Hmm. I respect your biblical beliefs. I, however, believe that there is only one true judge and that's God. I am not going to do his job and I choose to live a non-judgmental lifestyle. It does take guts to stand up for what you believe in and I will continue to stand up for the rights of the oppressed.
BTW, why are you so worked up about us not having protection for our jobs? Is it not our taxes that will be paying for medicare? Is it gay couples that are more likely to adopt the children that heterosexuals either can't take care of, or are wards of the state? Taking care of the old, adoption, those sound like good things. I vote YES for good things... if you don't want the gays to do that then you better adopt more children and stop getting old.
ok ok ok I got it. This will settle all arguments. A vote of YES on Ordinance 1856 is a vote AGAINST discrimination. There. Now we can all get back to our oatmeal and scrabble.
Does she put her pots and pans in the ground for 7 years when she puts meat in the veggies? It also looks like she is wearing wool and cotton products that is another taboo in the bible. But who said that this should be based on the bible why isn't she waring a scarf? Why is she allowed to be taped? One can not do a line by line veto of what is in the bible and do what they want and believe that they are saved and make others conform to their beliefs, try walking a mile in another's shoes.
I am going to be crazy here. But what if the right to not be discriminated against was more important to the world as a whole than the right to discriminate?
excellent video. but Libs don't care about all people's rights, only their own- everyone else can go to hell. it is all part of their desire to co-exist and be filled with tolerance.
Not so. Maybe some people feel that way but many liberal/progressive people want you to have individual freedom to make choices in your life. From work, school, family and faith. I am happy to listen to those with different opinions if they can do so with pleasant manners and without rage and condemnation.
well then those "progressives" who stand for individual rights need to speak up for both sides when the govt. is trying desperately to take those rights away. Stealing rights from one to give to another is not protecting anyone. Soon, everyone's rights will be taken away.
The ordinance does not steal rights from anyone. there is a clause that allows religious organization to have an exemption. 70 years ago, women did not have equal social standing and the womens' right movement affected great change. 50 years ago minorities did not have anti-discrimination legislation that protected their right to seek and maintain housing, employment and public accommodations. By Everyone I assume you mean that White Christian Men will have fewer rights??
The religious exemption is very limited. It is only for the ministerial staff.
We can't have examples of reverse discrimination without the law being passed. That is too late. The rights have been taken away from two black women do to their speaking their religious beliefs. No on was physicaly hurt by they speech but one lost her degree the other a job.
Genetic Sex and Race can not be changed. DNA does not change. The sexual orientation of people has changed. They are fundimentally different
I'm not familiar with the two women you mentioned do you have a link for an article I could look at?
As far as sex goes there is no real definition. Genetic code comes in xx, xy, xxy, xyy and a multitude of chromosomal anomalies. If you are referring to genitals then estimates of 1:100 to 1:1000 babies are classified as intersex. If you are talking about hormones than many many women have higher natural levels of testosterone than estrogen due to PCOS. Gender and Race are socially constructs.
I'm in Ohio & Only Fly , The "STARS & BARS" 1st National(C.S.A.) In both Front & Back Yards! Ofcorse I don't care about popularity. GOD BLESS, OUR TROOPS & ALL TRUE PATRIOTS! Praise The LORD and Pass The Ammunition! islam & liberal socialist, are the enemies, of us all! odumbo/osamabama & his cronies, have to go! One way or the other! SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS! DEO VINDICE! LONG LIVE THE REBELLION!
MIDiogeknees...should an employer be able to fire their employees because they do not support Christianity? Which is a choice, that could be repented easily. According to what you believe, this should be just fine right?
I don't live in the comments. Yes, there are very good reasons why I should not work in some capacities because of my religion. I doubt that I would be qualified to work in a Muslim or Jewish book store, for example. Christians who firmly believe in not working on Sunday are often excluded from jobs requiring work on Sunday. In New York, many businesses close on Saturday but are open on Sunday. The Christian might be excluded. If my outfit didn't fit the decor of a store, I would be fired.
And I don't work for the Mcdonalds because I don't want to nor do I work at walmart because I don't want to. I am not going to seek a job with the above mentioned companies because they do not interest me. I am not looking for any laws that require those companies to make a job that I will like.
We are just asking that jobs that we are willing and qualified for will not prohibit us for having a girlfriend. If we are fired for being late or messing up those can not be considered discrimination
I don't remember anyone saying that there should not be other protected classes. The young lady's intensity is not hate. She is reacting to the hurt she has received from others due to her beliefs. It is common when someone has not logical arguement that they resort to names. Calling someone a racist or a homophobe seems to end the arguement. Such names go outside of a dialog. The ordinanace discriminates against people's beliefs and security.
as far as I can tell there is no name calling in these responses. Perhaps attempts to seek a deeper motivation than the ones presented by the opposition, but I see no name calling. What this ordinance does is protect against discrimination. What you are saying is like saying because I don't like Christians, I should be allowed to deny them a job, or housing, and to deny me that right, is discriminating against me.
I guess I consider calling someone a Homophobe is namecalling.
Interesting that you should mention discrimination against Christian beliefs. A young lady at Eastern Michigan was expelled, a police officer in Ann Arbor was fired, and a young, black, woman report lost her job because of their non-professional statements that laws like Ord 1856 were bad.
This is why we say Vote NO to prevent discrimination.
So why are her beliefs more meritious to be law? Why does the hatred that has gone on for thousands of years forcing suicide, public exicutions, and even casting people from rooftops constitue sound law? All I want is to keep my job be, which I had already lost once when I was in the Airforce trying to serve my country, safe at home and not be classified as a third or lower class citizen. If you are truely concerned about the children then you can follow them. But their safety is up to GOD!
Actually, my children's safety has been placed in my hands. They have been loaned to me so that I can protect, nurture and guide until they are ready to stand on their own. I pray to God daily for their safety but I don't intentially place them into harms way.
One situation I will protect them from is potential exposure in what should be a safe situation. And yes, the protecting them would affect businesses since I can shop on-line for most items I now buy locally should this become law.
And your method is going to protect them 100%? are you going to homeschool them as well and move out into the country where the next house could be more than a mile away? what measures are really going to protect your children? I am not a criminologist but most men that are gay are not going to abuse someones daughter. and if a molester were to follow a child into a bathroom they would do that law or no law, they are molesters. Gay doesn't equal molestation.
The world is not safe. Period. If I can make it a percentage safer, I will do that.
People are murdered every day. One could argue that people are going to do that whether it is legal or not so why not legalize murder.
I agree, Gay doesn't equal molestation. It isn't necessary for a young child to be molested for them to be harmed. You worry about the harm done to homsexuals and write off the harm done to women and children if they are looking for a secure location.
The bathroom excuse has been used for a longtime as a reason to criminalize trans people from using their chosen restroom. However as far as I am aware there are no legal cases to date of transgender assailants harming children or adults in the restroom. If you have evidence of this please post. Additionally I work in family services and children and women are abused by relatives and family friends over 90% of the time. It is highly unlikely that they would be harmed by any person other than fam
Again, I am not talking about physical harm, although that is the case. The transgender person experiences no physical harm by going into the bathroom of their genetic sex. Many young people and women will be tramatized by a man in the woman's bathroom (or vice-versa).
The law marginalizes the majority to protect the minority from non-physical harm.
This is where you are incorrect in the assumption trans people are not at risk. BOTH mtf and ftm trans people can and are assaulted by men in th rest room. It is consistent with hate crimes committed outside of the facilities. It is based on the public perception of the person and their level of 'differentness' from others of their assigned sex. Trans people have been using public facilities for decades and there has *never* been an instance where one assaulted a child or woman.
Please don't call being gay sinful. if you think that calling someone homophobic is name calling what are others doing when they are calling gays sinners and evil? are not both groups conforming to their own beliefs? I really am happy others can have their belifes and religous views.
But I am certian that if someone else wanted to propse a law that you may not agree with you would oppose that law it wasn't working for you JUST the way that you would like that it must be against you.
Now we are into belief. I believe that the homosexual lifestyle is wrong. This doesn't mean that I hate those how have chosen this lifestyle. Are homosexuals sinners? Yes, so am I. Can they change and repent? Yes, so can I.
Am I afraid of homosexual? No, I am not afraid of them. On the other hand, I will not affirm their lifestyle as being good.
You are proposing a law which in other places had gotten people fired when they wrote things similar to what I have posted here.
I am just asking for job security and a safe place to live. I work hard and I pay my bills on time. What is wrong with formal protections?
You can't get fired for the colour of your skin, your age, your sex, for disability. What sets homosexuals to a subhuman level? If we are all sinners then why exclusively prohibit one group from job security? Ii is a threat because I have lost a great job just for being gay.
I know this isn't popular, but as a result of laws like the one proposed, people have been sued, lost jobs and rights because they don't support the homosexual lifestyle. Enshrining a behaviour as a protected class has caused reverse discrimination.
Do I think you should be fired? Not if it was for your behaviours that take place outside of the workplace. Do I support laws to make homosexual behavior a protected class, no.
It was out side the work place... I was in the US Airforce I was learning korean so I could protect my home and country. I kept my personal life personal.
This may be true in some locations, but myself and other individuals have asked the city council repeatedly to allow the ordinance to be in effect in all places, but to let religious organizations choose whether or not to follow it. I do not want a Christian or Muslim person to have to hire someone or provide services to someone they do not support.
The law has nothing to do with sex. It does not say what sex acts are protected, only people who may personally be gay or who *society* presumes is.
This is incorrect, you CAN get fired for being a minority, for being female (or pregnant) or for being deaf, BUT you have the legal right to sue for compensation because the employers actions were illegal. Talk to any person of color or someone with a disability and ask if they have been denied housing, loans or a job they qualified for???
Two good comments. The problem is that the law, as written, does not allow a Chrisian Bookseller to hire according to their beliefs. The exemption is very narrow. Even without the law, people who oppose this on religious grounds are being condemned. I have talked to people of color and some are very upset that the Yes side makes the comparison between sexual orientation and race. Do people hate, you bet. I have experienced lots the past few months. But that isn't why I oppose the ordinance.
I understand the problem with independent businesses not hiring people that do not support their values. This is not a theocracy though and people should respect the personal life choices of others such as faith, marriage, divorce, children and political beliefs. That should not interfere with the quality of work. Do you realize that Martin Luther Kings widow is fighting for GLBT equality? Many Black people DO believe there are similarities in the disadvantages and maltreatment.
Thank you for the correction Cameraboi1229! Why is it the "correct" thing to do to stop gay women and men from suing when they have to take a polygraph test to be asked if they are queer?
This is a Lie! They say that there can be no discrimination laws save race and colour. They fail to look at disabilities and age as other protected groups as well as religious freedoms. That those groups are protected in housing and employment. They are working to prevent a law that would grant the same protection to employment and housing for gay citizens that work hard and pay taxes that old people and women have. They are covering their bold homophobia with fear mongering and lies.
I'm just waiting around for the day when a woman wants to come in and use our urinals...
Good job GoldenVision. Keep it up.
petawebb 2 years ago
Hmm. I respect your biblical beliefs. I, however, believe that there is only one true judge and that's God. I am not going to do his job and I choose to live a non-judgmental lifestyle. It does take guts to stand up for what you believe in and I will continue to stand up for the rights of the oppressed.
jwhiting1000 2 years ago 2
rock on!!
StarkyKz 2 years ago
BTW, why are you so worked up about us not having protection for our jobs? Is it not our taxes that will be paying for medicare? Is it gay couples that are more likely to adopt the children that heterosexuals either can't take care of, or are wards of the state? Taking care of the old, adoption, those sound like good things. I vote YES for good things... if you don't want the gays to do that then you better adopt more children and stop getting old.
StarkyKz 2 years ago
pizza, yes. Monopoly Yes. And voting YES!!! I am starting to enjoy you more now.
GregPeckory 2 years ago
ok ok ok I got it. This will settle all arguments. A vote of YES on Ordinance 1856 is a vote AGAINST discrimination. There. Now we can all get back to our oatmeal and scrabble.
GregPeckory 2 years ago 2
Can we make it monopoly and pizza and vote NO against demonstrated discrimination? That is my preference.
MIDiogeknees 2 years ago
Does she put her pots and pans in the ground for 7 years when she puts meat in the veggies? It also looks like she is wearing wool and cotton products that is another taboo in the bible. But who said that this should be based on the bible why isn't she waring a scarf? Why is she allowed to be taped? One can not do a line by line veto of what is in the bible and do what they want and believe that they are saved and make others conform to their beliefs, try walking a mile in another's shoes.
StarkyKz 2 years ago
I am going to be crazy here. But what if the right to not be discriminated against was more important to the world as a whole than the right to discriminate?
GregPeckory 2 years ago
excellent video. but Libs don't care about all people's rights, only their own- everyone else can go to hell. it is all part of their desire to co-exist and be filled with tolerance.
hypocrites
RestrainedNoMore 2 years ago
Not so. Maybe some people feel that way but many liberal/progressive people want you to have individual freedom to make choices in your life. From work, school, family and faith. I am happy to listen to those with different opinions if they can do so with pleasant manners and without rage and condemnation.
cameraboi1229 2 years ago
well then those "progressives" who stand for individual rights need to speak up for both sides when the govt. is trying desperately to take those rights away. Stealing rights from one to give to another is not protecting anyone. Soon, everyone's rights will be taken away.
RestrainedNoMore 2 years ago 2
The ordinance does not steal rights from anyone. there is a clause that allows religious organization to have an exemption. 70 years ago, women did not have equal social standing and the womens' right movement affected great change. 50 years ago minorities did not have anti-discrimination legislation that protected their right to seek and maintain housing, employment and public accommodations. By Everyone I assume you mean that White Christian Men will have fewer rights??
cameraboi1229 2 years ago
The religious exemption is very limited. It is only for the ministerial staff.
We can't have examples of reverse discrimination without the law being passed. That is too late. The rights have been taken away from two black women do to their speaking their religious beliefs. No on was physicaly hurt by they speech but one lost her degree the other a job.
Genetic Sex and Race can not be changed. DNA does not change. The sexual orientation of people has changed. They are fundimentally different
MIDiogeknees 2 years ago
I'm not familiar with the two women you mentioned do you have a link for an article I could look at?
As far as sex goes there is no real definition. Genetic code comes in xx, xy, xxy, xyy and a multitude of chromosomal anomalies. If you are referring to genitals then estimates of 1:100 to 1:1000 babies are classified as intersex. If you are talking about hormones than many many women have higher natural levels of testosterone than estrogen due to PCOS. Gender and Race are socially constructs.
cameraboi1229 2 years ago
rebelstang 2 years ago
MIDiogeknees...should an employer be able to fire their employees because they do not support Christianity? Which is a choice, that could be repented easily. According to what you believe, this should be just fine right?
GregPeckory 2 years ago
Although Greg your not addressing me I'll address you. The answer is yes. That is part of being free. It should be a two way even street.
davidrjin 2 years ago
I don't live in the comments. Yes, there are very good reasons why I should not work in some capacities because of my religion. I doubt that I would be qualified to work in a Muslim or Jewish book store, for example. Christians who firmly believe in not working on Sunday are often excluded from jobs requiring work on Sunday. In New York, many businesses close on Saturday but are open on Sunday. The Christian might be excluded. If my outfit didn't fit the decor of a store, I would be fired.
MIDiogeknees 2 years ago
And I don't work for the Mcdonalds because I don't want to nor do I work at walmart because I don't want to. I am not going to seek a job with the above mentioned companies because they do not interest me. I am not looking for any laws that require those companies to make a job that I will like.
We are just asking that jobs that we are willing and qualified for will not prohibit us for having a girlfriend. If we are fired for being late or messing up those can not be considered discrimination
StarkyKz 2 years ago
I don't remember anyone saying that there should not be other protected classes. The young lady's intensity is not hate. She is reacting to the hurt she has received from others due to her beliefs. It is common when someone has not logical arguement that they resort to names. Calling someone a racist or a homophobe seems to end the arguement. Such names go outside of a dialog. The ordinanace discriminates against people's beliefs and security.
MIDiogeknees 2 years ago
as far as I can tell there is no name calling in these responses. Perhaps attempts to seek a deeper motivation than the ones presented by the opposition, but I see no name calling. What this ordinance does is protect against discrimination. What you are saying is like saying because I don't like Christians, I should be allowed to deny them a job, or housing, and to deny me that right, is discriminating against me.
GregPeckory 2 years ago
I guess I consider calling someone a Homophobe is namecalling.
Interesting that you should mention discrimination against Christian beliefs. A young lady at Eastern Michigan was expelled, a police officer in Ann Arbor was fired, and a young, black, woman report lost her job because of their non-professional statements that laws like Ord 1856 were bad.
This is why we say Vote NO to prevent discrimination.
MIDiogeknees 2 years ago
So why are her beliefs more meritious to be law? Why does the hatred that has gone on for thousands of years forcing suicide, public exicutions, and even casting people from rooftops constitue sound law? All I want is to keep my job be, which I had already lost once when I was in the Airforce trying to serve my country, safe at home and not be classified as a third or lower class citizen. If you are truely concerned about the children then you can follow them. But their safety is up to GOD!
StarkyKz 2 years ago
Actually, my children's safety has been placed in my hands. They have been loaned to me so that I can protect, nurture and guide until they are ready to stand on their own. I pray to God daily for their safety but I don't intentially place them into harms way.
One situation I will protect them from is potential exposure in what should be a safe situation. And yes, the protecting them would affect businesses since I can shop on-line for most items I now buy locally should this become law.
MIDiogeknees 2 years ago
And your method is going to protect them 100%? are you going to homeschool them as well and move out into the country where the next house could be more than a mile away? what measures are really going to protect your children? I am not a criminologist but most men that are gay are not going to abuse someones daughter. and if a molester were to follow a child into a bathroom they would do that law or no law, they are molesters. Gay doesn't equal molestation.
StarkyKz 2 years ago
The world is not safe. Period. If I can make it a percentage safer, I will do that.
People are murdered every day. One could argue that people are going to do that whether it is legal or not so why not legalize murder.
I agree, Gay doesn't equal molestation. It isn't necessary for a young child to be molested for them to be harmed. You worry about the harm done to homsexuals and write off the harm done to women and children if they are looking for a secure location.
MIDiogeknees 2 years ago
The bathroom excuse has been used for a longtime as a reason to criminalize trans people from using their chosen restroom. However as far as I am aware there are no legal cases to date of transgender assailants harming children or adults in the restroom. If you have evidence of this please post. Additionally I work in family services and children and women are abused by relatives and family friends over 90% of the time. It is highly unlikely that they would be harmed by any person other than fam
cameraboi1229 2 years ago
Again, I am not talking about physical harm, although that is the case. The transgender person experiences no physical harm by going into the bathroom of their genetic sex. Many young people and women will be tramatized by a man in the woman's bathroom (or vice-versa).
The law marginalizes the majority to protect the minority from non-physical harm.
Children can't protect themselves. Vote NO.
MIDiogeknees 2 years ago
This is where you are incorrect in the assumption trans people are not at risk. BOTH mtf and ftm trans people can and are assaulted by men in th rest room. It is consistent with hate crimes committed outside of the facilities. It is based on the public perception of the person and their level of 'differentness' from others of their assigned sex. Trans people have been using public facilities for decades and there has *never* been an instance where one assaulted a child or woman.
cameraboi1229 2 years ago 2
Please don't call being gay sinful. if you think that calling someone homophobic is name calling what are others doing when they are calling gays sinners and evil? are not both groups conforming to their own beliefs? I really am happy others can have their belifes and religous views.
But I am certian that if someone else wanted to propse a law that you may not agree with you would oppose that law it wasn't working for you JUST the way that you would like that it must be against you.
StarkyKz 2 years ago
Now we are into belief. I believe that the homosexual lifestyle is wrong. This doesn't mean that I hate those how have chosen this lifestyle. Are homosexuals sinners? Yes, so am I. Can they change and repent? Yes, so can I.
Am I afraid of homosexual? No, I am not afraid of them. On the other hand, I will not affirm their lifestyle as being good.
You are proposing a law which in other places had gotten people fired when they wrote things similar to what I have posted here.
MIDiogeknees 2 years ago
I am just asking for job security and a safe place to live. I work hard and I pay my bills on time. What is wrong with formal protections?
You can't get fired for the colour of your skin, your age, your sex, for disability. What sets homosexuals to a subhuman level? If we are all sinners then why exclusively prohibit one group from job security? Ii is a threat because I have lost a great job just for being gay.
StarkyKz 2 years ago
I know this isn't popular, but as a result of laws like the one proposed, people have been sued, lost jobs and rights because they don't support the homosexual lifestyle. Enshrining a behaviour as a protected class has caused reverse discrimination.
Do I think you should be fired? Not if it was for your behaviours that take place outside of the workplace. Do I support laws to make homosexual behavior a protected class, no.
MIDiogeknees 2 years ago
It was out side the work place... I was in the US Airforce I was learning korean so I could protect my home and country. I kept my personal life personal.
StarkyKz 2 years ago
This may be true in some locations, but myself and other individuals have asked the city council repeatedly to allow the ordinance to be in effect in all places, but to let religious organizations choose whether or not to follow it. I do not want a Christian or Muslim person to have to hire someone or provide services to someone they do not support.
The law has nothing to do with sex. It does not say what sex acts are protected, only people who may personally be gay or who *society* presumes is.
cameraboi1229 2 years ago
This is incorrect, you CAN get fired for being a minority, for being female (or pregnant) or for being deaf, BUT you have the legal right to sue for compensation because the employers actions were illegal. Talk to any person of color or someone with a disability and ask if they have been denied housing, loans or a job they qualified for???
cameraboi1229 2 years ago
Two good comments. The problem is that the law, as written, does not allow a Chrisian Bookseller to hire according to their beliefs. The exemption is very narrow. Even without the law, people who oppose this on religious grounds are being condemned. I have talked to people of color and some are very upset that the Yes side makes the comparison between sexual orientation and race. Do people hate, you bet. I have experienced lots the past few months. But that isn't why I oppose the ordinance.
MIDiogeknees 2 years ago
I understand the problem with independent businesses not hiring people that do not support their values. This is not a theocracy though and people should respect the personal life choices of others such as faith, marriage, divorce, children and political beliefs. That should not interfere with the quality of work. Do you realize that Martin Luther Kings widow is fighting for GLBT equality? Many Black people DO believe there are similarities in the disadvantages and maltreatment.
cameraboi1229 2 years ago 2
Thank you for the correction Cameraboi1229! Why is it the "correct" thing to do to stop gay women and men from suing when they have to take a polygraph test to be asked if they are queer?
StarkyKz 2 years ago
What I see is fear and hate. Not responsibility.
GregPeckory 2 years ago
This is a Lie! They say that there can be no discrimination laws save race and colour. They fail to look at disabilities and age as other protected groups as well as religious freedoms. That those groups are protected in housing and employment. They are working to prevent a law that would grant the same protection to employment and housing for gay citizens that work hard and pay taxes that old people and women have. They are covering their bold homophobia with fear mongering and lies.
StarkyKz 2 years ago 2
Bravo!
TheWalkerzone 2 years ago
Excellent!!
danaeashley22 2 years ago