(05-10-2016 11:41 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 11:36 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 11:29 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 09:35 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 05:35 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  No one asks your sexual preference on an application. No one asks that in a job interview. It is illegal to do so. I have hired guys I suspected were gay. Their sexual preference had nothing to do with completing the jobs I hired them for. I tell every employee I hire that sexual harassment,grabassing and other stuff of a sexual nature is not tolerated in our facility. Again...You want a special consideration..not equal treatment Tom.

No one asks if you are a Baptist. But you can't be fired even if the employer finds out. Or if you're open about your Baptistness.

We don't demand special consideration. But to have being LGBT hold the same protection as being a Baptist.

You already have that. I can't fire someone because of their religion or sex or sexual preference. Id catch living hell at a EOC hearing for doing that. Who and were are these people getting fired because they are gay Tom?

Do you really need 1,000,000 links? I'll just start with this one

http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2015/...ation.html

The Missouri court was wrong. It is illegal to harass people in the workplace. I have no idea how any sane individual could rule otherwise.

Actually, they got it right. Granted, from reading a leftist article, you wouldnt know the legal reason for it.

Missouri is an at-will state, as is many other states.

This is what a business cant do:

1. It shall be an unlawful employment practice:
(1) For an employer, because of the race, color, religion, national origin,
sex, ancestry, age or disability of any individual:
(a) To fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to
discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms,
conditions, or privileges of employment

You can be fired for any reason, except those listed above.

They fired me because I'm 72. - Illegal

They fired me because I'm ugly - Legal

They fired me because I farted - Legal

They fired me because I'm Christian - Illegal

They fired me because I'm hot and all the guys want to do me - Legal

In essence, you arent being fired because you're ugly, farted, or hot. Those reasons do not matter, because they can fire you WITHOUT CAUSE at any time EXCEPT for those items listed in the law.

If you are gay, you can be fired. If you are not gay you can also be fired by a gay owner. Because being gay does not protect you from being fired.

(05-09-2016 02:47 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-09-2016 02:43 PM)49RFootballNow Wrote:  

(05-09-2016 02:20 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-09-2016 02:18 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(05-09-2016 01:56 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Enacting some temporary and toothless 'protections' for 12 people at the expense of 100,000 people in Charlotte isn't a win.

who are the 12?

who are the 100,000 transgenders that can't use the bathroom of their choosing?

About 12 LGBT people work for the state cabinet agencies. 100,000 LGBT people work in Charlotte in private firms.

So 1 in 7 people in Charlotte are LGBT? Not sure of those numbers.

People who WORK in Charlotte.

Care to source these ridiculous claims per the AUP?

(05-10-2016 12:45 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 11:41 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 11:36 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 11:29 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 09:35 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  No one asks if you are a Baptist. But you can't be fired even if the employer finds out. Or if you're open about your Baptistness.

We don't demand special consideration. But to have being LGBT hold the same protection as being a Baptist.

You already have that. I can't fire someone because of their religion or sex or sexual preference. Id catch living hell at a EOC hearing for doing that. Who and were are these people getting fired because they are gay Tom?

Do you really need 1,000,000 links? I'll just start with this one

http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2015/...ation.html

The Missouri court was wrong. It is illegal to harass people in the workplace. I have no idea how any sane individual could rule otherwise.

Actually, they got it right. Granted, from reading a leftist article, you wouldnt know the legal reason for it.

Missouri is an at-will state, as is many other states.

This is what a business cant do:

1. It shall be an unlawful employment practice:
(1) For an employer, because of the race, color, religion, national origin,
sex, ancestry, age or disability of any individual:
(a) To fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to
discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms,
conditions, or privileges of employment

You can be fired for any reason, except those listed above.

They fired me because I'm 72. - Illegal

They fired me because I'm ugly - Legal

They fired me because I farted - Legal

They fired me because I'm Christian - Illegal

They fired me because I'm hot and all the guys want to do me - Legal

In essence, you arent being fired because you're ugly, farted, or hot. Those reasons do not matter, because they can fire you WITHOUT CAUSE at any time EXCEPT for those items listed in the law.

If you are gay, you can be fired. If you are not gay you can also be fired by a gay owner. Because being gay does not protect you from being fired.

NC is the same way. You can fire people for things that do not have to do with job performance or breaking company policies...but...You better hope like hell that they don't drag your ass in front of the EOC for a hearing. I've been there. It ain't fun. They are NOT on YOUR side.

Before I fire anyone I have my schit together documented and follow very stringent guidelines set forth by our risk management people. ONE lawsuit can ruin a company. You go ahead and play billy bad ass and fire people without real cause. You may get away with it. Often times they are not savvy enough to know what to do...but....It only takes once doing it to the wrong one and all hell breaks loose. I learned my lesson about 25 years ago. Never again.

This is why we use lots of temp employees now through an agency...especially when hiring. I don't have to do anything but just tell them we don't need then any more. I give them a good 6 month look over before I hire them permanently on our payroll.

Im shocked that any company would allow its management to engage in the harassment of any employee..for ANY reason. It is not only immoral..but..dangerous as hell. I hope this one in Missouri ends getting sued and destroyed for this schit eventually. Being in industry for 33 years and doing things the right way?...This makes me sick to my stomach that anyone would engage in such horrible practices with employees. We might not have greatest pay rates and benefits...but..we demand that our management team treat our people with the proper respect. If I saw schit like this going on in our mill?...Someones job would be on the line...pronto.

(05-10-2016 04:35 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 12:45 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 11:41 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 11:36 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 11:29 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  You already have that. I can't fire someone because of their religion or sex or sexual preference. Id catch living hell at a EOC hearing for doing that. Who and were are these people getting fired because they are gay Tom?

Do you really need 1,000,000 links? I'll just start with this one

http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2015/...ation.html

The Missouri court was wrong. It is illegal to harass people in the workplace. I have no idea how any sane individual could rule otherwise.

Actually, they got it right. Granted, from reading a leftist article, you wouldnt know the legal reason for it.

Missouri is an at-will state, as is many other states.

This is what a business cant do:

1. It shall be an unlawful employment practice:
(1) For an employer, because of the race, color, religion, national origin,
sex, ancestry, age or disability of any individual:
(a) To fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to
discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms,
conditions, or privileges of employment

You can be fired for any reason, except those listed above.

They fired me because I'm 72. - Illegal

They fired me because I'm ugly - Legal

They fired me because I farted - Legal

They fired me because I'm Christian - Illegal

They fired me because I'm hot and all the guys want to do me - Legal

In essence, you arent being fired because you're ugly, farted, or hot. Those reasons do not matter, because they can fire you WITHOUT CAUSE at any time EXCEPT for those items listed in the law.

If you are gay, you can be fired. If you are not gay you can also be fired by a gay owner. Because being gay does not protect you from being fired.

NC is the same way. You can fire people for things that do not have to do with job performance or breaking company policies...but...You better hope like hell that they don't drag your ass in front of the EOC for a hearing. I've been there. It ain't fun. They are NOT on YOUR side.

Before I fire anyone I have my schit together documented and follow very stringent guidelines set forth by our risk management people. ONE lawsuit can ruin a company. You go ahead and play billy bad ass and fire people without real cause. You may get away with it. Often times they are not savvy enough to know what to do...but....It only takes once doing it to the wrong one and all hell breaks loose. I learned my lesson about 25 years ago. Never again.

This is why we use lots of temp employees now through an agency...especially when hiring. I don't have to do anything but just tell them we don't need then any more. I give them a good 6 month look over before I hire them permanently on our payroll.

Im shocked that any company would allow its management to engage in the harassment of any employee..for ANY reason. It is not only immoral..but..dangerous as hell. I hope this one in Missouri ends getting sued and destroyed for this schit eventually. Being in industry for 33 years and doing things the right way?...This makes me sick to my stomach that anyone would engage in such horrible practices with employees. We might not have greatest pay rates and benefits...but..we demand that our management team treat our people with the proper respect. If I saw schit like this going on in our mill?...Someones job would be on the line...pronto.

Yep! As someone who works in an Employment Law Firm, I sure have seen companies go down, close or file bankruptcy because of this.

(05-10-2016 04:45 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 04:35 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 12:45 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 11:41 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 11:36 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Do you really need 1,000,000 links? I'll just start with this one

http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2015/...ation.html

The Missouri court was wrong. It is illegal to harass people in the workplace. I have no idea how any sane individual could rule otherwise.

Actually, they got it right. Granted, from reading a leftist article, you wouldnt know the legal reason for it.

Missouri is an at-will state, as is many other states.

This is what a business cant do:

1. It shall be an unlawful employment practice:
(1) For an employer, because of the race, color, religion, national origin,
sex, ancestry, age or disability of any individual:
(a) To fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to
discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms,
conditions, or privileges of employment

You can be fired for any reason, except those listed above.

They fired me because I'm 72. - Illegal

They fired me because I'm ugly - Legal

They fired me because I farted - Legal

They fired me because I'm Christian - Illegal

They fired me because I'm hot and all the guys want to do me - Legal

In essence, you arent being fired because you're ugly, farted, or hot. Those reasons do not matter, because they can fire you WITHOUT CAUSE at any time EXCEPT for those items listed in the law.

If you are gay, you can be fired. If you are not gay you can also be fired by a gay owner. Because being gay does not protect you from being fired.

NC is the same way. You can fire people for things that do not have to do with job performance or breaking company policies...but...You better hope like hell that they don't drag your ass in front of the EOC for a hearing. I've been there. It ain't fun. They are NOT on YOUR side.

Before I fire anyone I have my schit together documented and follow very stringent guidelines set forth by our risk management people. ONE lawsuit can ruin a company. You go ahead and play billy bad ass and fire people without real cause. You may get away with it. Often times they are not savvy enough to know what to do...but....It only takes once doing it to the wrong one and all hell breaks loose. I learned my lesson about 25 years ago. Never again.

This is why we use lots of temp employees now through an agency...especially when hiring. I don't have to do anything but just tell them we don't need then any more. I give them a good 6 month look over before I hire them permanently on our payroll.

Im shocked that any company would allow its management to engage in the harassment of any employee..for ANY reason. It is not only immoral..but..dangerous as hell. I hope this one in Missouri ends getting sued and destroyed for this schit eventually. Being in industry for 33 years and doing things the right way?...This makes me sick to my stomach that anyone would engage in such horrible practices with employees. We might not have greatest pay rates and benefits...but..we demand that our management team treat our people with the proper respect. If I saw schit like this going on in our mill?...Someones job would be on the line...pronto.

Yep! As someone who works in an Employment Law Firm, I sure have seen companies go down, close or file bankruptcy because of this.

If I was the CEO of this company...Id purge it of ALL of these people and get some risk management people in there asap. They are very lucky to have gotten away with this IMO.

(05-10-2016 04:50 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 04:45 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 04:35 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 12:45 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 11:41 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  The Missouri court was wrong. It is illegal to harass people in the workplace. I have no idea how any sane individual could rule otherwise.

Actually, they got it right. Granted, from reading a leftist article, you wouldnt know the legal reason for it.

Missouri is an at-will state, as is many other states.

This is what a business cant do:

1. It shall be an unlawful employment practice:
(1) For an employer, because of the race, color, religion, national origin,
sex, ancestry, age or disability of any individual:
(a) To fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to
discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms,
conditions, or privileges of employment

You can be fired for any reason, except those listed above.

They fired me because I'm 72. - Illegal

They fired me because I'm ugly - Legal

They fired me because I farted - Legal

They fired me because I'm Christian - Illegal

They fired me because I'm hot and all the guys want to do me - Legal

In essence, you arent being fired because you're ugly, farted, or hot. Those reasons do not matter, because they can fire you WITHOUT CAUSE at any time EXCEPT for those items listed in the law.

If you are gay, you can be fired. If you are not gay you can also be fired by a gay owner. Because being gay does not protect you from being fired.

NC is the same way. You can fire people for things that do not have to do with job performance or breaking company policies...but...You better hope like hell that they don't drag your ass in front of the EOC for a hearing. I've been there. It ain't fun. They are NOT on YOUR side.

Before I fire anyone I have my schit together documented and follow very stringent guidelines set forth by our risk management people. ONE lawsuit can ruin a company. You go ahead and play billy bad ass and fire people without real cause. You may get away with it. Often times they are not savvy enough to know what to do...but....It only takes once doing it to the wrong one and all hell breaks loose. I learned my lesson about 25 years ago. Never again.

This is why we use lots of temp employees now through an agency...especially when hiring. I don't have to do anything but just tell them we don't need then any more. I give them a good 6 month look over before I hire them permanently on our payroll.

Im shocked that any company would allow its management to engage in the harassment of any employee..for ANY reason. It is not only immoral..but..dangerous as hell. I hope this one in Missouri ends getting sued and destroyed for this schit eventually. Being in industry for 33 years and doing things the right way?...This makes me sick to my stomach that anyone would engage in such horrible practices with employees. We might not have greatest pay rates and benefits...but..we demand that our management team treat our people with the proper respect. If I saw schit like this going on in our mill?...Someones job would be on the line...pronto.

Yep! As someone who works in an Employment Law Firm, I sure have seen companies go down, close or file bankruptcy because of this.

If I was the CEO of this company...Id purge it of ALL of these people and get some risk management people in there asap. They are very lucky to have gotten away with this IMO.

The CEO was involved in the abuse in this case.

Some people can be fired for ingesting a perfectly legal substance....away from work...during hours that their employer is not even paying them to follow orders. Tobacco.

Many liberals like the control of people's behavior on smoking....for their own good you know. Smoking is bad....let's use the power of employment to snuff it out.

Conservatives of course think controlling your homosexual behavior by threatening your job is...you know....for your own good (your immortal soul even). Threaten their job to snuff it out.

Not exactly the dream of American Liberty and self-determination there. But it is becoming more and more common for employers to control your behavior even your behavior in the hours they aren't paying you. In some places there aren't protections. Facebook posts they don't like. Smoking. That Confederate flag sticker on your truck. Liking men. Medical marijuana. Single and pregnant. Extramarital affair. Swingers. A nekkid picture. Your boss sees you drinking alcohol at a restaurant.
I sympathize with you getting fired for being gay. But I am not in favor of establishing yet another "protected class"....because I don't like the idea of "protected classes".

Some places have laws that prohibit your firing for engaging in any off-work legal activity that doesn't have a direct relation to employment requirements or a legitimate business interest. That would include gayness. I'm on board with that.

I think you will be MUCH more successful getting that sort of protection put into place that guarantees liberty for everyone than you are trying to establish yet another "protected class".

(05-10-2016 05:16 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 04:50 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 04:45 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 04:35 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 12:45 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Actually, they got it right. Granted, from reading a leftist article, you wouldnt know the legal reason for it.

Missouri is an at-will state, as is many other states.

This is what a business cant do:

1. It shall be an unlawful employment practice:
(1) For an employer, because of the race, color, religion, national origin,
sex, ancestry, age or disability of any individual:
(a) To fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to
discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms,
conditions, or privileges of employment

You can be fired for any reason, except those listed above.

They fired me because I'm 72. - Illegal

They fired me because I'm ugly - Legal

They fired me because I farted - Legal

They fired me because I'm Christian - Illegal

They fired me because I'm hot and all the guys want to do me - Legal

In essence, you arent being fired because you're ugly, farted, or hot. Those reasons do not matter, because they can fire you WITHOUT CAUSE at any time EXCEPT for those items listed in the law.

If you are gay, you can be fired. If you are not gay you can also be fired by a gay owner. Because being gay does not protect you from being fired.

NC is the same way. You can fire people for things that do not have to do with job performance or breaking company policies...but...You better hope like hell that they don't drag your ass in front of the EOC for a hearing. I've been there. It ain't fun. They are NOT on YOUR side.

Before I fire anyone I have my schit together documented and follow very stringent guidelines set forth by our risk management people. ONE lawsuit can ruin a company. You go ahead and play billy bad ass and fire people without real cause. You may get away with it. Often times they are not savvy enough to know what to do...but....It only takes once doing it to the wrong one and all hell breaks loose. I learned my lesson about 25 years ago. Never again.

This is why we use lots of temp employees now through an agency...especially when hiring. I don't have to do anything but just tell them we don't need then any more. I give them a good 6 month look over before I hire them permanently on our payroll.

Im shocked that any company would allow its management to engage in the harassment of any employee..for ANY reason. It is not only immoral..but..dangerous as hell. I hope this one in Missouri ends getting sued and destroyed for this schit eventually. Being in industry for 33 years and doing things the right way?...This makes me sick to my stomach that anyone would engage in such horrible practices with employees. We might not have greatest pay rates and benefits...but..we demand that our management team treat our people with the proper respect. If I saw schit like this going on in our mill?...Someones job would be on the line...pronto.

Yep! As someone who works in an Employment Law Firm, I sure have seen companies go down, close or file bankruptcy because of this.

If I was the CEO of this company...Id purge it of ALL of these people and get some risk management people in there asap. They are very lucky to have gotten away with this IMO.

The CEO was involved in the abuse in this case.

Unless this is some family run business that caters to bigots and racists?...This guy might need to look for a new job. I'd be amazed if any public corporation would tolerate such BS. I would also be surprised if their customers would continue to do business with them when this hit the news. I know I would not patronize any company that allowed such blatant abuse of its employees.

You guys need to understand that you are reading a libturd article who did not correctly reflect whether or not any of what the gay man said occurred. Testimony of what happened never made it to court, because the case was dismissed due to there not being anything under the law to file the claim.

Although the article say the gay man was harassed and nobody denies that, the truth is that the case never made it far enough for the company to deny the claim. They simply stated that the case should be dismissed because the reason the gay man said he was fired for was not protected under law. This may not be the reason he was fired, the company simply stated that they had no need to prove why he was fired because the gay man is admitting through his filing that his suit has no merit. The courts, both of theme, agreed.

Again, the gay mans statement of facts were never proven or disproven. We have no idea if his boss really called him a coksucker or not. Although the article reads that way, that is not true.

(05-10-2016 09:22 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  You guys need to understand that you are reading a libturd article who did not correctly reflect whether or not any of what the gay man said occurred. Testimony of what happened never made it to court, because the case was dismissed due to there not being anything under the law to file the claim.

Although the article say the gay man was harassed and nobody denies that, the truth is that the case never made it far enough for the company to deny the claim. They simply stated that the case should be dismissed because the reason the gay man said he was fired for was not protected under law. This may not be the reason he was fired, the company simply stated that they had no need to prove why he was fired because the gay man is admitting through his filing that his suit has no merit. The courts, both of theme, agreed.

Again, the gay mans statement of facts were never proven or disproven. We have no idea if his boss really called him a coksucker or not. Although the article reads that way, that is not true.

Thats BS. If a company uses the 'we have the right to fire someone for being Gay' defense, its an admission of guilt.

(05-10-2016 09:41 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 09:22 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  You guys need to understand that you are reading a libturd article who did not correctly reflect whether or not any of what the gay man said occurred. Testimony of what happened never made it to court, because the case was dismissed due to there not being anything under the law to file the claim.
Although the article say the gay man was harassed and nobody denies that, the truth is that the case never made it far enough for the company to deny the claim. They simply stated that the case should be dismissed because the reason the gay man said he was fired for was not protected under law. This may not be the reason he was fired, the company simply stated that they had no need to prove why he was fired because the gay man is admitting through his filing that his suit has no merit. The courts, both of theme, agreed.
Again, the gay mans statement of facts were never proven or disproven. We have no idea if his boss really called him a coksucker or not. Although the article reads that way, that is not true.

Thats BS. If a company uses the 'we have the right to fire someone for being Gay' defense, its an admission of guilt.

No, for several reasons. Number one, it is an effective defense as a matter of law, without having to prove specific facts, which makes it the preferable strategy for defending a lawsuit. So it's simply a choice of effective litigation strategy, nothing more, nothing less, no admission. Number two, how can one be guilty when there is no guilt attached to the alleged behavior? There are others, but those two are sufficient for now.

(05-10-2016 09:41 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 09:22 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  You guys need to understand that you are reading a libturd article who did not correctly reflect whether or not any of what the gay man said occurred. Testimony of what happened never made it to court, because the case was dismissed due to there not being anything under the law to file the claim.

Although the article say the gay man was harassed and nobody denies that, the truth is that the case never made it far enough for the company to deny the claim. They simply stated that the case should be dismissed because the reason the gay man said he was fired for was not protected under law. This may not be the reason he was fired, the company simply stated that they had no need to prove why he was fired because the gay man is admitting through his filing that his suit has no merit. The courts, both of theme, agreed.

Again, the gay mans statement of facts were never proven or disproven. We have no idea if his boss really called him a coksucker or not. Although the article reads that way, that is not true.

Thats BS. If a company uses the 'we have the right to fire someone for being Gay' defense, its an admission of guilt.

So,.... If someone, or some thing, avails itself of the law, and/or the legal system, this is an admission of guilt, or being in the wrong?!?

You really wanna go down THAT road?

C'mon, Tom. You've become another parody account like zero or greenwhatever it is.

When will "Tom in Lazybrook" source his claims (# of gays and trannies in Charlotte) per the AUP?

(05-11-2016 08:40 AM)Hood-rich Wrote:  When will "Tom in Lazybrook" source his claims (# of gays and trannies in Charlotte) per the AUP?

He won't. I addressed it in an earlier post. I did find a survey from a few years ago that says there are 90,000 lgbt in Charlotte. Tom exaggerated that number to suit his cause. I have no idea where he comes up with just 12 lgbt working for the state that are covered now. Don't expect an answer from him.

(05-11-2016 08:50 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 08:40 AM)Hood-rich Wrote:  When will "Tom in Lazybrook" source his claims (# of gays and trannies in Charlotte) per the AUP?

He won't. I addressed it in an earlier post. I did find a survey from a few years ago that says there are 90,000 lgbt in Charlotte. Tom exaggerated that number to suit his cause. I have no idea where he comes up with just 12 lgbt working for the state that are covered now. Don't expect an answer from him.

My point is that the number of people protected by Gov McCrory's order was extremely small in comparison to those that he and the NC GOP decided to subject to employment discrimination. On a level of 10 to 100,000. Whether that number is 90,000 or 100,000...its still a large number of LGBT persons that are now subjected to employment discrimination.

(05-11-2016 12:37 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 08:50 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 08:40 AM)Hood-rich Wrote:  When will "Tom in Lazybrook" source his claims (# of gays and trannies in Charlotte) per the AUP?

He won't. I addressed it in an earlier post. I did find a survey from a few years ago that says there are 90,000 lgbt in Charlotte. Tom exaggerated that number to suit his cause. I have no idea where he comes up with just 12 lgbt working for the state that are covered now. Don't expect an answer from him.

My point is that the number of people protected by Gov McCrory's order was extremely small in comparison to those that he and the NC GOP decided to subject to employment discrimination. On a level of 10 to 100,000. Whether that number is 90,000 or 100,000...its still a large number of LGBT persons that are now subjected to employment discrimination.

The number of lbgt without non-discrimination protections under state law has DECREASED since his executive order on HB2. STOP LYING.

(05-10-2016 09:48 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 09:41 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 09:22 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  You guys need to understand that you are reading a libturd article who did not correctly reflect whether or not any of what the gay man said occurred. Testimony of what happened never made it to court, because the case was dismissed due to there not being anything under the law to file the claim.
Although the article say the gay man was harassed and nobody denies that, the truth is that the case never made it far enough for the company to deny the claim. They simply stated that the case should be dismissed because the reason the gay man said he was fired for was not protected under law. This may not be the reason he was fired, the company simply stated that they had no need to prove why he was fired because the gay man is admitting through his filing that his suit has no merit. The courts, both of theme, agreed.
Again, the gay mans statement of facts were never proven or disproven. We have no idea if his boss really called him a coksucker or not. Although the article reads that way, that is not true.

Thats BS. If a company uses the 'we have the right to fire someone for being Gay' defense, its an admission of guilt.

No, for several reasons. Number one, it is an effective defense as a matter of law, without having to prove specific facts, which makes it the preferable strategy for defending a lawsuit. So it's simply a choice of effective litigation strategy, nothing more, nothing less, no admission. Number two, how can one be guilty when there is no guilt attached to the alleged behavior? There are others, but those two are sufficient for now.

Meh, end result is that the guy was abused and then lost his job simply because he is Gay. The CEO could have defended his own behavior but chose not to.

How about sourcing those numbers Tommy?

(05-11-2016 01:09 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  How about sourcing those numbers Tommy?

When your profile is six months old, I'll let you demand answers from me.

Maybe Obama will invade North Carolina to teach those 10th Amendment users.

Good to see that this relatively minor issue is of a bigger concern for our president than anything else.