A Legal Fork for SCOTUS: How to Arrange Alphabet Soup Into a Viable Static Class.

[Syriusly]

I thought it was up to LGGBTQQIAAPPK2S now: Lesbian, Gay, Genderqueer, Bisexual, Transgendered, Queer, Questioning, Intersex, Asexual, Allies, Pansexual, Polyamorous, Kink, and Two-Spirited.

I'm sticking with the OP. "Alphabet soup" it is from now on.

LGBTQ covers it. As it was getting to be a mouthful even for their community.

That's because they themselves don't even know who/what they are. And hence the point of this entire thread.

Actually they do.

You do not.

You still want to discriminate against homosexuals- and presumably the rest of the community.

 

[Syriusly]

It's irrelevant in my view. But let me ask you this - wouldn't religion be a 'behavior' by your reasoning? And by that logic, shouldn't it also be removed as a "protected class"?..

"Should be removed" would be up to 2/3rds of Congress...if my poli-sci memories serve me still. But yes, it's the ONE class that is exempt from a static state and identifiable unchanging characteristics. Because our penal and civil code systems of majority-rule legislating are about regulating behaviors, any other would-be "class based on behaviors' applicants have the hurdle of democratic rule to clear.

Unless, they want to officially declare their dogma, evangelizing to young people and swift punishment of heretics "an official religion". Then this little chat would be over and done long ago.

Your memory fails you. The protected classes of civil rights law have nothing to do with the first amendment.

But can mere behaviors outside religion have a class distinction bestowed upon them? .

You really answered your own question.

When you included religion.

 

[Syriusly]

The whole basis of the First Amendment is to tell the government that they cannot regulate certain behavior- such as speech, or writing, or religion.

Yet Silhouette instead argues that the government has every right to regulate any behavior the majority deems offensive- regardless how many times the Supreme Court says otherwise.

 

[Silhouette]

But can mere behaviors outside religion have a class distinction bestowed upon them? .

You really answered your own question.

When you included religion.

So when did LGBT get tax-exempt federal recognition as a religion?

 

[Syriusly]

But can mere behaviors outside religion have a class distinction bestowed upon them? .

You really answered your own question.

When you included religion.

So when did LGBT get tax-exempt federal recognition as a religion?

Religion is a behavior- and according to the law a person cannot be denied service because of their religion.

You are the one who keeps making the false claim that people cannot be protected based upon their behavior- but clearly they can.

Not that homosexuality is a behavior.

 

[Silhouette]

Religion is a behavior- and according to the law a person cannot be denied service because of their religion.

You are the one who keeps making the false claim that people cannot be protected based upon their behavior- but clearly they can.

Not that homosexuality is a behavior.

Then apply for federal recognition and be done with it. But for instance, I don't think Applewhite's cult or Jim Jones' cult would've gotten that recognition.. Fun fact, your messiah the child-sodomizer Harvey Milk was a big supporter of Jim Jones.

 

[Syriusly]

Religion is a behavior- and according to the law a person cannot be denied service because of their religion.

You are the one who keeps making the false claim that people cannot be protected based upon their behavior- but clearly they can.

Not that homosexuality is a behavior.

Then apply for federal recognition and be done with it. .

Recognition of what? Religious belief is not race is not homosexuality.