Homosexuality is not a civil right

[Publisher]

In the 80’s I worked at an electronics company in the SF Bay Area. I was a member of the “Christian group” that met at lunch and breaks to pray and read scripture…I was a bit more conservative in those days.

One of the supervisors had big issues with a gay man who worked for him. The young man was a bit “flamboyant” but he did great work, he was accurate, timely, never missed work…he had a great work ethic. We had a company Xmas party and he brought his “significant other”…the tickets were bought and paid for by the young man and there was no restriction on who each could bring.

This supervisor wanted so badly to fire the “Sodomite” he was willing to compromise his principles on honesty. He foolishly mentioned in passing to me several times he wanted this young man OUT!!! He was willing to do anything to not allow this perversion to go unchallenged. When the young man brought his significant other, the supervisor went a bit overboard and trumped up reasons to fire they gay man.

I was one of the supervisors friends, I knew what he intended to do and I tried to talk him out of it…I failed. We never spoke again after the supervisor was fired.

Well it was time to stand up for the truth of keep my mouth shut and let a young man be treated badly simply because he was gay…after testimony and investigation, the supervisor was fired and the young man kept his job and eventually was promoted.

That was the end of my friendship because I dared speak up…I think that was my first step to becoming the “Godless-bleeding heart heretic liberal” I am today…thank God!!!

I would support such legislation without hesitation to write into law antidiscrimination policy against “perceived” orientation.

 

[estesbob]

I
I would support such legislation without hesitation to write into law antidiscrimination policy against “perceived” orientation.

So sexual behavior should be considered equivalent to race?

It is bad to make laws based on ancedotal evidence. Just because your supervisor was a jerk does not mean the rest of us have to be subjected to still more restrictions on how we run our Business.

 

[verdigirl]

So sexual behavior should be considered equivalent to race?

It is bad to make laws based on ancedotal evidence. Just becuase your supervisor was a jerk does not mean the rest of us have to be subjected to still more restrictions on how we run our Business.

No, of course not. But enough accumulated anectodes add up to solid data.

Let’s look at this another way. Let’s talk about ADA laws.

Let’s say that a person has become a paraplegic because he chose to drink and drive.

Does that mean that he is not entitled to equal access and protection under the law?

How about someone who goes blind as a result of self-inflicted syphillis. Are they not entitled to equal protection under the law?

You have already said that you have been objective enough to hire, fire and promote homosexuals. So why would this proposed legislation affect you personally if you already do things fairly?

 

[estesbob]

No, of course not. But enough accumulated anectodes add up to solid data.

Let’s look at this another way. Let’s talk about ADA laws.

Let’s say that a person has become a paraplegic because he chose to drink and drive.

Does that mean that he is not entitled to equal access and protection under the law?

How about someone who goes blind as a result of self-inflicted syphillis. Are they not entitled to equal protection under the law?

You have already said that you have been objective enough to hire, fire and promote homosexuals.** So why would this proposed legislation affect you personally if you already do things fairly**?

So if you have nothing to hide why shouldnt the police be allowed to search your house anytime they want?

I firmly believe that sexual behavior, immoral or otherwise, should NOT be given th same protected status as race, gender or country of national origin. PERIOD

In addition I dont think it is yours or anyones elses business what procedures i use to hire and fire employees. If you start your own busness you can institute any policies you want but please dont presume to tell me how to run mine

 

[Bennie_P]

In the 80’s I worked at an electronics company in the SF Bay Area. I was a member of the “Christian group” that met at lunch and breaks to pray and read scripture…I was a bit more conservative in those days.

One of the supervisors had big issues with a gay man who worked for him. The young man was a bit “flamboyant” but he did great work, he was accurate, timely, never missed work…he had a great work ethic. We had a company Xmas party and he brought his “significant other”…the tickets were bought and paid for by the young man and there was no restriction on who each could bring.

This supervisor wanted so badly to fire the “Sodomite” he was willing to compromise his principles on honesty. He foolishly mentioned in passing to me several times he wanted this young man OUT!!! He was willing to do anything to not allow this perversion to go unchallenged. When the young man brought his significant other, the supervisor went a bit overboard and trumped up reasons to fire they gay man.

I was one of the supervisors friends, I knew what he intended to do and I tried to talk him out of it…I failed. We never spoke again after the supervisor was fired.

Well it was time to stand up for the truth of keep my mouth shut and let a young man be treated badly simply because he was gay…after testimony and investigation, the supervisor was fired and the young man kept his job and eventually was promoted.

That was the end of my friendship because I dared speak up…I think that was my first step to becoming the “Godless-bleeding heart heretic liberal” I am today…thank God!!!

I would support such legislation without hesitation to write into law antidiscrimination policy against “perceived” orientation.

Your story is proof such legislation isn’t needed because you were willing to stand up for honesty. Despite what liberals think, many that are opposed to the homosexual lifestyle, would do the same as you did, under most intstances, were sexual orientation would not have or should not have a bearing on a person’s ability to do the work hired to do., But there are instances where a open ‘gay’ lifestyle would and no one should be forced by law to keep someone whose lifestyle contradicts or compromises an organization. Homosexuality behavior is a choice, with certain choices your options become limited.

 

[Publisher]

So sexual behavior should be considered equivalent to race?

It is bad to make laws based on ancedotal evidence. Just because your supervisor was a jerk does not mean the rest of us have to be subjected to still more restrictions on how we run our Business.

Yet we would “fire” someone just becasue we “perceived” their sexual orientation to be something we found religiously distateful…running a business is the public sector DOES NOT give anyone the right to discriminate or to “trump up allegations” against someone who has done them no harm other than the employer is willing to conduct their own “witch hunt”…laws should protect people from such individuals…the so called “righteous” should keep their noses out of other peoples business…and if it takes a law to prevent innocent people from being fired just becasue someone gets their panties in a wad over who they “think” someone is…so much the better.

 

[estesbob]

Yet we would “fire” someone just becasue we “perceived” their sexual orientation to be something we found religiously distateful…running a business is the public sector DOES NOT give anyone the right to discriminate or to “trump up allegations” against someone who has done them no harm other than the employer is willing to conduct their own “witch hunt”…laws should protect people from such individuals…the so called “righteous” should keep their noses out of other peoples business…and if it takes a law to prevent innocent people from being fired just becasue someone gets their panties in a wad over who they “think” someone is…so much the better.

I absolutely agree-keep your nose out of my business. And dont try and pass laws telling me how to run my business. If you think you can do it better start your own.

 

[estesbob]

Your story is proof such legislation isn’t needed because you were willing to stand up for honesty. Despite what liberals think, many that are opposed to the homosexual lifestyle, would do the same as you did, under most intstances, were sexual orientation would not have or should not have a bearing on a person’s ability to do the work hired to do., But there are instances where a open ‘gay’ lifestyle would and no one should be forced by law to keep someone whose lifestyle contradicts or compromises an organization. Homosexuality behavior is a choice, with certain choices your options become limited.

Agreed-its another case of them wanting to pass that dont effect them but make them feel good about themselves.

 

[Publisher]

I absolutely agree-keep your nose out of my business. And dont try and pass laws telling me how to run my business. If you think you can do it better start your own.

Thankfully, it will be up to the voters…and not up to us as individuals…but I will continue to work for equal rights under the law…and if your business in the public sector discriminates, I will continue to work toward laws that prevent discrimination…no matter what church they belong to.

 

[goofyjim]

Thankfully, it will be up to the voters…and not up to us as individuals…but I will continue to work for equal rights under the law…and if your business in the public sector discriminates, I will continue to work toward laws that prevent discrimination…no matter what church they belong to.

I will give the church and faith based organizations an exemption, but vote to have the law passed for secular companies.

 

[NewUlm1976_2000]

I will give the church and faith based organizations an exemption, but vote to have the law passed for secular companies.

And encourage church and faith based organizations to voluntary not discriminate.

 

[verdigirl]

And encourage church and faith based organizations to voluntary not discriminate.

 

[pathia]

. Homosexuality behavior is a choice, with certain choices your options become limited.

We protect choices, this is not new.

We protect freedom of religion. Religion is a choice. Maybe we should cut that little bit out of the constitution as well if we’re not going to protect ‘choices’ anymore.

 

[Bennie_P]

We protect choices, this is not new.

We protect freedom of religion. Religion is a choice. Maybe we should cut that little bit out of the constitution as well if we’re not going to protect ‘choices’ anymore.

But the freedom of religion comes with limitations also, if you haven’t noticed. What all this so-called “gay” rights movement is all about is to cut into the heart of the Church and silence the free expression of religion and determine thier own morality based on lust. It is Judea-Christian morality that practitioners of homosexuality, abortion, and other illicit behavior want to silence. It is hatred of God, common sense and life itself - the Culture of Death.

Today in the West, a new and aggressive homosexualism is making its bid for power. The media, psychiatry, science and academia have all been corrupted and pressed into the service of establishing homosexuality as a normal and acceptable variant of human sexuality. Those who are unwilling to bend to the new dispensation are bludgeoned into submission with slanderous accusations of intolerance and “homophobia.” Our efforts will certainly fail to corroborate the politically correct propaganda offered by much of today’s media, academia, psychiatry, various federal agencies, the courts and human rights organizations which are now driven by the new sexual ideology rather than by honest debate and inquiry. Read More

Read The Pink Swastika… as HTML as PDF
Download The Pink Swastika… as HTML as PDF

 

[verdigirl]

But the freedom of religion comes with limitations also, if you haven’t noticed. What all this so-called “gay” rights movement is all about is to cut into the heart of the Church and silence the free expression of religion and determine thier own morality based on lust.

Prove it.

How does homosexuality infringe my rights to practice as a Roman Catholic?

 

[Bennie_P]

Prove it.

How does homosexuality infringe my rights to practice as a Roman Catholic?

The ‘gay"rights movement’s aims are to silence the Church on the issue of morality, marraige and the family. If you are unable to see that, then there is no way I can prove it to you, for I don’t understand what you require for proof… Either you accept the teachings of the Church, or you accept the teachings of “gay” rights’ activists, if you have accepted the teachings of the “gay” right activists as being true then your right to practice Catholicism has already been infringed upon and in fact made meaningless. IMHO

http://www.conservapedia.com/Time_Magazine

Time Magazine

reported the following: “In San Francisco gay activists smeared handprints in paint and hung posters depicting sex acts in the Cathedral of St. Mary of the Assumption and the archdiocese chancery.”

One infamous incident was the assault on New York’s famed St. Patrick’s Cathedral on December 10, 1989. While Cardinal John O’Connor presided over the 10:15 Sunday morning Mass, a multitude of “pro-choice” and “gay rights” activists protested angrily outside. Some, wearing gold-colored robes similar to clerical vestments, hoisted a large portrait of a pornographically altered frontal nude portrait of Jesus.

THE HOMOSEXUAL MANIFESTO By Michael Swift,

“Gay Revolutionary.” Reprinted from The Congressional Record of the United States Congress. First printed in Gay Community News, February 15-21 1987
All churches who condemn us will be closed. Our only gods are handsome young men. We adhere to a cult of beauty, moral and esthetic. All that is ugly and vulgar and banal will be annihilated. Since we are alienated from middle-class heterosexual conventions, we are free to live our lives according to the dictates of the pure imagination. For us too much is not enough.

actupny.org/documents/stopchurch%7f%7f.JPG

How ‘gay rights’ is being sold to America
Exposed: Powerful manipulation techniques behind radical homosexual agenda

Peace.

 

[fix]

Believe it or not, we’re saying the same thing here. If the lifestyle is flaunted, and if it affects a company’s profitability, then sure, fire away.

Not just effect the profit, but other aspects as well. As mentioned things like teaching, coaches, etc.

But if the employer suspects and starts to dig up info and also probably violates the employee’s privacy…that’s the witch hunt that should be illegal.

Again, I see the opposite as the problem. Witch hunts are not needed. It is openly flaunted as a good.

Or do you condone violations of privacy?

Not sure what you mean? Is privacy a conditional or absolute “right” and how is privacy defined? For example if a male Catholic school teacher shows up at events with another man he lives with and claims they are in love is it a violation for a principal to ask questions and determine if that person is leading a life contrary to Catholic teaching?

Some here would claim that would be a civil rights violation even though there is no right to bad conduct.

 

[verdigirl]

The ‘gay"rights movement’s aims are to silence the Church on the issue of morality, marraige and the family. If you are unable to see that, then there is no way I can prove it to you, for I don’t understand what you require for proof… Either you accept the teachings of the Church, or you accept the teachings of “gay” rights’ activists, if you have accepted the teachings of the “gay” right activists as being true then your right to practice Catholicism has already been infringed upon and in fact made meaningless. IMHO

With all due respect to you, this is kind of silly. If I said in an earlier post that “we all accept that homosexuality is disordered,” does that communicate to you that I accept the teachings of the Church, or not?

I am aware that there is a gay rights movement. But no one has ever infringed on my right to worship as a Roman Catholic. And anyway, “if God is for us, who could be against us.” Sheesh. Why worry? This kind of vitriol makes it hard to behave like a Christian in all circumstances.

I appreciate your attempts to “educate me,” but I would rather see it from a balanced point of view. Like the U.S. Bishops’. The people who write that hate speech are probably not even Catholic. Those incidents you talk about are so random and far-between that, though they are alarming, they are negligible. We have more trouble with the Mormons just sauntering in during Mass.

You should be more concerned about the Neocatechumenal Way being destructive to our faith.

Pax tecum.

 

[verdigirl]

Not sure what you mean? Is privacy a conditional or absolute “right” and how is privacy defined? For example if a male Catholic school teacher shows up at events with another man he lives with and claims they are in love is it a violation for a principal to ask questions and determine if that person is leading a life contrary to Catholic teaching?

Some here would claim that would be a civil rights violation even though there is no right to bad conduct.

You know, there is no problem with having a clear policy statement from the time of application that states that even though you don’t fire because of homosexuality, there will be an expectation that a person keep such relationships under wraps. If the applicant can’t deal with that, they can decline to apply. Right?

Something like that is entirely legal.

 

[Publisher]

The problem isn’t with being able to practice one’s faith, but imposing that faith on others that do not hold to it. What one believes within the confines of the church is their business…but if “what they believe” requires them to practice discrimination in the public sector then I don have a problem. Allowing gay people to have equal rights under the law in no way impacts the free expression of religion…unless part of that “free expression” requires discrimination against those that do not practice that religion.

I may consider some things immoral BUT I don not have the right to impose my religious belief on those that do not believe such things that are allowed by law…that is the difference…you want to practice Catholicism or Mormonism or Quakerism as far as that goes, but when practicing those faiths impose restrictions on those that do not practice such religious beliefs…that’s where I have my issues.