Trump Smacked Down by SCOTUS Bigtime on LGBT Rights Issue

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Trump Smacked Down by SCOTUS Bigtime on LGBT Rights Issue
Actually Trump campaigned on LGBT rights....the videos are on youtube unless youtube dumped them....Trump is for all Americans and not dividing them into sections and groups.....

Except that he was full of shit . What he says on the campaign trail does not excuse the fact that his administration, at his directions, fought these workplace protections and revered the Obama policy on the issue. Not to mention all of the others ways that he betrayed LGBT folks since then

Trump is a lying sack of shit. A empty shell of a sub human being with no soul and no core values. He will say whatever is expedient and what he thinks will benefit him at any given time depending on his audiance.

Supporting LGBT rights is not :dividing them into a group" n They already are a group. It is bigotry that is divisive

I've never seen a president keep his promises like Trump has....

Trump administration launches global effort to end criminalization of homosexuality

The administration is responding in part to a reported hanging of a young gay man in Iran, Trump’s top geopolitical foe.

www.nbcnews.com

Trump has also appointed openly gay ambassadors and judges and onto his staff....many of the good things Trump has done and tried to do for the gay community have been fought by the house democrats and covered up by the media....both of whom do not want Trump to be re elected and so will fight him even when he is doing what they have always wanted to do or said they did.....broaden your spear of news collection....you are being denied pertinent information...

Totally correct! Trump is not homophobic..as far as I can see. I doubt he cares about the decision..except in the political calculation that some in his base are pissed. He might pander a bit and bitch about the decision..but that probably is just tactics.

Being a New York Democrat for so many years...Trump has many Gay connections.

True. He has no soul or core values. He is an empty shell of a sub human being

 

[mudwhistle]

I saw absolutely nothing in the story about Trump.

That is because you are too intellectually lazy and incurious to read the whole story. Trumps solicitor general weighed in on the case in an effort to thwart the decision that came down today

Yeah.......right.......sure.....if you say so.

I see this as an attempt to work up LGBT folks over yet another leftist hoax

 

[Rye Catcher]

It's a great day LGBT people who no longer have to fear discrimination in theworkplace

Supreme Court Says LGBTQ Employees Are Protected By Civil Rights Employment Statutes

While Title VII bars discrimination on the basis of “race, color, national origin, sex, and religion,” the original bill didn’t define “sex” as a term.

www.yahoo.com

Supreme Court Says LGBTQ Employees Are Protected By Civil Rights Employment Statutes

The Supreme Court ruled that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects LGBTQ employees from being discriminated against on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.

It warms my heart ton know that Trump is having apoplexy right now. Not only did his administration fight against this, but also, his own appointee wrote the opinion for the majority

It was a 6-3 ruling, with Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Neil Gorsuch joining the four liberal justices in the majority.

Writing for the majority, Gorsuch argued that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity is fundamentally no different than discrimination based on sex.
“An individual’s homosexuality or transgender status is not relevant to employment decisions,” Gorsuch wrote. “That’s because it is impossible to discriminate against a person for being homosexual or transgender without discriminating against that individual based on sex.”

The last I checked, Trump didn't bring this case before the courts. It had nothing to do with Trump.

Bull-Lonnie Trump's bully pulpit reaches from coast to coast and Canada to the Great Wall (well the parts that haven't fallen down, tunneled under or climbed over).

Check this out:

The Rising Trump Lawyer Battling to Reshape the Electorate

As victory laps go, it was remarkably low-key.In the summer of 2013, a young lawyer named William Consovoy appeared on a Brookings Institution panel to discuss his leading role in a recently decided voting-rights case. Just days earlier, the Supreme Court had ruled that certain states...

www.yahoo.com

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

Lying about what the original intent of the statute was solves nothing.

What you call lying is what I call interpreting the law in the context of an evolving social order. Rather than saying that they intended to exclude LGBT people, you could just as easily say that they just didn't give it much thought. So, do you think that employers should be able to fire LGBT folks for their sexuality or gender identity?

If they flaunt it, yes. All sorts of perversions are now protected by this stupid ruling.

What do you mean by "flaunting it" ?

I think he means if you make kissy lips all the time like this

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

Maybe this is flaunting it

 

[Oddball]

Lying about what the original intent of the statute was solves nothing.

What you call lying is what I call interpreting the law in the context of an evolving social order. Rather than saying that they intended to exclude LGBT people, you could just as easily say that they just didn't give it much thought. So, do you think that employers should be able to fire LGBT folks for their sexuality or gender identity?

No, it's transmogrifying the word "sex" from a noun to a verb.....But you degenerates can't persuade the general population to pass new or modify current law -primarily because you absolutely suck at argumentation and persuasion- so you go running to the oligarchy to get what you want by the force of judicial fiat.

 

[martybegan]

Lying about what the original intent of the statute was solves nothing.

What you call lying is what I call interpreting the law in the context of an evolving social order. Rather than saying that they intended to exclude LGBT people, you could just as easily say that they just didn't give it much thought. So, do you think that employers should be able to fire LGBT folks for their sexuality or gender identity?

The law could have been fixed by congress several times over the past 3 presidential administrations.

This is the court exceeding its authority.

1/2 the States fixed their own civil rights laws by the legislative process, why couldn't the feds do the same?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Lying about what the original intent of the statute was solves nothing.

What you call lying is what I call interpreting the law in the context of an evolving social order. Rather than saying that they intended to exclude LGBT people, you could just as easily say that they just didn't give it much thought. So, do you think that employers should be able to fire LGBT folks for their sexuality or gender identity?

The law could have been fixed by congress several times over the past 3 presidential administrations.

This is the court exceeding its authority.

1/2 the States fixed their own civil rights laws by the legislative process, why couldn't the feds do the same?

The fact is that congress could have fixed it but did not. When the other branches of government fail to act to protect civil rights, it is the duty of the courts to step in and fix it.

 

[Nosmo King]

Trump Smacked Down by SCOTUS Bigtime on LGBT Rights Issue
Actually Trump campaigned on LGBT rights....the videos are on youtube unless youtube dumped them....Trump is for all Americans and not dividing them into sections and groups.....

Is that why he wants transgendered people out of the military?

 

[martybegan]

Lying about what the original intent of the statute was solves nothing.

What you call lying is what I call interpreting the law in the context of an evolving social order. Rather than saying that they intended to exclude LGBT people, you could just as easily say that they just didn't give it much thought. So, do you think that employers should be able to fire LGBT folks for their sexuality or gender identity?

The law could have been fixed by congress several times over the past 3 presidential administrations.

This is the court exceeding its authority.

1/2 the States fixed their own civil rights laws by the legislative process, why couldn't the feds do the same?

The fact is that congress could have fixed it but did not. When the other branches of government fail to act to protect civil rights, it is the duty of the courts to step in and fix it.

Just like they did in Dredd Scott an Plessey?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Lying about what the original intent of the statute was solves nothing.

What you call lying is what I call interpreting the law in the context of an evolving social order. Rather than saying that they intended to exclude LGBT people, you could just as easily say that they just didn't give it much thought. So, do you think that employers should be able to fire LGBT folks for their sexuality or gender identity?

The law could have been fixed by congress several times over the past 3 presidential administrations.

This is the court exceeding its authority.

1/2 the States fixed their own civil rights laws by the legislative process, why couldn't the feds do the same?

The fact is that congress could have fixed it but did not. When the other branches of government fail to act to protect civil rights, it is the duty of the courts to step in and fix it.

Just like they did in Dredd Scott an Plessey?

No one said that they never make bad decisions. That is no excuse to cause people to have to wait a few more decades for their rights to be protecting in the year 2020

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

In related news:

Supreme Court’s LGBT decision could shake up other laws and lawsuits - Roll Call

Monday's Supreme Court decision backing LGBT employment rights will reverberate through other ongoing legislative and legal fights.

www.rollcall.com

The Supreme Court’s decision Monday that backed LGBT employment rights will reverberate through ongoing legislative and legal fights about anti-discrimination provisions in other federal laws and Trump administration policies — and in fights yet to come.

Next up

Nonreligious Questions

Whether you’ve been turned off by religion in the past or have a question about one of the world’s religions, check out what Patheos has to offer.

www.patheos.com

The Trump administration Friday finalized a regulation that overturns Obama-era protections for transgender people against sex discrimination in health care.


The policy shift, long-sought by the president’s religious and socially conservative supporters, defines gender as a person’s biological sex. The Obama regulation defined gender as a person’s internal sense of being male, female, neither or a combination.

 

[martybegan]

Lying about what the original intent of the statute was solves nothing.

What you call lying is what I call interpreting the law in the context of an evolving social order. Rather than saying that they intended to exclude LGBT people, you could just as easily say that they just didn't give it much thought. So, do you think that employers should be able to fire LGBT folks for their sexuality or gender identity?

The law could have been fixed by congress several times over the past 3 presidential administrations.

This is the court exceeding its authority.

1/2 the States fixed their own civil rights laws by the legislative process, why couldn't the feds do the same?

The fact is that congress could have fixed it but did not. When the other branches of government fail to act to protect civil rights, it is the duty of the courts to step in and fix it.

Just like they did in Dredd Scott an Plessey?

No one said that they never make bad decisions. That is no excuse to cause people to have to wait a few more decades for their rights to be protecting in the year 2020

The issue is this will be used to impinge on the rights of others. Again, should a Catholic school be forced to hire a gay person to teach?

 

[excalibur]

The ruling will lead to a tsunami of polarizing court cases and further degradation of Americans’ natural rights to free speech, to free association, and to worshipping God as their consciences require. All this in the name of “equality,” a word that has become a totalitarian weapon.​

SCOTUS's Transgender Ruling Firebombs The Constitution

The ruling will lead to a tsunami of polarizing court cases and further degradation of Americans' natural rights to free speech and religious exercise.

thefederalist.com

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

The ruling will lead to a tsunami of polarizing court cases and further degradation of Americans’ natural rights to free speech, to free association, and to worshipping God as their consciences require. All this in the name of “equality,” a word that has become a totalitarian weapon.​

SCOTUS's Transgender Ruling Firebombs The Constitution

The ruling will lead to a tsunami of polarizing court cases and further degradation of Americans' natural rights to free speech and religious exercise.

thefederalist.com

Deal with it. You have rights only to the extent that your exercising those rights do not imping on the rights of others. To put it another way, your right to swing your arm ends where my face begins

 

[Jets]

“I made two mistakes and both of them are sitting on the Supreme Court. [Referring to Earl Warren and William Brennan]”

― Dwight D. Eisenhower

President Trump is not the first nor last President to have this happen.

 

[excalibur]

“I made two mistakes and both of them are sitting on the Supreme Court. [Referring to Earl Warren and William Brennan]”

― Dwight D. Eisenhower

President Trump is not the first nor last President to have this happen.

Only one Trump appointee, Gorsuch, was part of the majority. Even had Gorsuch dissented the Roberts vote would still have resulted in the same decision only it would have been 5-4 rather than 6-3.

 

[Jets]

“I made two mistakes and both of them are sitting on the Supreme Court. [Referring to Earl Warren and William Brennan]”

― Dwight D. Eisenhower

President Trump is not the first nor last President to have this happen.

Only one Trump appointee, Gorsuch, was part of the majority. Even had Gorsuch dissented the Roberts vote would still have resulted in the same decision only it would have been 5-4 rather than 6-3.

Agreed.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Again, should a Catholic school be forced to hire a gay person to teach?

Yes, but they won't be forced. Catholic schools that brain wash kids should not exist

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Nonreligious Questions

Whether you’ve been turned off by religion in the past or have a question about one of the world’s religions, check out what Patheos has to offer.

www.patheos.com

Conservatives warn that today’s ruling will not merely protect homosexual or gender-confused Americans from tangible harm. Rather, it will require churches to recognize same-sex “marriages”; force photographers, florists, and bakers to participate in same-sex “weddings”; compel employers to fund drugs and surgeries to help people imitate members of the opposite sex; and make women and girls to share sleeping quarters, showers, changing areas, and restrooms with gender-confused males (or men simply claiming trans status to get close to vulnerable women).