AU demands shut down of Trump’s EAC + Painter fired for not attending Bible studies

#11
Again, if the guy agreed to it as a condition of employing a felon...
And he must be able to prove why he was fired for it to have any merit in court.
Reply
#12
(Sep 2, 2018 04:15 AM)Magical Realist Wrote:
(Sep 2, 2018 03:48 AM)Syne Wrote: Again, it could have been a concession for hiring a felon. Either attend paid Bible studies or won't be hired as a felon, which is not a protected class. If you'd just prefer that felons can't find decent jobs and become recidivists, that's on you.

A felon still falls under civil rights. And you can't force him to study the Bible as a condition of staying hired. It's a violation of the law. Sue that fucker for all he's worth.

Quote:If he knew the Bible studies were a requirement of gaining employment as a felon,

you cant legaly sign a rite away in a contract that breaks a law.
if the statement is written as a condition in the employment contract it does not suddenly change the law.
leveraging religous membership as compulsory for fellons would be no different to forcing black employees to study white history as a condition of employment.

it is blatent discrimination.

and... given that it has forced him to be advertised as a non christian fellon, he should be able to sue for signifigant damages.
defamation, & lost income & lost future income given the good reference that job would have otherwise provided.
emotional damages would be also an issue.
Reply
#13
So another person who would prefer that felons just become repeat offenders, due to a lack of such opportunities.
Similar to the people who would prefer orphans not be adopted through religious adoption agencies.

It's a sickness that ignores the human cost of anti-religious sentiment.
Reply
#14
(Sep 2, 2018 06:12 AM)Syne Wrote: So another person who would prefer that felons just become repeat offenders, due to a lack of such opportunities.
Similar to the people who would prefer orphans not be adopted through religious adoption agencies.

It's a sickness that ignores the human cost of anti-religious sentiment.

Religious adoption agencies shut themselves down when they can't stay tax exempted because of their discrimination against LGBT. That's all on them.
Reply
#15
Some states are protecting religious foster/adoption agencies and possibly allowing them access to state funds. Oklahoma, Kansas, Texas, Alabama, South Dakota, Virginia and Michigan. The more agencies, the more kids can get adopted. Has nothing to do with tax exemption. Has more to do with gays/atheists using orphan children as political footballs. It's sick.
Reply
#16
(Sep 2, 2018 06:49 AM)Syne Wrote: Some states are protecting religious foster/adoption agencies and possibly allowing them access to state funds. Oklahoma, Kansas, Texas, Alabama, South Dakota, Virginia and Michigan. The more agencies, the more kids can get adopted. Has nothing to do with tax exemption. Has more to do with gays/atheists using orphan children as political footballs. It's sick.

And the more LGBTs can adopt, the more kids that get adopted. Shutting yourself down because you hate gays is sick.
Reply
#17
No, that's not how that works. Where LGBT makes up such a small percent of the population, and an even smaller percent of adoption seekers, the limiting factor is agencies, especially when there already exist secular agencies to cater to the LGBT. Denying children the opportunity for an actual home just because you have a political axe to grind is narcissistic and evil.

Ignoring their own moral principles would be a dissociative identity disorder, at best. If they wanted to do that, they'd just go work for a secular agency.
Reply
#18
Quote:Denying children the opportunity for an actual home just because you have a political axe to grind is narcissistic and evil.

Yes that is how it works. They can't get their way discriminating against LGBTs and so shut their doors and end up moving all the kids to other adoption agencies. I'm not saying this again either. Posting to you makes me physically ill.
Reply
#19
(Sep 2, 2018 08:08 AM)Magical Realist Wrote: Yes that is how it works. They can't get their way discriminating against LGBTs and so shut their doors and end up moving all the kids to other adoption agencies. I'm not saying this again either. Posting to you makes me physically ill.

Then why do you reply to me, moron? Rolleyes
Look, just because you suffer from DID and have no problem ignoring your own moral compass, if you even have one, doesn't mean that you should expect anyone else to as well. Most rational people, who have any morals at all, cannot ignore their moral principles. So it isn't a choice. Whereas you being happy to cynically use the fate of children to do nothing but bolster your political agenda is amoral, at best.

If you do have any ethical considerations at all, it would be like asking you to knowingly place children in abusive pedophile homes. And no, moron, that's an analogy to whatever morals you may have, not a direct comparison. Would you place children in those homes or prefer to leave them in state custody, where at least you are not complicit in the abuse they would suffer? O_o

Can you just choose to change your views of abusive pedophiles? O_o
Reply
#20
There is a possibility (probably not) - that if you willfully abuse a 'right' granted 'by law' you lose the protection that law would have given you. Not sure how that might work in either the UK or US.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)