Started By
Message
re: Catholic couple fined $13,000 for refusing to host same-sex ‘wedding’
Posted on 11/12/14 at 9:06 am to Stonehog
Posted on 11/12/14 at 9:06 am to Stonehog
In order to be a protected class, the characteristic that is used for discrimination has to be immutable.
For the people who have "switched teams" (both ways), which side of the fence is valid for the purposes of a determining if their protected status is valid.
So, let's say one of the lesbians in this scenario decides that she really likes men 5 years from now. Does that change the lawsuit? Or would she still be able to be lesbian for the purpose of a lawsuit while engaged in a heterosexual relationship based upon her proclamation of homosexuality alone?
For the people who have "switched teams" (both ways), which side of the fence is valid for the purposes of a determining if their protected status is valid.
So, let's say one of the lesbians in this scenario decides that she really likes men 5 years from now. Does that change the lawsuit? Or would she still be able to be lesbian for the purpose of a lawsuit while engaged in a heterosexual relationship based upon her proclamation of homosexuality alone?
This post was edited on 11/12/14 at 9:11 am
3
Posted on 11/12/14 at 9:12 am to the808bass
Against my better judgement, I'm going to do a drive by. I can't believe this thread is still going.
Did society/government not come up with the concept of protected class? It is not like the definition is set is stone from God/Jesus/Allah/FSM/Higher Power but by the courts and law makers. So...why couldn't it change based simply upon identification with a sexual orientation?
Since "we" made the definition to begin with, "we" can change it.
quote:
In order to be a protected class, the characteristic that is used for discrimibation has to be immutable.
Did society/government not come up with the concept of protected class? It is not like the definition is set is stone from God/Jesus/Allah/FSM/Higher Power but by the courts and law makers. So...why couldn't it change based simply upon identification with a sexual orientation?
Since "we" made the definition to begin with, "we" can change it.
Posted on 11/12/14 at 9:13 am to the808bass
quote:
For the people who have "switched teams" (both ways), which side of the fence is valid for the purposes of a determining if they're protected status is valid.
You'll understand the issue better If you think of human sexuality as a spectrum instead of just gay or straight.
Anne Heche is a terrible example by the way, when she went out with Ellen no one believed she was really a lesbian. SNL even had a sketch where Chris Kattan played Heche and she kept mispronouncing lesbian and calling herself a lesbodian.
Posted on 11/12/14 at 10:09 am to the808bass
quote:
For the people who have "switched teams" (both ways), which side of the fence is valid for the purposes of a determining if their protected status is valid.
You don't understand sexual orientation. From your comments, I would put you in the category of bisexual. The right dude could flip your switch.
Your orientation, however, does not represent everyone else's orientation. There are strictly heterosexual people and those who are strictly homosexual.
It's similar to and often compared with handedness. There are people who do everything with their right hands, those who are strictly left-handed (Such as me. I was called Lefty well into high school), and the ambidextrous - people who can use each hand for specific functions.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News