Can any Obama supporter out there tell us exactly what President Obama has done
to resolve America's racial issues in the past 4 years???I remember
him claiming that because of his racial makeup... he was uniquely qualified to
be the President to resolve America's racial issues. But I can't think of ONE
INSTANCE where he has actually used this amazing unique ability he claimed he
has.The only time I can think of... he jumped into the racial issue
and immediatly stuck his foot in his mouth and blew it into a BIGGER issue than
it already was by showing his own racial biases and automatically ASSUMING that
the police officer was a racist and acted "stupidly"... (and later
having to admit that he didn't have all the information on the incident before
he spoke so harshly about the police officer and had to invite him over for a
few beers).Exactly HOW did this lone instance of his presumed unique
ability show he alone is able to HEAL America's racial divide? In my opinion,
in this one instance where he had a CHANCE to help with the racial divide,
instead he ADDED to it?Has Obama actually used his promised (but
drastically overstated) ability to help America overcome it's racial divide???
If so... can you tell us what he has done? Because personally, I expected a
LOT more from him during his first administration. During the
election Obama promised he alone could help... but now that he's in office, what
has he actually delivered that has helped?I think America IS
ready... but I'm not sure the President is ready to lead in this area. He's too
busy pushing Abortion, welfare, growing the government, and telling us what we
can/can't eat. Maybe my expectations were too high.
Utah_State_FanWhen a LGBT person if forced to sit in the back of a bus, or
denied the right to vote, or has to drink from a drinking fountain only for
them, then will I believe they are being discriminated against, but until then
please come up with something new. Not the same old same old.............LDS4But they can be denied housing, denied a job, denied hospital
visitations, etc... Why is the prejudice you seen to be OK with fine while
others are not? What did Christ say about hypocrites? You seem to be like the
Jews regarding the Samaritans...A superior self-righteous attitude.
Now, I don't want to get too far off topic, so how does the factual
discrimination I have shown AFFECT lgbt? Well, for starters it does
not ONLY affect lgbt. Their children: ** 'Report details
inequities for kids of gay parents' - By David Crary - AP - Published by DSNews
- 10/25/11 'Carrigan is among a growing multitude of American
children possibly more than 1.2 million of them being raised by gay and lesbian
parents, often WITHOUT all the legal protections afforded to mom-and-dad
households.' - aricle The US economy: ** 'Marriage an
important key to avoiding poverty' - By Jennifer A. Marshall, The Heritage
Foundation - Published by DSnews - 10/17/10 And this does not
include... VIOLENT discrimination, against LGBT. **
'Hate crimes against gays rose 11%, data show' - By Devlin Barrett - AP -
Published by DSNews - 11/24/09 ** 'Utah Pride Center vandalized' -
KSL - 08/20/10 ** '7 defendants in DJ Bell assault case waive
hearing on evidence' - By Emiley Morgan, Deseret News - 01/06/11 ** 'Attack in Utah county being investigated as possible hate-motivated crime
By Seth Bracken Qsalt Lake 09/08/11
Think discrimination dosen't need protection? Ok. I've
given examples of job discrimination, and Utah's leadership making inappropriate
comments. Let's use everyone's favorite: Chris
Buttars. ** 'Gays greatest threat to America, Buttars says' - By
Aaron Falk - DSnews - 02/19/09 Think he is alone? **
'GOP state legislator: Homosexuality worse than terrorism' - By David Ferguson -
Talking Points Memo - 09/10/11 But no. It is not ENOUGH that we fire
someone for being gay. And evict them from their home ONLY, for being gay. We
must: ** 'Republican Debate Audience Boos Gay Soldier Stephen Hill
After DADT Repeal Question' - By Jason Linkins - Huffington Post - 09/23/11 ...we must shout them DOWN, during Republican debates.
September, 2011. And these, are our Veterans.
My examples of job discrimination and employment and Housing discrimination is
still, not the end of it. That is the 'tee hee' let's fire someone
for being gay', tolerated discrimination. There are many, many
others. Let's look at the photo. In this silent protest, protesters
put gags over their mouth. Response? ** 'Silent LGBT
protest sparks crude comment' - By Mohammad Allam - The Daily Utah Chronicle -
02/16/10 'Gay-rights activists gathered in front of the Utah Supreme
Court inside the Capitol on Friday to silently rally for gay rights. (sic)
Rick Votaw (VP for SLC GOP) said...' Well, I can't even SAY what
Rick Votaw said. It would be denied by the moderator, for being
uncivil and offensive. He has yet, to apologize.
'Their major complaint is usually about the LDS church (Kind of like Pagan).' -
Flashback | 2:11 p.m. Feb. 12, 2012 Um, I didn't bring up the LDS
church on this story. You did. Moving on....
Why do LGBT 'whine' about discrimination? Well, lets see: **'Study: Gay Men Offered Fewer Job Interviews' - By Winston Gieseke - The
Advocate - 10/04/11 'According to a study published today in the
American Journal of Sociology, men whose resumes indicate that theyre gay are
40% less likely to be called in for job interviews, especially in the south or
Midwest.' article Please look up the Salt Lake City discrimination
report from 2009. It shows that there is a case of housing and employment
discrimination done to LGBT person three times... per month. Per month. But we should wait till they have to 'sit in the
back of the bus'?? Your justification of discrimination to
lgbt... is MORE discrimination due to race? That makes
no sense. And if I applied to Mormonsim, would NOT be tolerated. Double. STandard.
@Jory;I find it amusing when the ultra right wing, especially the
religious, claim to be discrminated against when those facing real
discrimination fight back against that very discrimination.It isn't
discrmination to fight back. Quite the opposite, in fact.
I find it amusing that it is only wrong when the people on the left (including
the LGBT community) get discriminated, but its perfectly alright when they
discriminate against people on the right (and religious institutions).
It looks like the new term for those who want to discriminate is "matter of
conscience".Since when does "conscience" permit
discrmination?Some of you asked for examples:(1) My
partner and I have to pay for 2 season ski passes at a local resort because
we're not "married", though we've been together over 13 years. Our
ski buddy friends, who are married as a man and woman get discounted prices on
their passes. This is a minor example, but it plays out in many other
situations as well, where it costs us more than heterosexual couples because of
a certain "marital status" (that we're not allowed, mind you).(2) I carry my partner on my insurance. I pay EXTRA TAXES on that
"benefit" becuase we're not "married". My co-workers who
are married as man/woman get to carry their spouses and are NOT TAXED extra.
We're all Citizens of this country equally.(3) In order for my
partner and I to have one another as our beneficiary, we MUST create a legal
will that costs thousands. Heterosexual couples require only a piece of paper,
a "marriage license", at a cost of approximately $70 to obtain the
same benefit.(4) Heterosexual couples can walk into any County
Clerk's office and obtain a marriage license, even if they just met one another
3 minutes ago. My partner and I, even after 13+ years can't.(5) I
can be fired for being gay in Utah. Do you have to worry about being fired for
being straight? (6) If I didn't own my own home, I could be evicted
for being gay in Utah. Do you have to worry about being evicted for being
straight?Those are examples of discrmination that we face every
single day. Right, there's nooooo discrimination that GLBT people have to face
in Righteous Ole Utah. Nah. None. (right).
Has Ruzicka given her approval yet? Her puppets on the Hill await her
decrees.I don't expect much to happen. Utah's legislators think
that morality and discrimination are synonymous.
Kalindra: I sincerely hope you aren't naive enough to believe that this law
would protect all people equally. It sounds good on paper, but ...
When a LGBT person if forced to sit in the back of a bus, or denied the right to
vote, or has to drink from a drinking fountain only for them, then will I
believe they are being discriminated against, but until then please come up with
something new. Not the same old same old.............
"Because seeing them causes involuntary emotional and physical distress and
infringes on my right and freedom to be secure within myself."Bob, I hope this is sarcasm. If it isn't let be reminded that laws don't
exist to protect you from being 'uncomfortable'. Your security within yourself
is entirely your own doing.
@ Hellooo: Since everyone has a sexual orientation, this law would protect all
people equally. No special class would be created.
I work with quite a few homosexuals. Many are friends and I appreciate them as
individuals I don't see any of them being descriminated at my place of work.
What I do hear is the constant complaints from them and whining about how bad
things are for them. I usually end up asking what is so bad? They usually
can't give me a straight (no pun intended) answer. Their major complaint is
usually about the LDS church (Kind of like Pagan). I ask them what is wrong
with the church? When they him haw around again I ask them the question,
doesn't a religious group or church have the right to fix beliefs and standards
for their members? Most of the time they say yes. What really gives me pain is
those who went on missions and now turn their back on the beliefs and the
covenants that they once made. They want the church to bend to their new
beliefs, not them honoring the committments that they made.
Mr. Hales discusses 'discrimination' but fails to define just what he means by
discrimination against LGBT's. It appears to be an appeal for acceptance of
these lifestyles as being equal with all others. Just because others disagree
with your lifestyle or sexual preference does not constitute discrimination. I
am for the kind and fair treatment of LGBT's, yet do not support laws
legitimizing those relationships. This is a matter of conscience for me as well
as some well-founded scientific support suggesting such relationships are
detrimental to society.
Last Saturday, after a baptism for a grandchild, we all went to dinner at a
family restaurant. Our waiter put on a "show" for us that made that
newly baptized grandchild ask, "What is the matter with our
waiter?"What was the matter was that that waiter thought that
we would ever again visit that restaurant. His conduct was so far over the top,
that we will never "reward" that restaurant chain with our business.
Had the waiter been female and had she offered her "charms" as he
offered his, we would have also decided to remove that restaurant from our list
of places where we will spend our money.Being assailed by
inappropriate public behavior and then having those who engage in that behavior
demand that we hire them, that we house them, and that we accept them is
bordering on insanity. There are rules of proper conduct. There are
rules of proper morals. Those who break those rules and still expect to be
treated "equally" are making absurd demands. If they want respect,
let them live respectful lives.
Adult American citizens should have the right and freedom to do and be anything
they please so long as they do not infringe on the rights and freedoms of
others. Believing this, I support the cause of Gays to be Gays. However.There are some things that people do that violate that
notion for me personally. Because seeing them causes involuntary emotional and
physical distress and infringes on my right and freedom to be secure within
myself. Among the worst of these would include a person kissing an
animal on the mouth. My bodily reactions to seeing a man kissing a man are much
the same. My problem may date back to my youth as a boy having to
face a gauntlet of overweight men and women intent on hugs and kisses at family
reunions. Thus I discriminate among my friends, associates and
others close to my life. What people do behind closed doors is their own
business and I could care less. It is the advertising that I disagree with.
Yeah, just based off this opinion piece, I'm still very hesitant to pass any old
arbitrary anti-discrimination legislation. The big questions for me are 1) in
relation to this "50 percent of Utah's LGBT people experience
discrimination" statistic, what does that define as
"discrimination"? When a person believes that homosexual behavior is
morally wrong, and having a business relationship with a LG person would
implicate a condonation of that behavior, it is the right of that person to
(agreeably) refuse to have said business relationship with said LG person. If
such (agreeable) refusing is considered to be a discriminatory act, then this
"anti-discrimination" legislation is going to cause more problems than
it solves. If more information regarding this "50
percent" statistic is available, it should be published, or at least
brought up in these sorts of opinion pieces. Can the actions evident in the
"50 percent" statistic be broken down into broad categories? Where is
this "discrimination" happening? In what sort of relationships? Etc.
It very well may be that of the 'discrimination' of this type in Utah, only 10
percent of those actions would be legally affected by the new law, hardly making
it very effective.
Well said, Mr. Hales.
The issue really is not one of discrimination. It is the reluctance to
establisha new "protected class" of citizens based on their
sexual orientation. The Salt Lake City ordinance establishes this new protected
class of individuals and does not adequately protect the rights of
"individual conscience" or those of hetro-sexual orientation.
Hopefully, if the legislature does act it will do so in a way that protects all
of the states citizen's hetro-sexual as well as LGT. While less reported those
of us that have worked in institutions where LGT are in the majority have
suffered on going harassment, reduced opportunties for advancement, and pay
I skeptically took notice when Hales said that the proposed law makes
"allowances" for religious institutions. Just this week, with
Obamacare, we saw how little protection such exemptions provided. When various
exemptions are included with a bill in order to get enough support for passage,
sometimes that's a big flashing sign that the bill shouldn't be passed in the
first place. Maybe the idea needs to be re-thunk.