Tennessee Governor Signs Bill Overturning LGBT Nondiscrimination Ordinance

[QUOTE="SpartanMSU"]

[QUOTE="Choga"]

However it should be illegal to discriminate based on whatever backwards opinions a person has about race/gender/sexuality etc.

Choga

Why? Why should a gun be put to a businesses head making them hire a person who they don't want to? You think this is going to stop them from being idiotic racists? You think it's even in the businesses best interest to discriminate based stupid reasons? Probably not, considering it's in the best interest of the business to hire the best person for the job.

Because as a society we value equal opportunity. And "best person for the job" is very misleading, since the best person for a homophobic employer is someone who isn't gay.

By "best person" I mean the person who is going to make/save the business the most money...

The goal of every business is to make money...soooo why the hell would they hire someone not based on their ability to do that?

[QUOTE="Choga"]

[QUOTE="SpartanMSU"]

Why? Why should a gun be put to a businesses head making them hire a person who they don't want to? You think this is going to stop them from being idiotic racists? You think it's even in the businesses best interest to discriminate based stupid reasons? Probably not, considering it's in the best interest of the business to hire the best person for the job.

whipassmt

Because as a society we value equal opportunity. And "best person for the job" is very misleading, since the best person for a homophobic employer is someone who isn't gay.

Moreover it's possible that being an active homosexual may disqualify one for a certain job based on that jobs qualifications. For instance Canon Law specifies that a teacher in a Catholic school must be known for their "moral probity" and since homosexual activities violate Church teaching then those who engage in them are not known for their "moral probity" and hence not qualified for the job of teaching in a Catholic School.

LOL

How the heck would you know if the waiter is gay Is he wearing a pink fedora with feathers sticking out of his hat?

And how would that ruin your dinner, aside from some loose feathers falling into your food?

Or do you have some insatiable urge to think about gay sex whenever you see someone you suspect is gay in your presence at a restaurant?

I mean seriously.... are you kidding me with this?

[QUOTE="whipassmt"]

Which is why I said there is a difference betwixt Just discrimination and unjust discrimination. Saying blind people are not allowed to drive is a form of just discrimination while saying black people are not allowed to drive is a form of unjust discrimination. Now the real question is would it be just or unjust discrimination not to allow women to drive, since they are supposedly crappier drivers (although statistically they get in less accidents if I'm correct).

HoolaHoopMan

Bolded: Well you've kinda just defeated your analogy there. Women are statistically better drivers than men, reason why men's care insurance costs more on average I believe.

"Just" discrimination is perfectly fine if a person isn't up to task given a jobs requirements, it's just when said discrimination takes place due to more of an immutable trait like not hiring blacks, women, gays etc.

1. took note of the distinction commonly drawn between the homosexual condition or tendency and individual homosexual actions

2.It is deplorable that homosexual persons have been and are the object of violent malice in speech or in action. Such treatment deserves condemnation from the Church's pastors wherever it occurs. It reveals a kind of disregard for others which endangers the most fundamental principles of a healthy society. The intrinsic dignity of each person must always be respected in word, in action and in law.

But the proper reaction to crimes committed against homosexual persons should not be to claim that the homosexual condition is not disordered. When such a claim is made and when homosexual activity is consequently condoned, or when civil legislation is introduced to protect behavior to which no one has any conceivable right, neither the Church nor society at large should be surprised when other distorted notions and practices gain ground, and irrational and violent reactions increase" (no. 10).

3. "Sexual orientation" does not constitute a quality comparable to race, ethnic background, etc. in respect to non-discrimination.

4. There are areas in which it is not unjust discrimination to take sexual orientation into account, for example, in the placement of children for adoption or foster care, in employment of teachers or athletic coaches, and in military recruitment.

5. Homosexual persons, as human persons, have the same rights as all persons including the right of not being treated in a manner which offends their personal dignity (cf. no. 10). Among other rights, all persons have the right to work, to housing, etc. Nevertheless, these rights are not absolute. They can be legitimately limited for objectively disordered external conduct. This is sometimes not only licit but obligatory.

6.Including "homosexual orientation" among the considerations on the basis of which it is illegal to discriminate can easily lead to regarding homosexuality as a positive source of human rights, for example, in respect to so-called affirmative action or preferential treatment in hiring practices. This is all the more deleterious since there is no right to homo sexuality (cf. no. 10) which therefore should not form the basis for judicial claims. The passage from the recognition of homosexuality as a factor on which basis it is illegal to discriminate can easily lead, if not automatically, to the legislative protection and promotion of homosexuality. A person's homosexuality would be invoked in opposition to alleged discrimination, and thus the exercise of rights would be defended precisely via the affirmation of the homosexual condition instead of in terms of a violation of basic human rights.

.The "sexual orientation" of a person is not comparable to race, sex, age, etc. also for another reason than that given above which warrants attention. An individual's sexual orientation is generally not known to others unless he publicly identifies himself as having this orientation or unless some overt behavior manifests it. As a rule, the majority of homosexually oriented persons who seek to lead chaste lives do not publicize their sexual orientation. Hence the problem of discrimination in terms of employment, housing, etc., does not usually arise.

Homosexual persons who assert their homosexuality tend to be precisely those who judge homosexual behavior or life****to be "either completely harmless, if not an entirely good thing" (cf. no. 3), and hence worthy of public approval. It is from this quarter that one is more likely to find those who seek to "manipulate the Church by gaining the often well-intentioned support of her pastors with a view to changing civil statutes and laws" (cf. no. 5), those who use the tactic of protesting that "any and all criticism of or reservations about homosexual people... are simply diverse forms of unjust discrimination" (cf. no. 9).

In addition, there is a danger that legislation which would make homosexuality a basis for entitlements could actually encourage a person with a homosexual orientation to declare his homosexuality or even to seek a partner in order to exploit the provisions of the law.

[QUOTE="Choga"]

[QUOTE="SpartanMSU"]

Why? Why should a gun be put to a businesses head making them hire a person who they don't want to? You think this is going to stop them from being idiotic racists? You think it's even in the businesses best interest to discriminate based stupid reasons? Probably not, considering it's in the best interest of the business to hire the best person for the job.

SpartanMSU

Because as a society we value equal opportunity. And "best person for the job" is very misleading, since the best person for a homophobic employer is someone who isn't gay.

By "best person" I mean the person who is going to make/save the business the most money...

The goal of every business is to make money...soooo why the hell would they hire someone not based on their ability to do that?

Because its wrong? I dont think peoplewant to end up living in a society where you have to lie about yourself to get a job.

I see your point... Money. But i dont think its the right and respectful point

Another question:

What business owner/manager would openly admit to NOT hiring a person BECAUSE they were gay or lesbian?

What business over would fire someone if they discovered they were gay/lesbian?

More than likely, the law would be irrelevant - the business owner/manager would just make up a "legit" reason for not hiring or firing the gay/lesbian person. They wouldn't even giv a reason. They would simply say "The position was filled". Or if they "came out" at work, the owner/manager would dig up something to use to get rid of them.

Sure, they could be sued if there was suspicion of discrimination, but how the hell would you prove it without direct quotes and/or a legit witness?

In the end, this governor is just playing to his conservative base. I doubt he even cares one way or the other. If his base supported it, he would have approved it without a second thought.

Politics is the most superficial arena in the country. Nobody truely supports anything independently of their own voter base. It's all about the flavor of the month.

Netherscourge

Discrimination laws are created for poltical points for politicians, as you can see with the governor in this example. As are many "helpful" laws actually.

[QUOTE="whipassmt"]

[QUOTE="Choga"]

Because as a society we value equal opportunity. And "best person for the job" is very misleading, since the best person for a homophobic employer is someone who isn't gay.

Netherscourge

Moreover it's possible that being an active homosexual may disqualify one for a certain job based on that jobs qualifications. For instance Canon Law specifies that a teacher in a Catholic school must be known for their "moral probity" and since homosexual activities violate Church teaching then those who engage in them are not known for their "moral probity" and hence not qualified for the job of teaching in a Catholic School.

LOL

How the heck would you know if the waiter is gay Is he wearing a pink fedora with feathers sticking out of his hat?

And how would that ruin your dinner, aside from some loose feathers falling into your food?

Or do you have some insatiable urge to think about gay sex whenever you see someone you suspect is gay in your presence at a restaurant?

I mean seriously.... are you kidding me with this?

And yes people are uncomfortable with gays serving them food. For example one time a painter came to paint my uncle's house and my uncle thought the painter might have been gay so my uncle went into the bathroom and got his tooth brush, put it in a plasticbag and hid it in the pocket of one of his coats that has hanging in his closet because he was afraid that the gay painter might brush his teeth with it.

Money is important to so many people. In certain groups of politicians, thats all they care about.

You dont do things for money. You do things because its the right thing to do.

[QUOTE="SpartanMSU"]

[QUOTE="Choga"]

Because as a society we value equal opportunity. And "best person for the job" is very misleading, since the best person for a homophobic employer is someone who isn't gay.

imetamonster

By "best person" I mean the person who is going to make/save the business the most money...

The goal of every business is to make money...soooo why the hell would they hire someone not based on their ability to do that?

Because its wrong? I dont think peoplewant to end up living in a society where you have to lie about yourself to get a job.

I see your point... Money. But i dont think its the right and respectful point

No, you don't see my point. My point was that it'd go against basic business principles (that of the goal of every business is to make money) to NOT hire someone only because of their race, religion, sexual orientation, etc. even if they had the best ability to make/save the most money for the business.

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"][QUOTE="fidosim"] No, but there is a very limited scope of discrimination that the law recognizes. Saying that "discrimination" is bad is to make a very broad statement - you can treat anyone like a protected class if they have been discriminated against in some way. If some people don't like to date blonde girls, they are discriminating against them. Does that mean we should make blonde girls a protected class? No. So your term "freedom from discrimination" is essentially meaningless.whipassmt

blind people can't get drivers licenses. That is discrimination.

You are forgetting that there is a difference betwixt just discrimination and unjust discrimination.

Moreover what does rights and discrimination have to do with military munitions (LGBs specifically) which I take it this law is about?

Thank goodness for the separation of church and state.

Now, we just need to separate the church from the minds of these twisted politicians and this will be a truly great country.

[QUOTE="SpartanMSU"]

[QUOTE="Choga"]

Because as a society we value equal opportunity. And "best person for the job" is very misleading, since the best person for a homophobic employer is someone who isn't gay.

imetamonster

By "best person" I mean the person who is going to make/save the business the most money...

The goal of every business is to make money...soooo why the hell would they hire someone not based on their ability to do that?

Because its wrong? I dont think peoplewant to end up living in a society where you have to lie about yourself to get a job.

[QUOTE="Netherscourge"]

[QUOTE="whipassmt"]In some jobs gays may harm business. For instance a gay waiter may cause people to not eat at the restaurant as much costing the employer revenue. Isn't it unfair to the employer to force him to hire someone who will cost him revenue.

Moreover it's possible that being an active homosexual may disqualify one for a certain job based on that jobs qualifications. For instance Canon Law specifies that a teacher in a Catholic school must be known for their "moral probity" and since homosexual activities violate Church teaching then those who engage in them are not known for their "moral probity" and hence not qualified for the job of teaching in a Catholic School.

whipassmt

LOL

How the heck would you know if the waiter is gay Is he wearing a pink fedora with feathers sticking out of his hat?

And how would that ruin your dinner, aside from some loose feathers falling into your food?

Or do you have some insatiable urge to think about gay sex whenever you see someone you suspect is gay in your presence at a restaurant?

I mean seriously.... are you kidding me with this?

And yes people are uncomfortable with gays serving them food. For example one time a painter came to paint my uncle's house and my uncle thought the painter might have been gay so my uncle went into the bathroom and got his tooth brush, put it in a plasticbag and hid it in the pocket of one of his coats that has hanging in his closet because he was afraid that the gay painter might brush his teeth with it.

What the heck? Dude, i dont think most people are concerned about gays serving them food?

Is this some stereotype? If it is. I can tell you its not true

[QUOTE="SpartanMSU"]

[QUOTE="Choga"]

Because as a society we value equal opportunity. And "best person for the job" is very misleading, since the best person for a homophobic employer is someone who isn't gay.

imetamonster

By "best person" I mean the person who is going to make/save the business the most money...

The goal of every business is to make money...soooo why the hell would they hire someone not based on their ability to do that?

Because its wrong? I dont think peoplewant to end up living in a society where you have to lie about yourself to get a job.

I see your point... Money. But i dont think its the right and respectful point

[QUOTE="whipassmt"]

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"] This is in regards to discrimination in the business or the public and you know that.Netherscourge

blind people can't get drivers licenses. That is discrimination.

You are forgetting that there is a difference betwixt just discrimination and unjust discrimination.

Moreover what does rights and discrimination have to do with military munitions (LGBs specifically) which I take it this law is about?

Thank goodness for the separation of church and state.

Now, we just need to separate the church from the minds of these twisted politicians and this will be a truly great country.

[QUOTE="whipassmt"]

[QUOTE="Netherscourge"]

LOL

How the heck would you know if the waiter is gay Is he wearing a pink fedora with feathers sticking out of his hat?

And how would that ruin your dinner, aside from some loose feathers falling into your food?

Or do you have some insatiable urge to think about gay sex whenever you see someone you suspect is gay in your presence at a restaurant?

I mean seriously.... are you kidding me with this?

imetamonster

And yes people are uncomfortable with gays serving them food. For example one time a painter came to paint my uncle's house and my uncle thought the painter might have been gay so my uncle went into the bathroom and got his tooth brush, put it in a plasticbag and hid it in the pocket of one of his coats that has hanging in his closet because he was afraid that the gay painter might brush his teeth with it.

What the heck? Dude, i dont think most people are concerned about gays serving them food?

Is this some stereotype? If it is. I can tell you its not true

[QUOTE="imetamonster"]

[QUOTE="SpartanMSU"]

By "best person" I mean the person who is going to make/save the business the most money...

The goal of every business is to make money...soooo why the hell would they hire someone not based on their ability to do that?

whipassmt

Because its wrong? I dont think peoplewant to end up living in a society where you have to lie about yourself to get a job.

Are you relating thatbeing racist is like being Black or being gay?

Way different. First off people shouldnt be racist or homophobic in the first place. You cant tell gays to hide the fact they are gay Thats not right

[QUOTE="Netherscourge"]

[QUOTE="whipassmt"]In some jobs gays may harm business. For instance a gay waiter may cause people to not eat at the restaurant as much costing the employer revenue. Isn't it unfair to the employer to force him to hire someone who will cost him revenue.

Moreover it's possible that being an active homosexual may disqualify one for a certain job based on that jobs qualifications. For instance Canon Law specifies that a teacher in a Catholic school must be known for their "moral probity" and since homosexual activities violate Church teaching then those who engage in them are not known for their "moral probity" and hence not qualified for the job of teaching in a Catholic School.

whipassmt

LOL

How the heck would you know if the waiter is gay Is he wearing a pink fedora with feathers sticking out of his hat?

And how would that ruin your dinner, aside from some loose feathers falling into your food?

Or do you have some insatiable urge to think about gay sex whenever you see someone you suspect is gay in your presence at a restaurant?

I mean seriously.... are you kidding me with this?

And yes people are uncomfortable with gays serving them food. For example one time a painter came to paint my uncle's house and my uncle thought the painter might have been gay so my uncle went into the bathroom and got his tooth brush, put it in a plasticbag and hid it in the pocket of one of his coats that has hanging in his closet because he was afraid that the gay painter might brush his teeth with it.

Why would a gay painter want to use your Uncle's toothbrush?

Why would ANY painter want to use your Uncle's toothbrush?

Why do only gay painter's make your Uncle uncomfortable about his toothbrush?

Why the hell am I still here asking these questions? lol

How did this whole topic turn into a debate about gays. I thought it was about military munitions (specifically the LGBs that the TC mentioned in the titles).

[QUOTE="whipassmt"]

[QUOTE="imetamonster"]

Because its wrong? I dont think peoplewant to end up living in a society where you have to lie about yourself to get a job.

imetamonster

Are you relating thatbeing racist is like being Black or being gay?

Way different. First off people shouldnt be racist or homophobic in the first place. You cant tell gays to hide the fact they are gay Thats not right

[QUOTE="Netherscourge"]

[QUOTE="whipassmt"]

blind people can't get drivers licenses. That is discrimination.

You are forgetting that there is a difference betwixt just discrimination and unjust discrimination.

Moreover what does rights and discrimination have to do with military munitions (LGBs specifically) which I take it this law is about?

whipassmt

Thank goodness for the separation of church and state.

Now, we just need to separate the church from the minds of these twisted politicians and this will be a truly great country.

I think some people need to stand up for whats right whether its the state or not...

Who cares if they were sued? They should have been in my opinion

How did this whole topic turn into a debate about gays. I thought it was about military munitions (specifically the LGBs that the TC mentioned in the titles).

whipassmt

LGBT is an acronym for Lesbi*n G@y, bi, transsexual

[QUOTE="whipassmt"]

[QUOTE="Netherscourge"]

LOL

How the heck would you know if the waiter is gay Is he wearing a pink fedora with feathers sticking out of his hat?

And how would that ruin your dinner, aside from some loose feathers falling into your food?

Or do you have some insatiable urge to think about gay sex whenever you see someone you suspect is gay in your presence at a restaurant?

I mean seriously.... are you kidding me with this?

Netherscourge

And yes people are uncomfortable with gays serving them food. For example one time a painter came to paint my uncle's house and my uncle thought the painter might have been gay so my uncle went into the bathroom and got his tooth brush, put it in a plasticbag and hid it in the pocket of one of his coats that has hanging in his closet because he was afraid that the gay painter might brush his teeth with it.

Why would a gay painter want to use your Uncle's toothbrush?

Why would ANY painter want to use your Uncle's toothbrush?

Why do only gay painter's make your Uncle uncomfortable about his toothbrush?

Why the hell am I still here asking these questions? lol

[QUOTE="imetamonster"]

[QUOTE="whipassmt"] lol. People lie about themselves in order to get a job all the time. Do you think open racists should be able to get a job and be protected by anti-discrimination law?

whipassmt

Are you relating thatbeing racist is like being Black or being gay?

Way different. First off people shouldnt be racist or homophobic in the first place. You cant tell gays to hide the fact they are gay Thats not right

Phew... you're just trolling.

For a second there, I honestly thought you believed this nonsense.

[QUOTE="imetamonster"]

[QUOTE="whipassmt"] lol. People lie about themselves in order to get a job all the time. Do you think open racists should be able to get a job and be protected by anti-discrimination law?

whipassmt

Are you relating thatbeing racist is like being Black or being gay?

Way different. First off people shouldnt be racist or homophobic in the first place. You cant tell gays to hide the fact they are gay Thats not right

They dont have to keep it hidden. Its not something thats looked at nicely. Its disrespectful and judgmental to judge someone on sexual orientation or color of skin. I cant beleive your standing up for homophobes and racists

[QUOTE="whipassmt"]

[QUOTE="Netherscourge"]

Thank goodness for the separation of church and state.

Now, we just need to separate the church from the minds of these twisted politicians and this will be a truly great country.

imetamonster

I think some people need to stand up for whats right whether its the state or not...

Who cares if they were sued? They should have been in my opinion

If someone in ministry in a Church is behaving in a way that violates that Church's teachings the Church has right to remove them from that ministry.

[QUOTE="whipassmt"]

How did this whole topic turn into a debate about gays. I thought it was about military munitions (specifically the LGBs that the TC mentioned in the titles).

SpartanMSU

LGBT is an acronym for Lesbi*n G@y, bi, transsexual

Thanks for answering me after everyone else refused to.

[QUOTE="whipassmt"]

[QUOTE="imetamonster"]

Are you relating thatbeing racist is like being Black or being gay?

Way different. First off people shouldnt be racist or homophobic in the first place. You cant tell gays to hide the fact they are gay Thats not right

imetamonster

They dont have to keep it hidden. Its not something thats looked at nicely. Its disrespectful and judgmental to judge someone on sexual orientation or color of skin. I cant beleive your standing up for homophobes and racists

[QUOTE="imetamonster"]

[QUOTE="whipassmt"] The problem here is that sometimes these anti-discrimination laws violate that "separation" by trying to force the Church to hire or accept people they otherwise would not. For instance a Bishop in Canada was sued for kicking removing an active homosexual altar server after parishioners complained, even though the state courts should have no business in what is a religious affair (i.e. who can and can't be altar servers).

whipassmt

I think some people need to stand up for whats right whether its the state or not...

Who cares if they were sued? They should have been in my opinion

If someone in ministry in a Church is behaving in a way that violates that Church's teachings the Church has right to remove them from that ministry.

Its discrimination!! For no reason at all! After studying sexuality for years, its not something you can change, or choose. Like skin color, or eye color, etc.

If a religion wants to discriminate against stuff like that, i can totally see religion getting throw into the garbage by our society. We are past the whole being gay is a evil disease era.

It's always been unofficial. Why not make it into law.Slender-Man

Because employers are afraid they'll be forced to hire gay/lesbian people against their will.

They're already mad that they have to hire minorities against their will.

Although, if they could hire undocumented migrant workers for $2 an hour, they'd do it in a heartbeat.

The lines between racism/bigotry/greed/politics is so hazy, I wonder if there really is any freedom or unity in this country.

It all comes down to greed and personal comfort level. Right and wrong is just a waste of time.

[QUOTE="imetamonster"]

[QUOTE="whipassmt"] who are you to say that people shouldn't be racist or "homophobic" (is that like hydrophobic molecules?). And why should a gay person be able to freely proclaim they are guy and a racist or a homophobe have to keep their racism or "homophobism" hidden? Not fair.

whipassmt

They dont have to keep it hidden. Its not something thats looked at nicely. Its disrespectful and judgmental to judge someone on sexual orientation or color of skin. I cant beleive your standing up for homophobes and racists

Theres a reason homophobes and racists are not looked at nicely. They judge people. And history shows us people like Hitler who killed jews and gays, not a good thing.

Its not good to be racist or homophobic.

Theres nothing wrong with being black, asian, white, or any other

Theres nothing wrong with being gay.

Huge difference

[QUOTE="whipassmt"]

[QUOTE="imetamonster"]

I think some people need to stand up for whats right whether its the state or not...

Who cares if they were sued? They should have been in my opinion

imetamonster

If someone in ministry in a Church is behaving in a way that violates that Church's teachings the Church has right to remove them from that ministry.

Its discrimination!! For no reason at all! After studying sexuality for years, its not something you can change, or choose. Like skin color, or eye color, etc.

If a religion wants to discriminate against stuff like that, i can totally see religion getting throw into the garbage by our society. We are past the whole being gay is a evil disease era.

[QUOTE="whipassmt"]

[QUOTE="imetamonster"]

They dont have to keep it hidden. Its not something thats looked at nicely. Its disrespectful and judgmental to judge someone on sexual orientation or color of skin. I cant beleive your standing up for homophobes and racists

imetamonster

Theres a reason homophobes and racists are not looked at nicely. They judge people. And history shows us people like Hitler who killed jews and gays, not a good thing.

Its not good to be racist or homophobic.

Theres nothing wrong with being black, asian, white, or any other

Theres nothing wrong with being gay.

Huge difference

You can choose to hate certain people for a certain reason.

You can try to change your nationality, eye color, sexual prefrence. But its not going to change. And thats fine. Its great actually. We are who we are. People, our country, everyone needs to accept it. We are beyond non-acceptance. Theres no point of trying to go back, because we wont.

Yeah im telling you right now that most people will not go through there lives without having sex. That goes for gays and straight people. Its ridiculous to tell anyone to live there live without sex.

Yeah im telling you right now that most people will not go through there lives without having sex. That goes for gays and straight people. Its ridiculous to tell anyone to live there live without sex.

imetamonster

And regardless. Religious organizations have a right to set standards for their members and the government has no right to intrude in this matter.

[QUOTE="imetamonster"]

Yeah im telling you right now that most people will not go through there lives without having sex. That goes for gays and straight people. Its ridiculous to tell anyone to live there live without sex.

whipassmt

And regardless. Religious organizations have a right to set standards for their members and the government has no right to intrude in this matter.

When it comes to a job, discrimination is not needed.

[QUOTE="whipassmt"]

[QUOTE="imetamonster"]

Yeah im telling you right now that most people will not go through there lives without having sex. That goes for gays and straight people. Its ridiculous to tell anyone to live there live without sex.

imetamonster

And regardless. Religious organizations have a right to set standards for their members and the government has no right to intrude in this matter.

When it comes to a job, discrimination is not needed.

[QUOTE="Netherscourge"]

[QUOTE="whipassmt"]In some jobs gays may harm business. For instance a gay waiter may cause people to not eat at the restaurant as much costing the employer revenue. Isn't it unfair to the employer to force him to hire someone who will cost him revenue.

Moreover it's possible that being an active homosexual may disqualify one for a certain job based on that jobs qualifications. For instance Canon Law specifies that a teacher in a Catholic school must be known for their "moral probity" and since homosexual activities violate Church teaching then those who engage in them are not known for their "moral probity" and hence not qualified for the job of teaching in a Catholic School.

whipassmt

LOL

How the heck would you know if the waiter is gay Is he wearing a pink fedora with feathers sticking out of his hat?

And how would that ruin your dinner, aside from some loose feathers falling into your food?

Or do you have some insatiable urge to think about gay sex whenever you see someone you suspect is gay in your presence at a restaurant?

I mean seriously.... are you kidding me with this?

And yes people are uncomfortable with gays serving them food. For example one time a painter came to paint my uncle's house and my uncle thought the painter might have been gay so my uncle went into the bathroom and got his tooth brush, put it in a plasticbag and hid it in the pocket of one of his coats that has hanging in his closet because he was afraid that the gay painter might brush his teeth with it.

[QUOTE="imetamonster"]

Yeah im telling you right now that most people will not go through there lives without having sex. That goes for gays and straight people. Its ridiculous to tell anyone to live there live without sex.

whipassmt

And regardless. Religious organizations have a right to set standards for their members and the government has no right to intrude in this matter.

Yes and we have a history filled of prominent church officials including a few popes to have sexual reliationships.. Celibacy is unrealistic biologically, furthermore it is in the end none of yoru business to begin with..

[QUOTE="whipassmt"]

[QUOTE="imetamonster"]

Yeah im telling you right now that most people will not go through there lives without having sex. That goes for gays and straight people. Its ridiculous to tell anyone to live there live without sex.

sSubZerOo

And regardless. Religious organizations have a right to set standards for their members and the government has no right to intrude in this matter.

Yes and we have a history filled of prominent church officials including a few popes to have sexual reliationships.. Celibacy is unrealistic biologically, furthermore it is in the end none of yoru business to begin with..

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

[QUOTE="whipassmt"] Maybe so maybe not. But the Bishop who kicked out the altar server is himself a celibate man, so it's not like he's telling the altar server to do anything he himself has not down.

And regardless. Religious organizations have a right to set standards for their members and the government has no right to intrude in this matter.

whipassmt

Yes and we have a history filled of prominent church officials including a few popes to have sexual reliationships.. Celibacy is unrealistic biologically, furthermore it is in the end none of yoru business to begin with..

If churches would pay TAXES, than i would be all in favor of what your saying.. But they don't, and they are still given the services they are getting for free..

[QUOTE="whipassmt"]

[QUOTE="imetamonster"]

Yeah im telling you right now that most people will not go through there lives without having sex. That goes for gays and straight people. Its ridiculous to tell anyone to live there live without sex.

imetamonster

And regardless. Religious organizations have a right to set standards for their members and the government has no right to intrude in this matter.

When it comes to a job, discrimination is not needed.

[QUOTE="whipassmt"]

[QUOTE="imetamonster"]

Yeah im telling you right now that most people will not go through there lives without having sex. That goes for gays and straight people. Its ridiculous to tell anyone to live there live without sex.

sSubZerOo

And regardless. Religious organizations have a right to set standards for their members and the government has no right to intrude in this matter.

Yes and we have a history filled of prominent church officials including a few popes to have sexual reliationships.. Celibacy is unrealistic biologically, furthermore it is in the end none of yoru business to begin with..

Thank you

[QUOTE="imetamonster"]

[QUOTE="whipassmt"] Maybe so maybe not. But the Bishop who kicked out the altar server is himself a celibate man, so it's not like he's telling the altar server to do anything he himself has not down.

And regardless. Religious organizations have a right to set standards for their members and the government has no right to intrude in this matter.

surrealnumber5

When it comes to a job, discrimination is not needed.

Sure?

Whats the question?

[QUOTE="whipassmt"]

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

Yes and we have a history filled of prominent church officials including a few popes to have sexual reliationships.. Celibacy is unrealistic biologically, furthermore it is in the end none of yoru business to begin with..

sSubZerOo

If churches would pay TAXES, than i would be all in favor of what your saying.. But they don't, and they are still given the services they are getting for free..

Do you want Planned Parenthood to pay taxes?

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

[QUOTE="whipassmt"] Maybe so maybe not. But the Bishop who kicked out the altar server is himself a celibate man, so it's not like he's telling the altar server to do anything he himself has not down.

And regardless. Religious organizations have a right to set standards for their members and the government has no right to intrude in this matter.

imetamonster

Yes and we have a history filled of prominent church officials including a few popes to have sexual reliationships.. Celibacy is unrealistic biologically, furthermore it is in the end none of yoru business to begin with..

Thank you

[QUOTE="imetamonster"]

[QUOTE="SpartanMSU"]

By "best person" I mean the person who is going to make/save the business the most money...

The goal of every business is to make money...soooo why the hell would they hire someone not based on their ability to do that?

surrealnumber5

Because its wrong? I dont think peoplewant to end up living in a society where you have to lie about yourself to get a job.

I see your point... Money. But i dont think its the right and respectful point

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

[QUOTE="whipassmt"] It is none of the governments business who the Church accepts and does not accept as altar servers and other ministries is my point. Whether or not certain people keep their vows of celibacy is irrelevant (some do, some don't same with all vows really) to my point. The point is that the government should not interfere in internal Church affairs.

whipassmt

If churches would pay TAXES, than i would be all in favor of what your saying.. But they don't, and they are still given the services they are getting for free..

Do you want Planned Parenthood to pay taxes?

I dont think they should

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

[QUOTE="imetamonster"]

Because its wrong? I dont think peoplewant to end up living in a society where you have to lie about yourself to get a job.

I see your point... Money. But i dont think its the right and respectful point

surrealnumber5

Im having a hard time understnanding the question