Why is Social Justice Less Important Than...

[vern_humphrey]

15 instances over 20 or years. I am sure there are more, but consider the number that were not fired.

I’d be interested in the source of this information.

I suspect these are lawsuits, where the person fired CLAIMED it was for homosexuality. And even if a jury bought the argument, or a settlement was reached, that doesn’t prove her case – which is that the law permits firing a person for their sexual preferences.

 

[Penny_Plain]

Brad:

Members of NAMBLA should be in jail.

You’re probably right, but for what?

I mean, I agree that anyone who has sex with children should be in prison forever, or possibly longer. But exactly what crime does a person who wants to have sex with children (but doesn’t) or joins an organization that advocates for such conduct commit?

I do not think American law makes speech illegal, even if the speech advocates conduct that any sane person would find repellant.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Penny Plain:

You’re probably right, but for what?

I mean, I agree that anyone who has sex with children should be in prison forever, or possibly longer. But exactly what crime does a person who wants to have sex with children (but doesn’t) or joins an organization that advocates for such conduct commit?

I do not think American law makes speech illegal, even if the speech advocates conduct that any sane person would find repellant.

It’s a very fine line.

For example, you can download pictures of naked women with your computer. That falls under the First Amendment. But I know a fellow who downloaded pictures of naked children and went to prison – child pornography is a crime, and to possess the pictures is illegal.

Similarly, there is a point where advocating sex with children becomes a crime. I know of one case where a pedophile advertised squirrel hunts for young people on an internet hunting forum. His intent was clear – he meant to contact, inveigle and molest those children.

Members of this foul organization trade ideas and experiences, aiding each other in the pursuit of their dispicable perversion. They are a criminal conspiracy.

 

[katherine2]

15 instances over 20 or years. I am sure there are more, but consider the number that were not fired.

sweetheart, you can only post so much text here. I’ve proven the point. We can move on.

 

[katherine2]

vern humphrey:

I’d be interested in the source of this information.

I suspect these are lawsuits, where the person fired CLAIMED it was for homosexuality. And even if a jury bought the argument, or a settlement was reached, that doesn’t prove her case – which is that the law permits firing a person for their sexual preferences.

They are not lawsuits because the law does not allow these people to sue based on firing people because they are gay (except in 14 states).

Why don’t you cite for us the federal law which prohibits this?

 

[vern_humphrey]

katherine2:

sweetheart, you can only post so much text here. I’ve proven the point. We can move on.

You haven’t, you know.

You’ve only posted a list of people whom YOU say were fired for their sexual orientation. You haven’t even proven sexual orientation was the cause, let alone that there’s a law making it legal.

If you want to PROVE the point, post the law that says, “Sexual orientation is grounds for dismissal.”

 

[Brendan]

katherine2:

Ernest Dillon of Detroit fired from the U.S. Postal Service in 1984

I remember the Dillon case, it occured at the local post office where I was living at the time.

Dillion quit the Post Office due to a ‘hostile’ work environment.

He was subsequently transfered to a different Postal facility.

Claiming that this was an example of legal firing is deceitful Katherine.

 

[katherine2]

vern humphrey:

If you want to PROVE the point, post the law that says, “Sexual orientation is grounds for dismissal.”

Vern,

Read the previous post. Employers don’t need a law to fire someone. A law is needed to restrain them from firing someone. You can cite a federal law on this, can you? I thought so. Case closed.

 

[fix]

All this talk about homosexuals being fired misses the point. They should be treated for their psychiatric condition. What happended to the mental hygiene laws? They were all watered down by the libs.

 

[Brad]

Penny Plain:

You’re probably right, but for what?

I mean, I agree that anyone who has sex with children should be in prison forever, or possibly longer. But exactly what crime does a person who wants to have sex with children (but doesn’t) or joins an organization that advocates for such conduct commit?

I do not think American law makes speech illegal, even if the speech advocates conduct that any sane person would find repellant.

They promote and advocate illegal actions.

They have been linked to child molestation and rape.

Let’s say there was the National Murder Little Girls Assocation and they met to discuss methods of murder, how they could get away with it etc. They exchange picutres and diagrams about how to murder little girls. They advocate murdering little girls. They talk about what a good thing it would be to murder the girls. Several of them have murdered successfully but haven’t been caught while others have tried to murder.

Freedom isn’t free. Free speech isn’t free. It stops at the promotion of illegal license.

 

[vern_humphrey]

katherine2:

Vern,

Read the previous post. Employers don’t need a law to fire someone. A law is needed to restrain them from firing someone. .

You posted that list in response to this post from Lisa N
Lisa N:

And once more I ask if you can provide documentation that people are being terminated solely because of real or perceived sexual orientation? Got proof?

Lisa N .

And it turns out that in at least one of those handful of cases, the person was not fired, but was transferred to a more friendly working place.

katherine2:

You can cite a federal law on this, can you? I thought so. Case closed.

You are the one who can’t cite a law, and who is compelled to simply put up a list, with no background information – a list that is unravelling even now.

 

[Penny_Plain]

Brad:

They promote and advocate illegal actions.

They have been linked to child molestation and rape.

Let’s say there was the National Murder Little Girls Assocation and they met to discuss methods of murder, how they could get away with it etc. They exchange picutres and diagrams about how to murder little girls. They advocate murdering little girls. They talk about what a good thing it would be to murder the girls. Several of them have murdered successfully but haven’t been caught while others have tried to murder.

Freedom isn’t free. Free speech isn’t free. It stops at the promotion of illegal license.

The organization does, I guess. I’m not a member, and I’m a little curious as to how you know so much about it. I find their goals as you describe them to be hideous and revolting.

But I’m not sure that everyone who belongs to an organization should go to jail simply based on the organizational goals. I doubt NAMBLA has an infallible magisterium that requires scrupulous adherence to its tenets.

I want to look at your list to determine what, exactly, the members are doing that would allow us to convict and imprison them. I do not think it is illegal to talk about methods of murdering little girls. Otherwise, the FBI would bust the national mystery writers convention every year. Ditto how to get away with it.

Not sure what “pictures and diagrams about how to murder little girls” would be. I agree that possession of child pornography is illegal. Can we say for certain that every member of NAMBLA possesses illegal child pornography? (I think the supreme court has said that drawings depicting children engaged in sexual activity are ok because actual children aren’t harmed.)

Advocating murdering little girls? Dunno if that’s illegal or not. Certainly you can suggest changes in laws without committing a crime. I would think you can suggest actions that are against the law without committing a crime. You get in trouble when you help somebody commit a crime.

It is difficult to put people in jail for crimes they haven’t been caught doing.

I don’t think most members of NAMBLA should go to jail because I would guess most of them are FBI agents anyway…

I expect Lisa N. to yell at me for getting this discussion even further off track. And she would have a point. We were talking about … what? I don’t even know. But it irks me that, in virtually every thread that discusses homosexuality, some devout Catholic brings up the issue of NAMBLA to imply that every single gay man is a pedophile.

This is equivalent to trying to discuss the Catholic Church with people who assert that Father Coughlin or Cardinal Law is representative of the entire Church.

 

[Lisa_N]

katherine2:

sweetheart, you can only post so much text here. I’ve proven the point. We can move on.

Katherine, one would you please quit with the patronizing tone? No one here is your sweetheart and no one here is your dearie either.

Second you only reiterated what I said, discrimination against homosexuals may have been a serious problem IN THE PAST. Frankly I saw it up close and personal. But it was in the 1980s. Things have changed a lot and I don’t think that any employer could get away with firing someone for sexual orientation…although it still begs the question, how does he KNOW about this person’s orientation? Why should it ever be an issue? Please find a pattern of discrimination that isn’t decades old and more of us will find your arguments compelling. Also it might help to have a source. After all we’re now finding out that much of the original reporting of the Mathew Shepherd case was totally biased and totally inaccurate.

Penny re: your brother in law, perhaps I should have used the word “supervisor” instead of employer since a company is not a person. My point is that yes indeed, gossip has damaged lives. OTOH there is nothing special about gossip that has to do with homosexuality is there? Heck for some employers that he was living with a person instead of being married, might have been an issue. But again, people’s private lives should not impact their employment unless somehow it impacts their jobs. I feel the same way about something like smoking. There are employers who feel that if a person smokes in his house on his own time, he can still be fired. I disagree (unless there is some compelling job related issue) IOW there is and should be a dividing line between work and personal life and it’s up to both parties to keep the line there.

Lisa N

 

[katherine2]

vern humphrey:

You are the one who can’t cite a law, and who is compelled to simply put up a list, with no background information – a list that is unravelling even now.

Yes, I can’t cite a law because the absense of a law give liberty to the employer to do what he wills. Thank you for proving my point.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Penny Plain:

The organization does, I guess. I’m not a member, and I’m a little curious as to how you know so much about it. I find their goals as you describe them to be hideous and revolting.

I know about them because I was in a hunting forum where a NAMBLA member offered “free squirrel hunts” for children. The phrasing made it suspicious (“Parents should allow the hunters at least an hour with the children for bonding”) and he actually mentioned NAMBLA. That triggered me to both warn the moderator (who removed the post and banned the poster) and to do a little research.

You don’t want to do research on NAMBLA – not unless you have a strong stomach.
Penny Plain:

But I’m not sure that everyone who belongs to an organization should go to jail simply based on the organizational goals. I doubt NAMBLA has an infallible magisterium that requires scrupulous adherence to its tenets.

I want to look at your list to determine what, exactly, the members are doing that would allow us to convict and imprison them. I do not think it is illegal to talk about methods of murdering little girls. Otherwise, the FBI would bust the national mystery writers convention every year. Ditto how to get away with it.

Not sure what “pictures and diagrams about how to murder little girls” would be. I agree that possession of child pornography is illegal. Can we say for certain that every member of NAMBLA possesses illegal child pornography? (I think the supreme court has said that drawings depicting children engaged in sexual activity are ok because actual children aren’t harmed.)

Advocating murdering little girls? Dunno if that’s illegal or not. Certainly you can suggest changes in laws without committing a crime. I would think you can suggest actions that are against the law without committing a crime. You get in trouble when you help somebody commit a crime…

I REALLY don’t advise you enter “NAMBLA” in a search engine and follow the resulting URLs – but if you want to . . .

 

[katherine2]

Lisa N:

No one here is your sweetheart and no one here is your dearie either.

ain’t that the truth.

Second you only reiterated what I said, discrimination against homosexuals may have been a serious problem IN THE PAST. Frankly I saw it up close and personal. But it was in the 1980s. Things have changed a lot and I don’t think that any employer could get away with firing someone for sexual orientation…

On your theory that an employer can’t get away with it, why is that? Certainly not because the civil law restrains him, so we can set that aside.

Is discrimination less common because of improved social opinions? Are you saying since the 1980’s events have happend that have caused people (employers) to respond to gay people in more positive ways and you are aplauding that?

 

[Penny_Plain]

Lisa N:

Penny re: your brother in law, perhaps I should have used the word “supervisor” instead of employer since a company is not a person. My point is that yes indeed, gossip has damaged lives. OTOH there is nothing special about gossip that has to do with homosexuality is there? Heck for some employers that he was living with a person instead of being married, might have been an issue. But again, people’s private lives should not impact their employment unless somehow it impacts their jobs. I feel the same way about something like smoking. There are employers who feel that if a person smokes in his house on his own time, he can still be fired. I disagree (unless there is some compelling job related issue) IOW there is and should be a dividing line between work and personal life and it’s up to both parties to keep the line there.

I think we mostly agree, so I’ll shut up. But please answer one question for me:

Should I read Scarlet Letter? I read “House of the Seven Gables” because somebody told me it was good. I’d rather read Faulkner, and I HATE Faulkner.

 

[vern_humphrey]

katherine2:

Yes, I can’t cite a law because the absense of a law give liberty to the employer to do what he wills. Thank you for proving my point.

I love you dearly, Katherine, but sometimes you come out with gibberish.

There’s no law that prohibits an employer from firing someone for getting a tatoo, or for dying their hair purple. Does this mean that there are “tatoo rights” or “purple hair rights?”

You gave a list of people supposedly fired for sexual orientation – we have seen the list is incorrect and deceptive. You ought to try apologizing.

 

[StJeanneDArc]

katherine2:

Is is not a “reward” to allow some to do their job and be judged based on their job performance.

Robin Lambert for three years directed employee relations at a large manufacturing company in Portland, ME until fired for being gay 1981

Tim Bryson fired for being gay in 1993 as a sales representative in the southeast regional office of a large home furnishings company

Mike Engler worked as a stockbroker for a financial services company in Cumberland, Maryland. Fired for being gay in 1989.

John Curlovich, a gay man, fired from a Pittsburgh-based litigation support company in 1990.

Dan Miller, an employee in a management consulting company located in Pittsburgh. Fired in 1990 because he was gay.

Jennifer Lynch worked in Arlington at a residential facility for mentally retarded adults. Fired in 1994 for being lesbian.

Ernest Dillon of Detroit fired from the U.S. Postal Service in 1984

Steve Vanston of Lansing, Michigan works as a florist. Fired in 1992.

Perry Merz, a gay man, was hired for a part-time position at a funeral home, was fired in 1992 because he is gay.

Robert Lewis of Akron worked for several months at a North Canton mail-order company until he was fired in 1994 because he was gay.

Joyce Perciballi of Canton had worked her way up from a position as a clerk to management. But in early 1994 was fired for being a lesbian.

To earn graduate-school tuition, John Howard gave tours of an Alabama’s paper company’s large private art collection. He was fired for being gay in 1994.

Raymond Stinchcomb worked at a fast-food franchise in Orlando. He was fired for being gay in 1988.

Dean Hall of Augusta , GA was fired as a car salesman in 1992 because he was gay.

Cheryl Summerville worked as a cook at a Cracker Barrel restaurant in an Atlanta suburb for three years. In 1991 the company issued a policy saying gays were not to be employed and she quit before she could be fired.

Where did you get this information? Was the word “gay” on the pink slip or whatever was used to fire these people?

My own personal experience has been that fear of lawsuits makes it harder to fire avowed homosexuals, even in right-to-work states like Texas. Is it just to force an employer to continue employing someone whose lifestyle he finds repellent? What if such lifestyle hurts the business? It’s also been my experience that fired employees often have very erroneous perceptions as to the cause of the firing.

 

[vern_humphrey]

StJeanneDArc:

Where did you get this information? Was the word “gay” on the pink slip or whatever was used to fire these people?

Of course not.

Katherine is struggling with her conscience. She doesn’t want to face up to the consequences of a Catholic accepting an agenda that includes abortion. She erects these flimsy arguments to keep from looking at herself in the mirror.

We need to remember that our charge is to help, not attack her.