Christine Grant's View of the Meyer Case

[hawkdrummer1]

And that is the utter irony of the "momentous victory for women everywhere" related to this decision.

and to take that one step further...this is why we have our current President. Irrespective of whether you love him, hate him or are somewhere in between.... if you're intellectually honest, you recognize that the PC left has WAY overplayed its cards...often to absurd ends... and that's why we have Trump.

 

[hagarwood]

http://www.readingeagle.com/ap/arti...bians-not-protected-class-appeals-court-rules

The link you provided only applies to a temporary ruling of the 11th circuit (Ga., Ala., Fl.). In the rest of the country sexual orientation is a protected class. This was established by the Matthew Shepard Bill and a 2014 executive order. The whole 11th circuit will review that 2-1 decision and possibly it will end up at the Supreme Court, but in Iowa sexual orientation is a protected class.

 

[RobHowe]

The link you provided only applies to a temporary ruling of the 11th circuit (Ga., Ala., Fl.). In the rest of the country sexual orientation is a protected class. This was established by the Matthew Shepard Bill and a 2014 executive order. The whole 11th circuit will review that 2-1 decision and possibly it will end up at the Supreme Court, but in Iowa sexual orientation is a protected class.

I understand. My point is it's not a clear cut protected class everywhere.

Also because one is from a protected class doesn't mean she doesn't have an opinion on said class. Gays are protected from discrimination the same as race, religion, nationality and sex. That's a good thing in theory.

 

[DMLadyhawk]

I understand. My point is it's not a clear cut protected class everywhere.

Also because one is from a protected class doesn't mean she doesn't have an opinion on said class. Gays are protected from discrimination the same as race, religion, nationality and sex. That's a good thing in theory.

It's pretty sad that there have to be protected classes in this country...

 

[OkstHawk]

It was a unanimous verdict, wasn't it? I would think that would squelch this kind of discussion. But as some on this thread pointed out, perhaps there is bias when we talk about these things, based upon your school.

You have to realize who you're talking to on this board.

 

[SteveGarvey1]

and to take that one step further...this is why we have our current President. Irrespective of whether you love him, hate him or are somewhere in between.... if you're intellectually honest, you recognize that the PC left has WAY overplayed its cards...often to absurd ends... and that's why we have Trump.

Both sides overplay their hands. That's why there's such a pendulum of power back and forth.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

And that is the utter irony of the "momentous victory for women everywhere" related to this decision.

Yep, I've lived this first hand for 28yrs. I'm part of a very selective minority protected by some laws. A minority with less individuals than the black population, Asian, Muslim, gay or lesbian, etc..

Sometimes the laws set do more to hinder one's progression or advancement than they do to provide opportunities.

 

[Hawknigh]

and to take that one step further...this is why we have our current President. Irrespective of whether you love him, hate him or are somewhere in between.... if you're intellectually honest, you recognize that the PC left has WAY overplayed its cards...often to absurd ends... and that's why we have Trump.

Oh, you meant Trump, not President Herreld!

 

[Joshbrown]

Both sides overplay their hands. That's why there's such a pendulum of power back and forth.

False equivalency.

One side doesn't use violence to shut down free speech. One side is more open to compromise. One side doesn't have the book 'Rules For Radicals' as its Bible.

 

[SteveGarvey1]

False equivalency.

One side doesn't use violence to shut down free speech. One side is more open to compromise. One side doesn't have the book 'Rules For Radicals' as its Bible.

Was referring to legislation, executive orders or judicial decisions made by the party in power to stick it to the other party and both sides do it.

But eliminating free speech in the name of political correctness is done by only one side it seems. I should have read your post more closely.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

False equivalency.

One side doesn't use violence to shut down free speech. One side is more open to compromise. One side doesn't have the book 'Rules For Radicals' as its Bible.

In addition,

.....one side are not obstructionist.
---- one side is totally out of control at the moment.