Boehner blocks democracy again (Page 2)

Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn

Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by sbreaux

Originally posted by Jackemy1

Originally posted by Justin86

Originally posted by Left Brain

Originally posted by Justin86 I assume you are referring to ENDA (His latest amongst many). This is like a punch in the face to me. I don't see an issue with this one. One step forward this week, one step back.

For the life of me, I can't figure out why gay/lesbian/transgender issues are even debated anymore. Who cares?  There is quite a bit of hope on the horizon if my teenage kids and their friends are any indication....they don't care at all about someone's sexual orientation. I consider myself a Republican........Boehner is on my last nerve.

He claimed it would cause people to lose their jobs. I'm sorry this is complete BS. You will never convince me of this. Ever.

I'll try. Employers are risk adverse. So with all things being equal, they will always make their investment in the one with the lowest risk. This is no different when employers are investing in human resources. If there are two candidates equal in talent but one carries a higher risk, such a a potential discrimination lawsuit, the candidate with the lower risk will always get hire. It is an unintended consequence of legislating special and protected classes.

So are you OK with removing all anti-discrimination laws from the books?

I think as a country we've moved past most of the need for discrimination laws....

Says the affluent, majority-religion-practicing white guy...

Correction, says the poor white kid who was heavily discriminated upon because he was homeless and living on welfare throughout much of his childhood.

So in your opinion, America discriminates today just as much as it did 50 years ago and we as a nation will never move past it?  Therefore, all laws regarding discrimination should never be changed.

And what about all the votes that Reid blocks?  They are for the better good right?  It works both ways.  And I believe it is Reid's favorite phrase, "That bill will never see the floor."

If you want to cloud the your comments with devisive comments about where the money trail leads, we can start with Obama and his terrorist/criminal friends.  Instead, why don't we focus on the person Boenhner who is an idiot. (Just like his buddy Reid)

Originally posted by mr2tony

Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn

Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by sbreaux

Originally posted by Jackemy1

Originally posted by Justin86

Originally posted by Left Brain

Originally posted by Justin86 I assume you are referring to ENDA (His latest amongst many). This is like a punch in the face to me. I don't see an issue with this one. One step forward this week, one step back.

For the life of me, I can't figure out why gay/lesbian/transgender issues are even debated anymore. Who cares?  There is quite a bit of hope on the horizon if my teenage kids and their friends are any indication....they don't care at all about someone's sexual orientation. I consider myself a Republican........Boehner is on my last nerve.

He claimed it would cause people to lose their jobs. I'm sorry this is complete BS. You will never convince me of this. Ever.

I'll try. Employers are risk adverse. So with all things being equal, they will always make their investment in the one with the lowest risk. This is no different when employers are investing in human resources. If there are two candidates equal in talent but one carries a higher risk, such a a potential discrimination lawsuit, the candidate with the lower risk will always get hire. It is an unintended consequence of legislating special and protected classes.

So are you OK with removing all anti-discrimination laws from the books?

I think as a country we've moved past most of the need for discrimination laws....

Says the affluent, majority-religion-practicing white guy...

Correction, says the poor white kid who was heavily discriminated upon because he was homeless and living on welfare throughout much of his childhood.

So in your opinion, America discriminates today just as much as it did 50 years ago and we as a nation will never move past it?  Therefore, all laws regarding discrimination should never be changed.

So in your opinion, America has moved past it? You believe that discrimination based on race, gender and/or sexual orientation doesn't exist or isn't strong enough to warrant having laws against it?

I believe I said we've moved past "most" of the need.  There's no question there was heavy discrimination 50+ years ago, and there's no question that it is significantly less today then it was then.  Perhaps it's better stated that we've moved past "some" of the need verse "most" because there's no real way to quantify it.  I was more trying to convey the viewpoint that there is a point where the discrimination laws can create more harm than good.  I don't know if we're at that point now or not.

I'm a business owner, I make all of our hiring decisions and I don't discriminate toward anybody in any way based on sex, race, religion, or sexual orientation.  You guys know me as a pretty religious guy, but two of my 8 employees are pretty hard core atheists and one is going to skepticon next weekend.  So, I truly don't discriminate.

With the example above about ENDA.  Today, I have zero issues with hiring anyone who is LGBT because I hire based on qualifications.  However, if this law were to pass I would be far more hesitant to hire an equally qualified candidate who was LGBT or even had mannerisms that would lead me to believe they may be LGBT out of the fear of being sued if I were to legitimately need to fire them.  As I mentioned above, I've been on the pointy end of a civil rights lawsuit and it's not a good place to be.  If I had even one person file a suit it would likely put me out of business, even if I won the lawsuit.  So, I feel that a law like that, which is meant to protect a class, will ultimately make the members of this class less likely to be hired.

Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by mr2tony

Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn

Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by sbreaux

Originally posted by Jackemy1

Originally posted by Justin86

Originally posted by Left Brain

Originally posted by Justin86 I assume you are referring to ENDA (His latest amongst many). This is like a punch in the face to me. I don't see an issue with this one. One step forward this week, one step back.

For the life of me, I can't figure out why gay/lesbian/transgender issues are even debated anymore. Who cares?  There is quite a bit of hope on the horizon if my teenage kids and their friends are any indication....they don't care at all about someone's sexual orientation. I consider myself a Republican........Boehner is on my last nerve.

He claimed it would cause people to lose their jobs. I'm sorry this is complete BS. You will never convince me of this. Ever.

I'll try. Employers are risk adverse. So with all things being equal, they will always make their investment in the one with the lowest risk. This is no different when employers are investing in human resources. If there are two candidates equal in talent but one carries a higher risk, such a a potential discrimination lawsuit, the candidate with the lower risk will always get hire. It is an unintended consequence of legislating special and protected classes.

So are you OK with removing all anti-discrimination laws from the books?

I think as a country we've moved past most of the need for discrimination laws....

Says the affluent, majority-religion-practicing white guy...

Correction, says the poor white kid who was heavily discriminated upon because he was homeless and living on welfare throughout much of his childhood.

So in your opinion, America discriminates today just as much as it did 50 years ago and we as a nation will never move past it?  Therefore, all laws regarding discrimination should never be changed.

So in your opinion, America has moved past it? You believe that discrimination based on race, gender and/or sexual orientation doesn't exist or isn't strong enough to warrant having laws against it?

I believe I said we've moved past "most" of the need.  There's no question there was heavy discrimination 50+ years ago, and there's no question that it is significantly less today then it was then.  Perhaps it's better stated that we've moved past "some" of the need verse "most" because there's no real way to quantify it.  I was more trying to convey the viewpoint that there is a point where the discrimination laws can create more harm than good.  I don't know if we're at that point now or not.

I'm a business owner, I make all of our hiring decisions and I don't discriminate toward anybody in any way based on sex, race, religion, or sexual orientation.  You guys know me as a pretty religious guy, but two of my 8 employees are pretty hard core atheists and one is going to skepticon next weekend.  So, I truly don't discriminate.

With the example above about ENDA.  Today, I have zero issues with hiring anyone who is LGBT because I hire based on qualifications.  However, if this law were to pass I would be far more hesitant to hire an equally qualified candidate who was LGBT or even had mannerisms that would lead me to believe they may be LGBT out of the fear of being sued if I were to legitimately need to fire them.  As I mentioned above, I've been on the pointy end of a civil rights lawsuit and it's not a good place to be.  If I had even one person file a suit it would likely put me out of business, even if I won the lawsuit.  So, I feel that a law like that, which is meant to protect a class, will ultimately make the members of this class less likely to be hired.

Dude.....c'mon............no.  That's crazy talk.

Originally posted by Justin86

Originally posted by Jackemy1

Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn

Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn

Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by sbreaux

Originally posted by Jackemy1

Originally posted by Justin86

Originally posted by Left Brain

Originally posted by Justin86 I assume you are referring to ENDA (His latest amongst many). This is like a punch in the face to me. I don't see an issue with this one. One step forward this week, one step back.

For the life of me, I can't figure out why gay/lesbian/transgender issues are even debated anymore. Who cares?  There is quite a bit of hope on the horizon if my teenage kids and their friends are any indication....they don't care at all about someone's sexual orientation. I consider myself a Republican........Boehner is on my last nerve.

He claimed it would cause people to lose their jobs. I'm sorry this is complete BS. You will never convince me of this. Ever.

I'll try. Employers are risk adverse. So with all things being equal, they will always make their investment in the one with the lowest risk. This is no different when employers are investing in human resources. If there are two candidates equal in talent but one carries a higher risk, such a a potential discrimination lawsuit, the candidate with the lower risk will always get hire. It is an unintended consequence of legislating special and protected classes.

So are you OK with removing all anti-discrimination laws from the books?

I think as a country we've moved past most of the need for discrimination laws....

Says the affluent, majority-religion-practicing white guy...

Correction, says the poor white kid who was heavily discriminated upon because he was homeless and living on welfare throughout much of his childhood.

So in your opinion, America discriminates today just as much as it did 50 years ago and we as a nation will never move past it?  Therefore, all laws regarding discrimination should never be changed.

I guess we've kind of hijacked this thread, huh? I'm happy to discuss further in another one. Boy, you took an 8-word post and really ran with it, huh? Do I think "America" discriminates just as much as they did 50 years ago? Mmmm.... I think it depends a lot on where you go, honestly. I think discrimination is not as widely accepted as it was before, and so people aren't as open with their discriminatory opinions as perhaps they were 50 years ago, but that doesn't mean the discrimination doesn't exist. No one in their right mind would ever say openly "I picked the white prospective tenant over the black one, because I think whites are more trustworthy", but that doesn't mean that whites aren't being chosen over blacks for those kinds of reasons every day-- they just aren't stated as such. We have come a long way, but it's a bit of the chicken/egg thing for me: I wonder how much of the advancements that minorities/women have made in the US are precisely because we have enacted legislation that ensure them equal treatment under the law? If we were to simply switch off all of the anti-discrimination laws that protect equal pay for women or equal housing and employment opportunities for minorites, would everything stay exactly where it is today, or would many people, now unburdened with the threat of discrimination lawsuits, go back to the kind of behavior that took place all over the US before these laws were enacted? Sadly, I think that would happen all over the country. So, no, I'm not in favor of eliminating or reducing anti-discrimination laws. I agree that many of the laws have had the consequence of making it harder for some in the majority to get certain jobs or go to certain schools, and it's unfortunate for those individuals. My own experience, though, is that my college, most of the companies I've worked for, our local, state, and federal government, and nearly every group of high-paid, influential individuals is still overwhelmingly male and white. So, to quote Chris Rock again, for anyone who thinks that the white man is "losing", I'd have to wonder who they think is "winning"? Because from where I sit, we're still doing more than ok, and better than everyone else.

Ratio of African-American unemployment to white unemployment in 1954 - 1.98 (9.9% unemployment for African-Americans) Ratio of African-American unemployment to white unemployment today - 2 (13.7% unemployment for African-Americans) So with 50 years of anti-discrimination, affirmative action, anti-poverty and so on, there has been absolutely change it the gap in unemployment rates between whites and African-Americans. In fact, the ratio has been higher since government intervention. We got to stop thinking that government intervention in every single one of our societal problems is the magic bullet.

Yes because causation always implies correlation..... You are leaving out probably a thousand other variables in your argument. And while I wish we did not have to government intervention in aspects like this, I can think of numerous occurrences in the past 10 years that have caused me to lose faith in most people. Until you are on the side of discrimination I don't think you can understand. I don't want your sympathy nor am I asking for it I'm just expressing what I have been thru. While I hate that laws like this can attach a 'label' to myself I think they are important. Because I don't think people will do the right thing (or at least what I view is the right thing, and that's being treated equal)

If the bolded part is true then you are doing something wrong.....there is no reason for that, and feeling that way leads to a really screwed up, unfulfilling life. I promise you I have watched people at the absolute worst a human being can be.....and I always believe people are overwhelmingly good....all I have to do is look for it.

Originally posted by Justin86

Originally posted by Left Brain

Originally posted by Justin86

Originally posted by Jackemy1

Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn

Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn

Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by sbreaux

Originally posted by Jackemy1

Originally posted by Justin86

Originally posted by Left Brain

Originally posted by Justin86 I assume you are referring to ENDA (His latest amongst many). This is like a punch in the face to me. I don't see an issue with this one. One step forward this week, one step back.

For the life of me, I can't figure out why gay/lesbian/transgender issues are even debated anymore. Who cares?  There is quite a bit of hope on the horizon if my teenage kids and their friends are any indication....they don't care at all about someone's sexual orientation. I consider myself a Republican........Boehner is on my last nerve.

He claimed it would cause people to lose their jobs. I'm sorry this is complete BS. You will never convince me of this. Ever.

I'll try. Employers are risk adverse. So with all things being equal, they will always make their investment in the one with the lowest risk. This is no different when employers are investing in human resources. If there are two candidates equal in talent but one carries a higher risk, such a a potential discrimination lawsuit, the candidate with the lower risk will always get hire. It is an unintended consequence of legislating special and protected classes.

So are you OK with removing all anti-discrimination laws from the books?

I think as a country we've moved past most of the need for discrimination laws....

Says the affluent, majority-religion-practicing white guy...

Correction, says the poor white kid who was heavily discriminated upon because he was homeless and living on welfare throughout much of his childhood.

So in your opinion, America discriminates today just as much as it did 50 years ago and we as a nation will never move past it?  Therefore, all laws regarding discrimination should never be changed.

I guess we've kind of hijacked this thread, huh? I'm happy to discuss further in another one. Boy, you took an 8-word post and really ran with it, huh? Do I think "America" discriminates just as much as they did 50 years ago? Mmmm.... I think it depends a lot on where you go, honestly. I think discrimination is not as widely accepted as it was before, and so people aren't as open with their discriminatory opinions as perhaps they were 50 years ago, but that doesn't mean the discrimination doesn't exist. No one in their right mind would ever say openly "I picked the white prospective tenant over the black one, because I think whites are more trustworthy", but that doesn't mean that whites aren't being chosen over blacks for those kinds of reasons every day-- they just aren't stated as such. We have come a long way, but it's a bit of the chicken/egg thing for me: I wonder how much of the advancements that minorities/women have made in the US are precisely because we have enacted legislation that ensure them equal treatment under the law? If we were to simply switch off all of the anti-discrimination laws that protect equal pay for women or equal housing and employment opportunities for minorites, would everything stay exactly where it is today, or would many people, now unburdened with the threat of discrimination lawsuits, go back to the kind of behavior that took place all over the US before these laws were enacted? Sadly, I think that would happen all over the country. So, no, I'm not in favor of eliminating or reducing anti-discrimination laws. I agree that many of the laws have had the consequence of making it harder for some in the majority to get certain jobs or go to certain schools, and it's unfortunate for those individuals. My own experience, though, is that my college, most of the companies I've worked for, our local, state, and federal government, and nearly every group of high-paid, influential individuals is still overwhelmingly male and white. So, to quote Chris Rock again, for anyone who thinks that the white man is "losing", I'd have to wonder who they think is "winning"? Because from where I sit, we're still doing more than ok, and better than everyone else.

Ratio of African-American unemployment to white unemployment in 1954 - 1.98 (9.9% unemployment for African-Americans) Ratio of African-American unemployment to white unemployment today - 2 (13.7% unemployment for African-Americans) So with 50 years of anti-discrimination, affirmative action, anti-poverty and so on, there has been absolutely change it the gap in unemployment rates between whites and African-Americans. In fact, the ratio has been higher since government intervention. We got to stop thinking that government intervention in every single one of our societal problems is the magic bullet.

Yes because causation always implies correlation..... You are leaving out probably a thousand other variables in your argument. And while I wish we did not have to government intervention in aspects like this, I can think of numerous occurrences in the past 10 years that have caused me to lose faith in most people. Until you are on the side of discrimination I don't think you can understand. I don't want your sympathy nor am I asking for it I'm just expressing what I have been thru. While I hate that laws like this can attach a 'label' to myself I think they are important. Because I don't think people will do the right thing (or at least what I view is the right thing, and that's being treated equal)

If the bolded part is true then you are doing something wrong.....there is no reason for that, and feeling that way leads to a really screwed up, unfulfilling life. I promise you I have watched people at the absolute worst a human being can be.....and I always believe people are overwhelmingly good....all I have to do is look for it.

You know, you are probably right. I can't help the way I feel though. It's something I am changing about myself. Don't get me wrong here either I am by no means some sad depressed person. In fact it's quite the opposite. I do good and I value the good that others do immensely. But I have a hard time seeing good in someone, especially someone you were taught that you could count on (like family) that hates me for who I am.

Yeah, well, for what it's worth.......do your best not to confuse hate with ignorance....it can sound and even look the same, but it's really not. 

It ain't...... Boehner is still an idiot.

Well I like you, so that's all that matters.  

We've all suffered from some form of discrimination, stereotype, or prejudice in our lives.  Some get it worse than others, but the important thing to remember is to let it reflect on the people doing it and not on you.  I use these forces for good in my life and they motivate me to be successful in all that I do.

The most encouraging words anyone can say to me is "you can't do that" because it drives me more than anything else to do that very thing.

One of my favorite quotes I live by is from Chuck Swindoll.  He's a pastor, but the message is secular in nature:

"The longer I live, the more I realize the impact of attitude on life.  Attitude, to me, is more important than facts.  It is more important than the past, than education, than money, than circumstances, than failures, than successes, than what other people think, say or do.  It is more important than appearance, giftedness or skill.  It will make or break a company... a church... a home.  The remarkable thing is we have a choice every day regarding the attitude we embrace for that day.  We cannot change our past... we cannot change the fact that people will act in a certain way.  We cannot change the inevitable.  The only thing we can do is play the one string we have, and that is our attitude... I am convinced that life is 10% what happens to me and 90% how I react to it.  And so it is with you... we are in charge of our Attitudes”

I asked my high schooler about this. His response was identical. It's a non-issue for them. My oldest, too, he's a chef and there are plenty of gay people working in restaurants. His response was more along the lines of 'as long as they do their job who cares?' I think they automatically assume people get treated fairly, and I know that they both would step in if they saw someone being treated unfairly. 

Which makes me wonder why Boehner can't see what a 17 and 21 year old can see.

DP, sorry

Originally posted by Jackemy1

Originally posted by Justin86

Originally posted by Jackemy1

Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn

Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn

Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by sbreaux

Originally posted by Jackemy1

Originally posted by Justin86

Originally posted by Left Brain

Originally posted by Justin86 I assume you are referring to ENDA (His latest amongst many). This is like a punch in the face to me. I don't see an issue with this one. One step forward this week, one step back.

For the life of me, I can't figure out why gay/lesbian/transgender issues are even debated anymore. Who cares?  There is quite a bit of hope on the horizon if my teenage kids and their friends are any indication....they don't care at all about someone's sexual orientation. I consider myself a Republican........Boehner is on my last nerve.

He claimed it would cause people to lose their jobs. I'm sorry this is complete BS. You will never convince me of this. Ever.

I'll try. Employers are risk adverse. So with all things being equal, they will always make their investment in the one with the lowest risk. This is no different when employers are investing in human resources. If there are two candidates equal in talent but one carries a higher risk, such a a potential discrimination lawsuit, the candidate with the lower risk will always get hire. It is an unintended consequence of legislating special and protected classes.

So are you OK with removing all anti-discrimination laws from the books?

I think as a country we've moved past most of the need for discrimination laws....

Says the affluent, majority-religion-practicing white guy...

Correction, says the poor white kid who was heavily discriminated upon because he was homeless and living on welfare throughout much of his childhood.

So in your opinion, America discriminates today just as much as it did 50 years ago and we as a nation will never move past it?  Therefore, all laws regarding discrimination should never be changed.

I guess we've kind of hijacked this thread, huh? I'm happy to discuss further in another one. Boy, you took an 8-word post and really ran with it, huh? Do I think "America" discriminates just as much as they did 50 years ago? Mmmm.... I think it depends a lot on where you go, honestly. I think discrimination is not as widely accepted as it was before, and so people aren't as open with their discriminatory opinions as perhaps they were 50 years ago, but that doesn't mean the discrimination doesn't exist. No one in their right mind would ever say openly "I picked the white prospective tenant over the black one, because I think whites are more trustworthy", but that doesn't mean that whites aren't being chosen over blacks for those kinds of reasons every day-- they just aren't stated as such. We have come a long way, but it's a bit of the chicken/egg thing for me: I wonder how much of the advancements that minorities/women have made in the US are precisely because we have enacted legislation that ensure them equal treatment under the law? If we were to simply switch off all of the anti-discrimination laws that protect equal pay for women or equal housing and employment opportunities for minorites, would everything stay exactly where it is today, or would many people, now unburdened with the threat of discrimination lawsuits, go back to the kind of behavior that took place all over the US before these laws were enacted? Sadly, I think that would happen all over the country. So, no, I'm not in favor of eliminating or reducing anti-discrimination laws. I agree that many of the laws have had the consequence of making it harder for some in the majority to get certain jobs or go to certain schools, and it's unfortunate for those individuals. My own experience, though, is that my college, most of the companies I've worked for, our local, state, and federal government, and nearly every group of high-paid, influential individuals is still overwhelmingly male and white. So, to quote Chris Rock again, for anyone who thinks that the white man is "losing", I'd have to wonder who they think is "winning"? Because from where I sit, we're still doing more than ok, and better than everyone else.

Ratio of African-American unemployment to white unemployment in 1954 - 1.98 (9.9% unemployment for African-Americans) Ratio of African-American unemployment to white unemployment today - 2 (13.7% unemployment for African-Americans) So with 50 years of anti-discrimination, affirmative action, anti-poverty and so on, there has been absolutely change it the gap in unemployment rates between whites and African-Americans. In fact, the ratio has been higher since government intervention. We got to stop thinking that government intervention in every single one of our societal problems is the magic bullet.

Yes because causation always implies correlation..... You are leaving out probably a thousand other variables in your argument. And while I wish we did not have to government intervention in aspects like this, I can think of numerous occurrences in the past 10 years that have caused me to lose faith in most people. Until you are on the side of discrimination I don't think you can understand. I don't want your sympathy nor am I asking for it I'm just expressing what I have been thru. While I hate that laws like this can attach a 'label' to myself I think they are important. Because I don't think people will do the right thing (or at least what I view is the right thing, and that's being treated equal)

Ye of little faith. Good always conquers evil.....always. So you got to think the core of human nature is good and not evil. I believe the core fallacy of progressivism is the belief that man is evil by nature and therefore needs coercion and force to make them be good. I just reject that premise. In a round about way you are getting to my point. You are correct, there are thousands of variables in a free civil society. And unless a government has absolute command and control it can't centrally control thousands or variables and then it would no longer be a free civil society. Obviously arbitrary discrimination is wrong. It is evil. A free civil society that places a value on individual liberty can never co-exist with arbitrary discrimination in its civil institutions. Eventually, the institutions of a free country will always purge unjust societal norms and from that will be a more just civil society because free people will always demand it. It may take awhile for it to happen, but is always does.

I think they call that Prison.  

Thanks for returning to my subject?  Is there anyone else who finds it ironic that Boehner who professes his love for the Constitution is the one who stops the legislative process?

OK, Boehner is an idiot.....that's established.  The best part of this thread is that it's beenpointed out more than a few times that Reid/Democrats do the exact same thing....and do you know what you get from LIberals on that point?..........................crickets.    You can't make it up.