The Equality Act, another lawyers' full employment Act and an attack on inalienable rights

[johnwk]

Did y'all know that our federal Constitution and supreme law of the land was intelligently designed both gender and race neutral from Inception?

That is the bigest boatload of bizarre bovine excrement that I have heard in a long time, even on the USMB

So what. You needed a valid argument to have anything more than your unsubstantiated opinion.

Yes I need a valid argument as opposed to your trolling moronic bullshit

Bearing true witness must require moral virtue.

And bearing true witness is not one of Progressive Patriot's qualities when discussing whether or not Congress has been delegated the power to adopt and enforce "appropriate legislation" forbidding the American people to make distinctions based upon "sex" in their social and commercial activities.

Progressive Patriot is no better than Justice Gorsuch who, in his WRITTEN OPINION in Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, has perpetuated a fraud upon the American people, embraced a usurpation of power by Congress, violated his oath of office to defend our written Constitution, and has done so by embracing the Humpty Dumpty Theory of Language being applied to Title VII, of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean- neither more nor less."

In Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S., Justice Gorsuch alleges Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects employees against discrimination if they are “gay or transgender”. Of course, Gorsuch arrives at that conclusion after concocting one of the most distorted and twisted definitions of “sex” imaginable to be within the meaning of “sex” as found in the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

But in addition to the Gorsuch Humpty Dumpty Theory of Language being applied to Title VII, of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, he brazenly ignores the irrefutable fact that Congress has never been delegated authority in the Constitution of the United States by the American people, to adopt “appropriate legislation” forbidding distinctions being made based upon “sex” ___ the one exception being is the Nineteenth Amendment, and this amendment is expressly limited to forbidding the right to vote to be denied or abridged based upon “sex”.

The Gorsuch opinion makes a mockery not only of the Tenth Amendment, which reserves to the States all powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, but Gorsuch ignores the crystal clear confirmation that ”The powers of the legislature are defined and limited; and that those limits may not be mistaken or forgotten, the constitution is written. To what purpose are powers limited, and to what purpose is that limitation committed to writing; if these limits may, at any time, be passed by those intended to be restrained? ______ Chief Justice Marshall, MARBURY v. MADISON, 5 U.S. 137 (1803)

The abuse of power by Justice Gorsuch in Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia,whether well-meaning or not, is a direct assault on our Constitutional system and attacks the American People’s inalienable right to be free to mutually agree in their contracts and associations, and this includes their social and commercial intercourse.

And the bottom line is, Progressive Patriot, does not bear true witness in discussing this abuse of power.

JWK

"The public welfare demands that constitutional cases must be decided according to the terms of the Constitution itself, and not according to judges' views of fairness, reasonableness, or justice." -- Justice Hugo L. Black ( U.S. Supreme Court Justice, 1886 - 1971) Source: Lecture, Columbia University, 1968

Why don't you just dispense with your constitutional gymnastics and admit that you are a bigot who is loathe to extend civil rights to LGBT people and in fact endorse discrimination against all minorities in the name of "freedom " Your America is not my America

Well, there you go again with insulting name calling and unsubstantiated assertions.

Unlike you, not only do I support and defend our system of government and the will of the people as expressed in our written federal Constitution to be observed and enforced, I also defend the right of people, all people, being free to mutually agree in their contracts and associations, and that includes their social and commercial intercourse.

How each person uses that freedom is a different discussion, and even though the choices made by some may appear to be grounded in absurd and repulsive beliefs and prejudices, and those choices reject an across the board inclusiveness, under what authority can I claim to refuse to defend their right to freedom of choice, while demanding my freedom to choose shall be protected by the force of government? To do so indicates a bigoted belief . . . "inclusiveness for me but not for thee".

JWK

The Equality Act attempts to exercise legislative power proposed under the “Equal Rights Amendment” which was wisely rejected by the American people, and thus, to this degree, the Act is an attempted usurpation of power not granted.

 

[danielpalos]

Did y'all know that our federal Constitution and supreme law of the land was intelligently designed both gender and race neutral from Inception?

That is the bigest boatload of bizarre bovine excrement that I have heard in a long time, even on the USMB

So what. You needed a valid argument to have anything more than your unsubstantiated opinion.

Yes I need a valid argument as opposed to your trolling moronic bullshit

Bearing true witness must require moral virtue.

And bearing true witness is not one of Progressive Patriot's qualities when discussing whether or not Congress has been delegated the power to adopt and enforce "appropriate legislation" forbidding the American people to make distinctions based upon "sex" in their social and commercial activities.

Progressive Patriot is no better than Justice Gorsuch who, in his WRITTEN OPINION in Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, has perpetuated a fraud upon the American people, embraced a usurpation of power by Congress, violated his oath of office to defend our written Constitution, and has done so by embracing the Humpty Dumpty Theory of Language being applied to Title VII, of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean- neither more nor less."

In Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S., Justice Gorsuch alleges Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects employees against discrimination if they are “gay or transgender”. Of course, Gorsuch arrives at that conclusion after concocting one of the most distorted and twisted definitions of “sex” imaginable to be within the meaning of “sex” as found in the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

But in addition to the Gorsuch Humpty Dumpty Theory of Language being applied to Title VII, of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, he brazenly ignores the irrefutable fact that Congress has never been delegated authority in the Constitution of the United States by the American people, to adopt “appropriate legislation” forbidding distinctions being made based upon “sex” ___ the one exception being is the Nineteenth Amendment, and this amendment is expressly limited to forbidding the right to vote to be denied or abridged based upon “sex”.

The Gorsuch opinion makes a mockery not only of the Tenth Amendment, which reserves to the States all powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, but Gorsuch ignores the crystal clear confirmation that ”The powers of the legislature are defined and limited; and that those limits may not be mistaken or forgotten, the constitution is written. To what purpose are powers limited, and to what purpose is that limitation committed to writing; if these limits may, at any time, be passed by those intended to be restrained? ______ Chief Justice Marshall, MARBURY v. MADISON, 5 U.S. 137 (1803)

The abuse of power by Justice Gorsuch in Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia,whether well-meaning or not, is a direct assault on our Constitutional system and attacks the American People’s inalienable right to be free to mutually agree in their contracts and associations, and this includes their social and commercial intercourse.

And the bottom line is, Progressive Patriot, does not bear true witness in discussing this abuse of power.

JWK

"The public welfare demands that constitutional cases must be decided according to the terms of the Constitution itself, and not according to judges' views of fairness, reasonableness, or justice." -- Justice Hugo L. Black ( U.S. Supreme Court Justice, 1886 - 1971) Source: Lecture, Columbia University, 1968

Our supreme law of the land is clear for all civil intents and purposes:

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

And each state retains the reserved power to decide the "privileges and immunities" it offers, and likewise reserves the power to make distinctions based upon sex, excluding of course with relation to voting which the Nineteenth Amendment prohibits distinctions based upon "sex".

JWK

Equal pay for equal work!

 

[johnwk]

Speaking for myself, I'm happy to dispense with the Constitutional arguments. It always boils down to revisionist history (from all sides). And in the end, we're going to get the kind of government we ask for. A constitution only helps if there's consensus on what it means. We lost that long ago.

But I'm not a bigot. I despise racism, and yes, it bothers me to have miscreants like that on my "side". But, in the tradition of liberals who support the rights of everyone, even those they disagree with, (or at least they used to) I can't sit back and let overreaching government attempt to dictate matters of conscience. "Not helping" someone isn't the same as hurting them. And if bigots don't want to associate will certain people, regardless of their reasons, that's their right.

Ultimately, the kind of anti-discrimination laws modeled on the CRA are social engineering projects. They don't protect anyone's "rights" (they violate them instead) and they don't mandate equal treatment. They simply target certain biases for suppression. Even if most people believe those biases are wrong-headed, government has no business telling people who they must associate with or that they must respect or accommodate others against their will.

With regard to protected "class legislation", other than what is adopted by a constitutional amendment, e.g., the Fifteenth and the Nineteenth Amendments which the American People knowingly and willingly agreed to via our Constitution's Amendment process, I think we are pretty much in agreement. Anti-discrimination laws are dangerous to liberty and an attempt to dictate matters of conscience.

Aside from that, I believe it is extremely unwise to ignore defending the true meaning of our Constitution, but in doing so, one must always yield to the documented intentions and beliefs under which its provisions were agreed to. This of course is nothing more than adhering to the most fundamental rule of constitutional construction, which is stated as follows:


"The fundamental principle of constitutional construction is that effect must be given to the intent of the framers of the organic law and of the people adopting it. This is the polestar in the construction of constitutions, all other principles of construction are only rules or guides to aid in the determination of the intention of the constitution’s framers."--- numerous citations omitted__ Vol.16 American Jurisprudence, 2d Constitutional law (1992 edition), pages 418-19 - - - Par. 92. Intent of framers and adopters as controlling.

JWK

Those who reject abiding by the text of our Constitution, and the intentions and beliefs under which it was agree to, as documented from historical records and gives context to its text, wish to remove the anchor and rudder of our constitutional system so they may then be free to “interpret” the Constitution to mean whatever they wish it to mean.

 

[johnwk]

Equal pay for equal work!

JWK



The Democrat Party Leadership has been angry, stupid and obnoxious ever since the Republican Party Leadership freed democrat owned slaves and put the KKK out of business. ___ Author unknown

 

[danielpalos]

Equal pay for equal work!

View attachment 503207

JWK



The Democrat Party Leadership has been angry, stupid and obnoxious ever since the Republican Party Leadership freed democrat owned slaves and put the KKK out of business. ___ Author unknown

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

 

[johnwk]

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

JWK



The Equality Act attempts to exercise legislative power proposed under the “Equal Rights Amendment” which was wisely rejected by the American people, and thus, to this degree, the Act is an attempted usurpation of power not granted.

 

[danielpalos]

The only Equality Act we need is equal protection of the laws for unemployment compensation in our at-will employment States.

Only the morally challenged Right-Wing has a problem with it.

 

[hadit]

The only Equality Act we need is equal protection of the laws for unemployment compensation in our at-will employment States.

Only the morally challenged Right-Wing has a problem with it.

Well, all 5 of them and the entire legal profession. You know, the people who actually know the law?

 

[danielpalos]

The only Equality Act we need is equal protection of the laws for unemployment compensation in our at-will employment States.

Only the morally challenged Right-Wing has a problem with it.

Well, all 5 of them and the entire legal profession. You know, the people who actually know the law?

Isn't right-wing fantasy wonderful.

 

[hadit]

The only Equality Act we need is equal protection of the laws for unemployment compensation in our at-will employment States.

Only the morally challenged Right-Wing has a problem with it.

Well, all 5 of them and the entire legal profession. You know, the people who actually know the law?

Isn't right-wing fantasy wonderful.

Do you deny that the entire legal profession agrees with me and disagrees with you about your imagined link between UC and at-will laws?

 

[Soupnazi630]

I thought equality was already the law. All lives matter, even Whitey. So we gotta move on and fix some real problems like our border or our inability to get people back to work. LGBTQ already has protections.

We subscribe to Capitalism. What problems cannot be solved with capital under Capitalism?

Equal protection of the law for unemployment compensation in our at-will employment States can solve simple poverty by solving for deleterious effects of capitalism's natural rate of unemployment; and, on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States. Automatic stabilization is what will benefit our economy.

There is no natural rate of unemployment under capitalism. One cannot be compensated for unempoloyment because one has not contributed anything to be compensated for. Welfare can only increase and sustain poverty it can never solve it.

 

[danielpalos]

The only Equality Act we need is equal protection of the laws for unemployment compensation in our at-will employment States.

Only the morally challenged Right-Wing has a problem with it.

Well, all 5 of them and the entire legal profession. You know, the people who actually know the law?

Isn't right-wing fantasy wonderful.

Do you deny that the entire legal profession agrees with me and disagrees with you about your imagined link between UC and at-will laws?

Yes. You (right-wingers) alleging something means Nothing. Get them on here to argue it with me. I already know right-wingers will have to make like Trumpian attorneys in open Court.

 

[danielpalos]

There is no natural rate of unemployment under capitalism.

How did you reach that conclusion? I understand economics unlike most right-wingers.

 

[Soupnazi630]

There is no natural rate of unemployment under capitalism.

How did you reach that conclusion? I understand economics unlike most right-wingers.

No you do not.

 

[danielpalos]

There is no natural rate of unemployment under capitalism.

How did you reach that conclusion? I understand economics unlike most right-wingers.

No you do not.

Yes, I do and You have no valid arguments to disprove it. You must not understand economics and practice the abomination of hypocrisy (unto God) like the morally challenged Right-Wing.

 

[Soupnazi630]

There is no natural rate of unemployment under capitalism.

How did you reach that conclusion? I understand economics unlike most right-wingers.

No you do not.

Yes, I do and You have no valid arguments to disprove it. You must not understand economics and practice the abomination of hypocrisy (unto God) like the morally challenged Right-Wing.

No you do not.

I have proven on every thread that you are massively and intentionally ignorant. The burden is on you to prove that it exists and you cannot.

The cvlaim ids stupid and childish.

 

[danielpalos]

There is no natural rate of unemployment under capitalism.

How did you reach that conclusion? I understand economics unlike most right-wingers.

No you do not.

Yes, I do and You have no valid arguments to disprove it. You must not understand economics and practice the abomination of hypocrisy (unto God) like the morally challenged Right-Wing.

No you do not.

I have proven on every thread that you are massively and intentionally ignorant. The burden is on you to prove that it exists and you cannot.

The cvlaim ids stupid and childish.

You simply appeal to ignorance as is typical of the Right-Wing by Habit.

Why do you believe there is no "natural rate of unemployment" under Capitalism?

 

[Soupnazi630]

There is no natural rate of unemployment under capitalism.

How did you reach that conclusion? I understand economics unlike most right-wingers.

No you do not.

Yes, I do and You have no valid arguments to disprove it. You must not understand economics and practice the abomination of hypocrisy (unto God) like the morally challenged Right-Wing.

No you do not.

I have proven on every thread that you are massively and intentionally ignorant. The burden is on you to prove that it exists and you cannot.

The cvlaim ids stupid and childish.

You simply appeal to ignorance as is typical of the Right-Wing by Habit.

Why do you believe there is no "natural rate of unemployment" under Capitalism?

No I never appeal and I correct your ignorance.

It is on you to prove that there is and you cannot.

 

[danielpalos]

There is no natural rate of unemployment under capitalism.

How did you reach that conclusion? I understand economics unlike most right-wingers.

No you do not.

Yes, I do and You have no valid arguments to disprove it. You must not understand economics and practice the abomination of hypocrisy (unto God) like the morally challenged Right-Wing.

No you do not.

I have proven on every thread that you are massively and intentionally ignorant. The burden is on you to prove that it exists and you cannot.

The cvlaim ids stupid and childish.

You simply appeal to ignorance as is typical of the Right-Wing by Habit.

Why do you believe there is no "natural rate of unemployment" under Capitalism?

No I never appeal and I correct your ignorance.

It is on you to prove that there is and you cannot.

Isn't right-wing fantasy wonderful.

 

[Soupnazi630]

There is no natural rate of unemployment under capitalism.

How did you reach that conclusion? I understand economics unlike most right-wingers.

No you do not.

Yes, I do and You have no valid arguments to disprove it. You must not understand economics and practice the abomination of hypocrisy (unto God) like the morally challenged Right-Wing.

No you do not.

I have proven on every thread that you are massively and intentionally ignorant. The burden is on you to prove that it exists and you cannot.

The cvlaim ids stupid and childish.

You simply appeal to ignorance as is typical of the Right-Wing by Habit.

Why do you believe there is no "natural rate of unemployment" under Capitalism?Yes and that is your engtire

No I never appeal and I correct your ignorance.

It is on you to prove that there is and you cannot.

Isn't right-wing fantasy wonderful.

Your entire belief system is right wing fantasy