haven't had the opportunity to read the last 12 hours of posts in this thread, but I am sure there was nothing important in there.

    Dumbest idea I've ever heard. No way this ever becomes law. IT'S COMMON DAMN SENSE! Fair tax.

  10. #160
    Husker Fan

    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Posts
    40,855
    guys if you're gonna mock me, at least mock me correctly.

    it's DAMN COMMON SENSE.

  11. #161
    Quote Originally Posted by Huskers57 View Post
    guys if you're gonna mock me, at least mock me correctly.

    it's DAMN COMMON SENSE.
    agree to disagree
    "The distinctive mark of the Christian, today more than ever, must be love for the poor, the weak, the suffering." Pope John Paul II


  12. #162
    Guest

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    947
    Enough, Ron Brown has his priorities and Nebraska Football is about third. He wants to be fired for his homosexual beliefs and will keep this issue in the forefront.
    TO, give him what he wants and lets move on, this issue has no purpose in Nebraska Football. Ron can have his own Church platform to preach from!

  13. #163
    Husker Fan

    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Posts
    40,855
    Quote Originally Posted by Howlin Wolf View Post
    Enough, Ron Brown has his priorities and Nebraska Football is about third. He wants to be fired for his homosexual beliefs and will keep this issue in the forefront.
    TO, give him what he wants and lets move on, this issue has no purpose in Nebraska Football. Ron can have his own Church platform to preach from!
    I agree that this is what Brown wants to accomplish. sad.

  14. #164
    Quote Originally Posted by Huskers57 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howlin Wolf View Post
    Enough, Ron Brown has his priorities and Nebraska Football is about third. He wants to be fired for his homosexual beliefs and will keep this issue in the forefront.
    TO, give him what he wants and lets move on, this issue has no purpose in Nebraska Football. Ron can have his own Church platform to preach from!
    I agree that this is what Brown wants to accomplish. sad.
    You're both nuts.

  15. #165
    Husker Fan

    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Posts
    40,855
    brown ain't testifying before the lincoln council this time around....

    http://huskerextra.com/sports/husker...3aee4ef37.html







Posting Permissions

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