Do you want to be forced to hire someone for your retail store who looks like this?
Under this law, you would be compelled to.
Posted on 11/08/2007 1:03:01 PM PST by flowerplough
DiversityInc asks, "What do you think? Is it OK to discriminate against a person because of orientation?"
DiversityInc (Diversity and the Bottom Line): It's mission is "to bring education and clarity to the business benefits of diversity," but this particular reader-response question seems to lack some clarity, to me. I assume "orientation" refers to one's preference in sexual partners and activities, and, in this case, is primarily intended to elicit opinion on hiring and firing due to a preference for same-sex partners and activities, but cannot tell if their "OK" might mean "legal", "ethical", "permissible" or ... ?
(Some features and articles of DI are reserved for subscribers. Previous public survey questions have included subjects like "Your Worst Customer-service Experiences Ever?", "Bill Cosby Blames Blacks for Failing Their Children: Is He Right?", and "Which Words Are Most Offensive?")
I say okay.
Orientation? Like which way they’re facing? Seems silly, but OK I guess.
Private organizations should be able to discriminate on any basis they wish. It’s called freedom of association. The government is a different matter, but I still think it’s OK in cases like marriage and gays in the military, as they are discriminating based on behavior.
I am inclined against discriminating against anyone based solely upon their orientation. Most of us are restrained from doing things we are “oriented” to do by virtue of a value system that says, “Even though I want to do this, it is wrong, so I won’t.” I am “oriented” to want to have sex with every beautiful woman I encounter; to help myself to things that have value, even if they do not belong to me; to eat and drink too much; etc. etc. I don’t do those things because they are wrong.
Same goes for those who might be “oriented” toward homosexuality. If they understand that it is wrong, they refrain from the behavior, not because they don’t want to do it, but because they understand that it is wrong.
So, I would discriminate against those who succomb to their “orientation” and not against those who resist it.
If I had an employee face down or laying on his back during work hours I’d fire him. Otherwise if he is vertical I don’t care if he faces north, south, east or west.
In our town, we had an openly gay mayoral candidate.
I didn’t feel like going out to vote, but I did.
Two days later there is still a perfect tie between the two candidates.
If I didn’t vote, the openly gay candidate would have won.
I do not hate gays, but I have seen enough of them trying to shove their lifestyle in our faces to not want one in power.
I always knew it was important to vote, but I never even dreamed my vote would ever be that critical.
I’m so thankful I dragged my lazy butt out of the house on election day!
“bring education and clarity to the business benefits of diversity”
Well, now, I’m sure they have studies to back up their claims of said benefits to a business organization.
These studies would have to refute the studies that show the opposite occurrence in neighborhood and community situations though.
“Is it OK to discriminate against a person because of orientation?”
Depends on whether you are gay or heterosexual.
“Your Worst Customer-service Experiences Ever”
Oh, that caught my eye...
My worst experience ever was taking a friend to a BBQ restaurant, being hassled for looking at the menu for more than 2 seconds, hearing the order taker (of a protected class) shouting back to the kitchen “da bitch change her mine again!”, then when we asked to see the manager, we were “seen” by some white guy in a dirty apron while the REAL manager (a well dressed black woman) stood back about 5 feet listening.
Upon rereading the question, I realize it doesn’t explicitly say ‘in employment.’ If I was looking for a wife I would certainly ‘discriminate’ based on her ‘orientation.’
When did we as Conservatives start putting people in boxes? Judge the individual, not the box.
Of course it is not only OK, but logical. Should a 22 year old male be hired to oversee a group of teenage girls on an overnight camping trip? Why not? Because of his sexual orientation.
Then should the same situation be OK with teenage boys if the 22 year old is attracted to boys?
Kids? Animals? Force? What about those orientations?
Diversity Inc? Who would have guessed that would ever be?
If you are going to discriminate based on behaviors (things you control) is it also OK to discriminate based on religion, as most people believe you choose your religion?
My reaction as well. I'd happily work alongside anyone except the ones facing southeast. You just can't get along with those people.
What is happening with the word "orientation" here is the same as what happened with "diversity" and "choice." They no longer mean what they mean, they're code words for liberal political enthusiasms. This instance is particularly clumsy.
I reserve the right to discriminate against anyone one for any reason.
I retain the exclusive right to manage my life.
Do you want to be forced to hire someone for your retail store who looks like this?
Under this law, you would be compelled to.
“What do you think? Is it OK to discriminate against a person because of orientation?”
Did you discriminate against your first girlfriend when you did not marry her and chose someone else?
Theoretically, the 1st amendment right of assembly should cover any voluntary and free associations - including private corporations. You don’t want to hire someone, for any reason whatsoever, you ought to be free to do so (just keep in mind that the consumers themselves may punish you for your choices).
**************
Exactly right.
But I think “Dont Ask Dont tell” is true nondiscrimination. It does dot discriminate against people for desires, only acting on the desires in the form of telling people you desire same sex(including any sensual contact). Matthews say, “What if they are gay and follow all the rules”. The rules are , you dont tell people you want to have sex with the same sex. Your desires are yours, keep them to yourself. What about my desire to tell the cute intern at work what I imagine doing to her , after she told me she is not interested? I was born with a desire that attracts me to her as a hetro-sexual male. Does that desire give me rights to act in the liberal parallel universe. Of course not!
Sexual orientation (real or perceived) is a behavior, and I would think that it is acceptable to discriminate against individuals exhibiting behaviors you consider undesirable, immoral, etc.
These days, I am probably wrong, wrong, wrong.
It's wrong to discriminate against Asians.
DING!DING!DING!DING!
We have a winner!
“Should a 22 year old male be hired to oversee a group of teenage girls on an overnight camping trip? Why not? Because of his sexual orientation.”
Wish I coulda stated the obvious so succinctly in my response to the Diversistas.
Did you stay and eat there?
Orientation?
To what?
There’s a problem with these laws. If you don’t hire someone in a protected class WHATEVER THE REASON they will sue you and claim it’s because they are IN THE PROTECTED CLASS. You can’t win.
Another thing wrong. there is no LEGAL DEFINITION of these protected classes. None. It’s whatever the “victim” says (unless it’s someone with White European Christian background saying he’s black).
You can’t win.
That’s why the laws were passed: to assure that the new victims can get money from the oppressors: White European Christians.
“It’s wrong to discriminate against Asians”
Good answer!
It’s what I hate about so many polls. There are too many “is it true you’ve stopped beating your wife” type questions.
Free association? That puppy died a long time ago. There is a hint of it here and there as long as you are willing to spend big bucks in court — and even that is hanging by a thin 5-4 thread.
“The Girl Scouts have decided that, despite Ensler’s published fantasies about teen girls, some lesbian leadership for female youth will not present too many problems. The Boy Scouts would rather not take the risk of allowing (male) homosexuals charge over their troops, however.”
I wish, if I had a daughter, she could join the “discriminatory” Boy Scouts! :-(
The freedom to associate precludes the freedom NOT to associate. I believe SCOTUS has ruled as such.
Home run on your analysis. The recent attempt to add orientation to federal hate crimes bills included no definition of “orientation”. I wish GWB made that an issue instead of just discounting on it’s negative effects.
ROFL
LOL!!
Anti-discrimination laws in hiring have not helped blacks (and most others) a bit.
Now, laws prohibiting racial discrimintion in public accomdations have been very beneficial to our society.
But when it comes to picking employees . . .
Quick quiz, why do white males make the best workers?
You can fire them.
The last insult of the “manager” didn’t occur until after we’d gotten our food.
And I actually didn’t hear about the insult to my friend until after we had both sat down.
But! I’ve never been back. There are too many other good BBQ places in KC to put up with that crap.
‘... shouting back to the kitchen “da bitch change her mine again!”’
Dem’s fightin’ words!!!!!
I can’t tell you how livid and snarly I would’ve been then!!! >:(
If you were hired to oversee a group of teenaged girls on an overnight camping trip would you be able to do it without raping them all or are you confident that you could exercise self control and rely on your knowledge of what is wrong and what is right?
Yes.
Now, let's reverse the question:
1) Is it okay for the government to usurp the right to free association, and to compel individuals to associate in their personal and business lives with persons with whom they would not otherwise choose to associate?
2) Is it okay for the government to so closely dictate some perceived (and arbitrary) sense of morality that it can rob its citizens of the right to associate with whom they please?
3) Does any such government retain its legitimacy, in the Jeffersonian sense, having evinced "a design to reduce [its citizens] under absolute despotism"?
4) Why would any business obey such a law, or any legitimate legislator support its passage?
Only if they smoke
If the gay gene that supposedly exists is ever found can the mother abort because her baby possesses that gene or is that discrimination? What about her choice?
That's not really the issue. The issue is should the government force a group looking for someone to run a girl's camp -- force them to weigh men, women, lesbians, etc.. equally in employment consideration. So the question should be, "Are you confident all male employee will exercise self-control...?" Statistics say they won't all do it, therefore why should the government force risk. Nevermind discrimination, let's talk about risk. The gov't would be forcing a higher risk factor on the girls, higher insurance premiums on the business, and higher crime rates and therefore more public police, court and prison expenses.
I’m confident that if I hire 22-year-old males to supervise teenage girls all alone in the woods that the frequency of those girls having sex on those trips would be very high compared to a hetro-female supervising them.
And you know that I’m right, so what’s your problem?
Arthur Bryant’s... that’s your best bet =^)
Define “discriminate” please.
If you want the sort of behavior you pay good money for in a fancy French restaurant in the tonier parts of town, you might go there in the future.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.