It is a matter of principle. It would state that officially, in the USA sexual discrimination is a not approved, it is a thing of the past. In the end the discussion comes down to whether a person's sexual orientation is a matter choice. I would argue that anybody who thinks so is basing that on the fact that their own sexual orientation is beyond choice. If not I would dare anybody to chose to change their sexual orientation for a week. Nothing is lost, just one week. Read about another sexual orientation in depth to get to understand what it is all about, then make the decision to be gay, transgender, whatever for a week.
Why should I do that when I'm perfectly happy as a heterosexual? I'm not obsessed about my sexual orientation like gays and lesbians are.
But what it will do is force Boy Scouts to hire men who shouldn't be over boys. Can you imagine hiring a man to sleep in a tent with young girls? Then why would you hire a gay man to sleep in a tent with young boys? Stupid.
To also force churches, whose Bibles teach against homosexuality, to hire homosexuals on staff, completely violating their rights and freedoms.
Because being Gay and being a Pedophile are not the same thing. Get your facts straight. In that thought pattern, no man should ever be left alone with a girl – their child or not – because we all know some men like to sleep with women and that is just too close for comfort.
Ridiculous. it just highlights a fundamental lack of empathy for other people.
Except this concerns basic human rights. It is long overdue and I take my hat off to TC for using his position to encourage decision makers to challenge their own bigotry.
Being hired for a job is not a basic civil right. You don't have a right to a job just because you want one, nor do I have to hire you just because you want one. Your civil liberty is the fact that you have the right to pursue any job you want (freedom) but you don't have the RIGHT to be hired.
But what makes you think a heavy dude is less deserving of a job than a slender one?
Physical health, and also their abilities to carry out the job, depending upon what exactly that job is of course.
If somebody is hiring an employee for the longterm, and there are two employees seeking the job with equal qualifications, it makes sense to go with the one who will survive longer, and have less medical issues and take less time off from work.
There are many things to consider when hiring somebody, and I believe that everything is fair game, including gender, physical appearance, religion and many other factors.
Being hired for a job is not a basic civil right. You don't have a right to a job just because you want one, nor do I have to hire you just because you want one. Your civil liberty is the fact that you have the right to pursue any job you want (freedom) but you don't have the RIGHT to be hired.
No you don't have a right to have a job just because you want one, but you should have the right to be judged for that job fairly, based on things you can control rather than things that have no bearing on job performance that you can't.
Why does it matter whether it's a choice? Religion is a choice, but I'm forbidden from discriminating against people who believe in nonsense and disbelieve science (ie Christians)
I am a long time citizen and it troubles me when Christian bigots use their political position to push their religious agenda on everyone (remember, religion is now debunked bunch of bronze age lies).
My how tolerant and accepting your are of people with different beliefs than you. I’m assuming you would fire any Christians working for you if you were their boss? Would you advise them not to attend church if they wanted to keep their jobs?
If somebody is hiring an employee for the longterm, and there are two employees seeking the job with equal qualifications, it makes sense to go with the one who will survive longer, and have less medical issues and take less time off from work.
There are many things to consider when hiring somebody, and I believe that everything is fair game, including gender, physical appearance, religion and many other factors.
Fortunately, your beliefs are not the law. In fact, the law (and common sense, fairness, and dignity) dictate that you cannot discriminate against people for these reasons! By your standard, Apple should have fired S. Jobs at the first sign of illness.
The greatest deception of recent times is that homosexuality is like being caucasian, hispanic, asian, etc.
It's a complete fallacy.
It's a lifestyle choice.
Not immutable. Not by birth.
Pure ignorance. Tell that to kids offing themselves because the can't be who people want them to be. That they can't "fake straight" without hating themselves every minute of their lives. It's selfish and deplorable to make someone be someone else just to make YOU comfortable. Being an employer doesn't give you the right to dictate someone's identity. It' great that you have you all figured out – fantastic – some aren't hat lucky and have their own life they also need to figure out. No one is telling you to stop being you, just don't think you have a valid opinion on who some one else should be.
Fortunately, your beliefs are not the law. In fact, the law (and common sense, fairness, and dignity) dictate that you cannot discriminate against people for these reasons! By your standard, Apple should have fired S. Jobs at the first sign of illness.
I am aware that it is not the law. I was merely stating what I believe. I don't always agree with all laws of course, and I also don't always follow all laws.
Why does it matter whether it's a choice? Religion is a choice, but I'm forbidden from discriminating against people who believe in nonsense and disbelieve science (ie Christians)
You realize, of course, that the primary mathematician/physicist who proposed the big bang theory was a Belgian Roman Catholic priest by the name of Monseigneur Georges Henri Joseph Édouard Lemaître. Funny how you lump all Christians into one stereotype but bristle at anyone doing the same to your favorite group. The so-called tolerance of the left is beyond the pale of hypocrisy.
No you don't have a right to have a job just because you want one, but you should have the right to be judged for that job fairly, based on things you can control rather than things that have no bearing on job performance that you can't.
I struggle with that word "should." "Should" implies an entitlement. I, again, go back to the fundamental belief that our only true civil right is freedom. We can be whoever we want to be, but we can't force others' behavior. Government is not effective enforcer of morality and it's hard to legislate morality.
Make no mistake, I am not one who would discriminate against a homosexual during a job interview, but this legislation is not going to be helpful.
Why should I do that when I'm perfectly happy as a heterosexual? I'm not obsessed about my sexual orientation like gays and lesbians are.
Only if you were of the opinion that sexual orientation is a matter of choice. If you are not then equality under the law should be non-problematic, non?
How about we just do away with discrimination altogether - Including not discriminating against people like a certain CEO who ended up resigning just two weeks after he was hired? Does anyone else sense the double standard?
No, and it goes to the heart of the definition of bigotry.
Brendan Eich spent money not on his beliefs, but to impose his beliefs on others. He was unaccepting of the beliefs of others (bigotry). He wasn't forced to resign because he didn't want to gay marry (that would've been bigotry and thus a double standard).
Brendan Eich was forced to resign because there were enough people like me who looked at it like this... He's free to not gay marry. He's even free to hate gays all he wants. However, when he spends money to impose his beliefs on others who don't share his beliefs in a way that has no impact on him whatsoever other than his disapproval of their beliefs, then there's an issue of where that money comes from.
In this situation, Brendan Eich was getting money from Mozilla. The use of Firefox by us meant that money would be available to be given to Brendan Eich, who would not state that he wouldn't contribute to a prop 8 like campaign again. Thus there was a direct connection:
Use Firefox -> Mozilla gets money -> money goes to Brendan Eich -> Brendan Eich spends money on anti-gay campaigns.
I, and many others, didn't want to use Firefox knowing this direct chain would happen. Mozilla saw the impact of this and had a long talk with Brendan Eich resulting in his resignation.
Now, I know in reality the bigger issue was likely that Google threatened to pull funding, which accounts for 90% of Mozilla's revenue, but those at Google were doing this for the same reason (as well as fear of secondary boycotting of Google products and services).
This is so stupid... Apple needs to stay out of personal politics. I can't figure out where gays are discriminated against? I'm about sick and tired of the .05% tail wagging the dog. If you want to be an AIDS risk then do it, but you don't need to shout it from the rooftops.
Ten years ago everybody was saying marriage was on out-dated, obsolete institution. Now everybody wants in on it. WTF? I liked it better when liberals hated marriage.
I don't care if you are gay or straight. Shut up about sex in the workplace and do your job. Then we won't have any issues, sexual harassment, orientation or otherwise.
No... I'm not homophobic... I just don't like them.
As it says above, there 28 states where it is legal to be fired for being gay. I believe that is discrimination, if you were looking for one example. Also, it's not .05% it's actually more like 4%, so around 8 Million Americans (source). Also, reports have highschoolers as high as 13% due to better understanding of peer-groups and less of a need to be closeted (hence, identifying). If you truly want an AIDS risk, be straight in the continent of Africa, or Brazil, or many other places unprotected sex is religiously supported. You are dealing in old stereotypes, my friend.
It's not just about "being" married, it is also what it mean. Equality. Not to be kicked out of a hospital room, denyed coverage, benefits or support and – in the off chance it doesn't work out (like many straight marriages as well) – legal president when dealing with assets and more importantly, the children by which ever what they became part of the family.
Gay people don't want to talk about sex at work, most are scared and would rather leave their private life at home. The problem is that they don't have the freedom to be relaxed about their private life as I would. I could say, when prompted by a co-worker about my weekend plans, That my wife and I have a date and we'll be going out. If someone who was gay was in the same position, they open themselves up to get fired. Having pictures up or anything you identify with your loving home life can end you employment. That is not equality. If I can not fire someone for not liking black people, how is it fair that I can fire someone for knowing they go home to another man? And be honest about that thought.
You don't have to like them – I work with people I don't like, and probably for better reasons than you have for not liking Gays, but that is not a reason to allow a legal way to fire them. This is a modern society and we should be beyond that by now.
I am a long time citizen and it troubles me when Christian bigots use their political position to push their religious agenda on everyone (remember, religion is now debunked bunch of bronze age lies).
Hateful much? Don't lump all Christians together. Besides, have you been to the Middle East? Where is your Muslim hate?
Why does it matter whether it's a choice? Religion is a choice, but I'm forbidden from discriminating against people who believe in nonsense and disbelieve science (ie Christians)
Don't lump all Christians as one group. That's being a bigot as well.
I don't have any problems with hiring a gay person of course, if they were the best qualified for the job, that is what's important. But I would most likely have to pass on hiring any sexually confused people. Those people should go work for FB, since FB has a gazillion different choices for gender. What a joke. And no, you don't get to choose that you are a female or something else, if you actually have male sexual organs. You are what you are. If somebody goes around and really wishes that they were a hippopotamus, that doesn't make it so, no matter how much they wish that they were. People are what they are. There are probably thousands of lunatics in various mental asylums that think that they're Napoleon.
I'm being charitable when I say that your rant reads like that of a poorly-educated bigot. You contradicted yourself in the first two sentences by basically asserting that most of the time jobs should be filled based on merit, except when you feel like discriminating against someone based on sexual orientation. "Trust me guys, I'm not really a racist/bigot, but we need to discriminate along these lines because ...." You're not fooling anyone.
My how tolerant and accepting your are of people with different beliefs than you. I’m assuming you would fire any Christians working for you if you were their boss? Would you advise them not to attend church if they wanted to keep their jobs?
Why should ignorance be respected? When you have over 50% of the population who literally believes in the creationism, that deny the scientific facts like evolution, that don't want science taught in schools, that support unjust policies in the middle east because they think it is a per-requisite for Armageddon and return of Jesus, when you have politicians saying things like we don't need environmental policy because Jesus is coming back to earth within 50 years, so who cares what happens to the earth anyway, when you have people literally wishing for the end of the world to come as soon as possible (if they saw mushroom clouds they would literally rejoice because the best thing that can happen to them has started to happen, i.e. return of Jesus).
This love affair with ignorance is getting out of hand, and the future of the entire civilization is at stake. It's time to stop being so damn polite and respectful of ignorance and delusions and it's time we pointed out at every opportunity about what we do know, that all religions are man made inventions.
Sure everyone is entitled to an opinion. But is it worth anything. Is it supported by evidence/reason? If the opinion is wrong, then it should be pointed out and if it is outrageously wrong, then also ridiculed (because that's when it's expressed with most conviction). To be knowledgeable on a particular subject is precisely to exclude certain wrong views from consideration. And religion is so wrong on so many levels.
Religious people have a really hard time with this one. You have the right to believe any old superstition, but the rest of us have the right to tell you are absolutely stupid for doing so. This religious entitlement and protection has to stop.
Comments
LOL
They are choices. Nothing more.
The greatest deception of recent times is that homosexuality is like being caucasian, hispanic, asian, etc.
It's a complete fallacy.
It's a lifestyle choice.
Not immutable. Not by birth.
I'm sorry, if it's a choice, who would choose it? Who would choose to face bigotry, have unequal rights etc?
You almost never see it.
But what it will do is force Boy Scouts to hire men who shouldn't be over boys. Can you imagine hiring a man to sleep in a tent with young girls? Then why would you hire a gay man to sleep in a tent with young boys? Stupid.
To also force churches, whose Bibles teach against homosexuality, to hire homosexuals on staff, completely violating their rights and freedoms.
Because being Gay and being a Pedophile are not the same thing. Get your facts straight. In that thought pattern, no man should ever be left alone with a girl – their child or not – because we all know some men like to sleep with women and that is just too close for comfort.
Ridiculous. it just highlights a fundamental lack of empathy for other people.
Being hired for a job is not a basic civil right. You don't have a right to a job just because you want one, nor do I have to hire you just because you want one. Your civil liberty is the fact that you have the right to pursue any job you want (freedom) but you don't have the RIGHT to be hired.
But what makes you think a heavy dude is less deserving of a job than a slender one?
Physical health, and also their abilities to carry out the job, depending upon what exactly that job is of course.
If somebody is hiring an employee for the longterm, and there are two employees seeking the job with equal qualifications, it makes sense to go with the one who will survive longer, and have less medical issues and take less time off from work.
There are many things to consider when hiring somebody, and I believe that everything is fair game, including gender, physical appearance, religion and many other factors.
This will just pave the way for, say, Catholic Churches to be forced to hire gay men as priests.
But... but... at one point the Catholic church ITSELF encouraged gay men to become priests!
Being hired for a job is not a basic civil right. You don't have a right to a job just because you want one, nor do I have to hire you just because you want one. Your civil liberty is the fact that you have the right to pursue any job you want (freedom) but you don't have the RIGHT to be hired.
No you don't have a right to have a job just because you want one, but you should have the right to be judged for that job fairly, based on things you can control rather than things that have no bearing on job performance that you can't.
I am a long time citizen and it troubles me when Christian bigots use their political position to push their religious agenda on everyone (remember, religion is now debunked bunch of bronze age lies).
My how tolerant and accepting your are of people with different beliefs than you. I’m assuming you would fire any Christians working for you if you were their boss? Would you advise them not to attend church if they wanted to keep their jobs?
If somebody is hiring an employee for the longterm, and there are two employees seeking the job with equal qualifications, it makes sense to go with the one who will survive longer, and have less medical issues and take less time off from work.
There are many things to consider when hiring somebody, and I believe that everything is fair game, including gender, physical appearance, religion and many other factors.
Fortunately, your beliefs are not the law. In fact, the law (and common sense, fairness, and dignity) dictate that you cannot discriminate against people for these reasons! By your standard, Apple should have fired S. Jobs at the first sign of illness.
LOL
They are choices. Nothing more.
The greatest deception of recent times is that homosexuality is like being caucasian, hispanic, asian, etc.
It's a complete fallacy.
It's a lifestyle choice.
Not immutable. Not by birth.
Pure ignorance. Tell that to kids offing themselves because the can't be who people want them to be. That they can't "fake straight" without hating themselves every minute of their lives. It's selfish and deplorable to make someone be someone else just to make YOU comfortable. Being an employer doesn't give you the right to dictate someone's identity. It' great that you have you all figured out – fantastic – some aren't hat lucky and have their own life they also need to figure out. No one is telling you to stop being you, just don't think you have a valid opinion on who some one else should be.
Fortunately, your beliefs are not the law. In fact, the law (and common sense, fairness, and dignity) dictate that you cannot discriminate against people for these reasons! By your standard, Apple should have fired S. Jobs at the first sign of illness.
I am aware that it is not the law. I was merely stating what I believe. I don't always agree with all laws of course, and I also don't always follow all laws.
Why does it matter whether it's a choice? Religion is a choice, but I'm forbidden from discriminating against people who believe in nonsense and disbelieve science (ie Christians)
You realize, of course, that the primary mathematician/physicist who proposed the big bang theory was a Belgian Roman Catholic priest by the name of Monseigneur Georges Henri Joseph Édouard Lemaître. Funny how you lump all Christians into one stereotype but bristle at anyone doing the same to your favorite group. The so-called tolerance of the left is beyond the pale of hypocrisy.
I struggle with that word "should." "Should" implies an entitlement. I, again, go back to the fundamental belief that our only true civil right is freedom. We can be whoever we want to be, but we can't force others' behavior. Government is not effective enforcer of morality and it's hard to legislate morality.
Make no mistake, I am not one who would discriminate against a homosexual during a job interview, but this legislation is not going to be helpful.
Why should I do that when I'm perfectly happy as a heterosexual? I'm not obsessed about my sexual orientation like gays and lesbians are.
Only if you were of the opinion that sexual orientation is a matter of choice. If you are not then equality under the law should be non-problematic, non?
How about we just do away with discrimination altogether - Including not discriminating against people like a certain CEO who ended up resigning just two weeks after he was hired? Does anyone else sense the double standard?
No, and it goes to the heart of the definition of bigotry.
Brendan Eich spent money not on his beliefs, but to impose his beliefs on others. He was unaccepting of the beliefs of others (bigotry). He wasn't forced to resign because he didn't want to gay marry (that would've been bigotry and thus a double standard).
Brendan Eich was forced to resign because there were enough people like me who looked at it like this... He's free to not gay marry. He's even free to hate gays all he wants. However, when he spends money to impose his beliefs on others who don't share his beliefs in a way that has no impact on him whatsoever other than his disapproval of their beliefs, then there's an issue of where that money comes from.
In this situation, Brendan Eich was getting money from Mozilla. The use of Firefox by us meant that money would be available to be given to Brendan Eich, who would not state that he wouldn't contribute to a prop 8 like campaign again. Thus there was a direct connection:
Use Firefox -> Mozilla gets money -> money goes to Brendan Eich -> Brendan Eich spends money on anti-gay campaigns.
I, and many others, didn't want to use Firefox knowing this direct chain would happen. Mozilla saw the impact of this and had a long talk with Brendan Eich resulting in his resignation.
Now, I know in reality the bigger issue was likely that Google threatened to pull funding, which accounts for 90% of Mozilla's revenue, but those at Google were doing this for the same reason (as well as fear of secondary boycotting of Google products and services).
This is so stupid... Apple needs to stay out of personal politics. I can't figure out where gays are discriminated against? I'm about sick and tired of the .05% tail wagging the dog. If you want to be an AIDS risk then do it, but you don't need to shout it from the rooftops.
Ten years ago everybody was saying marriage was on out-dated, obsolete institution. Now everybody wants in on it. WTF? I liked it better when liberals hated marriage.
I don't care if you are gay or straight. Shut up about sex in the workplace and do your job. Then we won't have any issues, sexual harassment, orientation or otherwise.
No... I'm not homophobic... I just don't like them.
As it says above, there 28 states where it is legal to be fired for being gay. I believe that is discrimination, if you were looking for one example. Also, it's not .05% it's actually more like 4%, so around 8 Million Americans (source). Also, reports have highschoolers as high as 13% due to better understanding of peer-groups and less of a need to be closeted (hence, identifying). If you truly want an AIDS risk, be straight in the continent of Africa, or Brazil, or many other places unprotected sex is religiously supported. You are dealing in old stereotypes, my friend.
It's not just about "being" married, it is also what it mean. Equality. Not to be kicked out of a hospital room, denyed coverage, benefits or support and – in the off chance it doesn't work out (like many straight marriages as well) – legal president when dealing with assets and more importantly, the children by which ever what they became part of the family.
Gay people don't want to talk about sex at work, most are scared and would rather leave their private life at home. The problem is that they don't have the freedom to be relaxed about their private life as I would. I could say, when prompted by a co-worker about my weekend plans, That my wife and I have a date and we'll be going out. If someone who was gay was in the same position, they open themselves up to get fired. Having pictures up or anything you identify with your loving home life can end you employment. That is not equality. If I can not fire someone for not liking black people, how is it fair that I can fire someone for knowing they go home to another man? And be honest about that thought.
You don't have to like them – I work with people I don't like, and probably for better reasons than you have for not liking Gays, but that is not a reason to allow a legal way to fire them. This is a modern society and we should be beyond that by now.
Hateful much? Don't lump all Christians together. Besides, have you been to the Middle East? Where is your Muslim hate?
Ain't that the truth.
Don't lump all Christians as one group. That's being a bigot as well.
I disagree with Tim Cook.
I don't have any problems with hiring a gay person of course, if they were the best qualified for the job, that is what's important. But I would most likely have to pass on hiring any sexually confused people. Those people should go work for FB, since FB has a gazillion different choices for gender. What a joke. And no, you don't get to choose that you are a female or something else, if you actually have male sexual organs. You are what you are. If somebody goes around and really wishes that they were a hippopotamus, that doesn't make it so, no matter how much they wish that they were. People are what they are. There are probably thousands of lunatics in various mental asylums that think that they're Napoleon.
I'm being charitable when I say that your rant reads like that of a poorly-educated bigot. You contradicted yourself in the first two sentences by basically asserting that most of the time jobs should be filled based on merit, except when you feel like discriminating against someone based on sexual orientation. "Trust me guys, I'm not really a racist/bigot, but we need to discriminate along these lines because ...." You're not fooling anyone.
My how tolerant and accepting your are of people with different beliefs than you. I’m assuming you would fire any Christians working for you if you were their boss? Would you advise them not to attend church if they wanted to keep their jobs?
Why should ignorance be respected? When you have over 50% of the population who literally believes in the creationism, that deny the scientific facts like evolution, that don't want science taught in schools, that support unjust policies in the middle east because they think it is a per-requisite for Armageddon and return of Jesus, when you have politicians saying things like we don't need environmental policy because Jesus is coming back to earth within 50 years, so who cares what happens to the earth anyway, when you have people literally wishing for the end of the world to come as soon as possible (if they saw mushroom clouds they would literally rejoice because the best thing that can happen to them has started to happen, i.e. return of Jesus).
This love affair with ignorance is getting out of hand, and the future of the entire civilization is at stake. It's time to stop being so damn polite and respectful of ignorance and delusions and it's time we pointed out at every opportunity about what we do know, that all religions are man made inventions.
Sure everyone is entitled to an opinion. But is it worth anything. Is it supported by evidence/reason? If the opinion is wrong, then it should be pointed out and if it is outrageously wrong, then also ridiculed (because that's when it's expressed with most conviction). To be knowledgeable on a particular subject is precisely to exclude certain wrong views from consideration. And religion is so wrong on so many levels.
Religious people have a really hard time with this one. You have the right to believe any old superstition, but the rest of us have the right to tell you are absolutely stupid for doing so. This religious entitlement and protection has to stop.