Quantcast

Comments about ‘Proposed statewide anti-discrimination law on ice for this year’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, Feb. 5 2014 4:45 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Irony Guy
Bountiful, Utah

"It's not an issue." The conservatives have spoken.

The Real Maverick
Orem, UT

Closed door meetings?

Wait, I thought repubs hated those!

Interesting, how the people who scream loudest about these types of meetings at the federal level are suddenly supportive of them at the local level.

Furry1993
Ogden, UT

I guess they'e afraid that the animus that would be displayed during debate on the bills would negate the (false) claim of no animus against GLBT people which the state is trying to assert in its appeal arguments. If they but knew it, the fact that they are refusing to protect the right of GLBT people to be free from discrimination in housing and employment is showing their animus. Interesting.

FT
salt lake city, UT

The Sutherland Institute has spoken.

lost in DC
West Jordan, UT

seeing the comments already posted I can only say, "wow, talk about bitter labelers!"

where is the bill to ban discrimination based on:

hair - or lack thereof?
right-handed vs left-handed?
tall vs short?
ugly vs good looking?
tenor vs bass, alto vs soprano?
brass vs woodwinds vs percussion?
warts?
moles?
tattoos?
scars?
shirts vs skins?
red vs blue?
squeaky voice?
nasaly voice?
love of animated movies?
love of violent movies?
love of violent animated movies?
ABC vs NBC?
Fox vs MSNBC?
skirt vs pants?
bikini vs one-piece?
SUV vs LEV? there is MANDATED discrimination on that one!
vegan vs carnivore?
fur vs cotton?
or any percieved slight based on whatever affinity group suits your fancy?

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments