carport commenting feats impale?…

Well, perhaps Dave and I do have something in common after all.

My quest is not quixotic. I think there is far too much government in our lives. What other people think is irrelevent to my making up my own mind.

“I feel discrimination in employment…”

I don’t care about your feelings, John, and I think far too much political thinking is really just that — feelings.

You need to return to our Comments Policy:

In addition, commenters may be moderated or banned for persisting in any of following behavior:

Strawman arguments. Please restrict your discussions to what someone actually says. Do not stretch the meaning of someone’s words to go far beyond what that person actually said or wrote.

I’m more than a little tired of you telling me what I do or don’t “decry” and what Jim did or didn’t “complain about”.

Keep it up and you’ll get back on moderation.

What? Now we take an email as fact? This woman or man for all we know, could have just fabricated this email.

I mean, LDS CPA firm? The Church doesn’t run any CPA firms. If this woman was clearly fired because of her vote then she has the legal right to take this Knucklehead CPA to court and get a nice little compensation for discrimination.

We have no idea if this woman was a good worker or was already on her way out. maybe she was trying to force her voice on others or disparaging others for their points of view, which is a firable offense.

I feel discrimination in employment should remain illegal in the US. You would like to either decriminalize or legalize such discrimination. I have little reason to believe that my view will change during my lifetime. You have a very high mountain to climb convincing the general American pulic to make it legal again to discriminate in employment. Good luck in you Quixotic quest.

My argument about how these laws perpetuate the ‘Americans are bigots’ stereotype has nothing whatsoever to do with how level a playing field we have now or had in the past. Your bringing the matter up only helps to make my point.

“You obviously do not belong to a racial group that has been systematically oppressed and discriminated against since the founding of our country. “

Here again you help my case, not yours. You assume the country to be permantly divided into a victim class and a victimizer class.

For the record, the ethnic groups to which I belong are not subject to real discrimination nowadays, but the past is a different matter.

Of course this says nothing about how I might be treated unfairly over other factors, but then you seem to have no interest.

“you wouldn’t hold on long to that position … If your family couldn’t feed itself, because nobody would even consider hiring you because of your race.”

During the height of Jim Crow it wasn’t impossible for black Americans to feed themselves and their families. What is this? Militant paranoia?

“I generally find this particular intellectual position most prevalent among those in our society who feel the least threatened and have the least to lose should we gradually revert back to a 1950’s or before mentality.”

Even if I didn’t think I had anything to lose by reverting to the attitudes of the 1950s or earlier I still wouldn’t want to. But I’m not afraid of this happening because it isn’t going to happen!

If paranoia is all you have to justify denying freedom of association to employers, then you really have no justification at all.

Your argument would only be valid if we lived in a society with a level playing field to begin with. You obviously do not belong to a racial group that has been systematically oppressed and discriminated against since the founding of our country.

It is very easy to take the intellectual position that employers should be able to discriminate on the basis or race, religion or whatever they chose, but you wouldn’t hold on long to that position if you were repeatedly denied jobs and promotions because of your race. If your family couldn’t feed itself, because nobody would even consider hiring you because of your race.

I generally find this particular intellectual position most prevalent among those in our society who feel the least threatened and have the least to lose should we gradually revert back to a 1950′s or before mentality.

Some in the Yes on 8 Campaign and in the Mormon Church have expressed outrage that gay patrons would boycott a business whose profits funded the effort. They said it went “too far” to refuse to work with an Artistic Director that gave $1,000 to the effort.

But, to date, I’ve not heard of anyone fired for simply voting Yes.

If you are saying it is better to force a resignation over a donation than it is to fire someone over a vote, you are making a distinction without a difference.

The employer mentioned here doesn’t represent all Mormons nor all of the Yes on 8 or Yes on 102 crowd; you shouldn’t act like he does. One instance of a Mormon letting go of an employee he no longer feels comfortable working with does not demonstrate the existance of a concerted effort by Mormons or other pro-traditional marriage types to go after the jobs of No on 8/102 supporters.

You, who decries the firing of a gay marriage supporter, have no sympathy for Eckern who was forced to resign by the No on 8 crowd.

I thought it hypocritical of Jim to complain about the firing while giving tacit support to the CMT and El Coyote affairs, hence my first comment. Jim never responded to it.

On the topic of responses:

You didn’t answer my question on the original thread. You didn’t answer it when I asked it here. This gave the impression that you were ignoring it. When your only reply is that I’m treating you like a servant, I know you are ignoring it.

This is a habit of yours, Tim. I bring up something you don’t want to deal with and you ignore it. When I point out you’re ignoring it, you respond with some snarky comment. Charming and very mature to be sure.