BushyFromOz Posted December 23, 2008 Posted December 23, 2008 wow dtrick, you really shouldnt give me so much control over your emotions. It is a debate, it isnt life or death, and if I offended you as a homosexual, I do apologize, as I am trying to stop the discrimination against your people. "Your people", what, is dtrick some kind of alien species?? And you do know that "crotchies" is a slang name for pubic lice right??
Asysin2leads Posted December 25, 2008 Posted December 25, 2008 Well, the thing of it is, in the fire service, it is a very closed off organization. An organization full of well-toned, well-built men, living together, showering together, exercising together, forming bonds between each other that people on the outside just wouldn't get. So as you can see they are already very tolerant of homosexual behavior.
crotchitymedic1986 Posted January 24, 2009 Author Posted January 24, 2009 I promised I would post the response from the EEOC, regarding the rights, or lack thereof of, for homosexuals. As stated previously: HOMOSEXUALS HAVE NO PROTECTION RIGHTS UNDER THE EEOC, if they are fired or harassed for being homosexual: Discussion Thread Response (Juan Francisco Munoz) 01/23/2009 09:29 AM Thank you for contacting the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission You mentioned your concerns if sexual preference was covered by EEOC. Sex discrimination involves treating someone unfavorably because of that person’s sex or gender. It is against the law to discriminate on the basis of sex or gender when it comes to any aspect of employment, including hiring, firing, pay, job assignments, promotions, layoff, training, fringe benefits, and any other term or condition of employment. It is against the law to harass a person because of that person’s sex or gender. Harassment includes unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature. However, non-sexual, offensive comments about a person’s gender are also against the law. For example, it is against the law to harass a woman by making offensive comments about women in general Sexual preference is not governed by EEOC but may be under local or state laws. If you have further questions or wish to discuss this with an intake information representative, please call 1-800-669-4000 Monday through Friday. If you are deaf or hearing impaired, the TTY number is 1-800-669-6820.
WolfmanHarris Posted January 25, 2009 Posted January 25, 2009 I was worried for a second when I saw this thread surface again, but was pleasantly surprised to read this addition. Confirmed what I said earlier Crotch, despite an incredibly rocky start this is an important addition to the discussion. It is very unfortunate that the EEOC does not cover sexual orientation but the comment that drew my attention most was the part that said: "Sexual preference is not governed by EEOC but may be under local or state laws." My first question is whether that quote is their wording or yours Crotch? I'm not usually a fan of semantics, but I'd consider sexual preference a misnomer that implies a choice that to my understanding is not supported in literature. (Though I'll admit this isn't first hand reading) My close relationship with LGBT friends and family means that I'm closer to the LGBT community than many others might be, so it may be my experience that's colouring this, but sexual orientation is considered the correct term in recognition of this. For an organization that practically screams politically correct (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission), in the area of sexual orientation they seem behind curve on issues of sexual orientation in employment and not just in the letter of the law. My second question is, is anyone state or local laws that cover sexual orientation in either specific or blanket terms? The Ontario Human Rights Code provides protection for sexual orientation, same-sex partnerships and gender identity. Information can be found here on the Ontario Human Rights Commission website. On a federal level the following link to the library of the Canadian Parliament has a great deal of information on sexual orientation and the law. Specifically refer to section A, where is specifies that despite the ommission of sexual orientation from Section 15 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the open-ended language allowed for precedent to flush out the scope of this protection. Under Andrews v. the Law Society of BC (1995) S15 was found to include sexual orientation. Note that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms supersedes all law Federal and Provincial unless explicitly excluded under S33 ("The Notwithstanding Clause") and therefore any law that would seem to exclude sexual orientation would be of no force and effect. As something of an armchair jurist, I'd appreciate any other laws that exist at a Federal, State or Local level that address sexual orientation in terms of employment.
mobey Posted January 25, 2009 Posted January 25, 2009 "Sexual preference is not governed by EEOC but may be under local or state laws." My first question is whether that quote is their wording or yours Crotch? . That's exactly what I thought. The term "Sexual orientation" has been used for years over sexual preference, since... of course.... being gay is not a choice! only homophobes think that way. Sorry crotch you have lost your credibility on these forums a long time ago.... I believe this is not an e-mail at all, but a letter fabricated by crotch himself. I think the other homosexual thread was reopened and [s:479edad551]Iamyourgod[/s:479edad551]...uhh crotchitymedic felt left out and had to reopen this burnt out thread.
WolfmanHarris Posted January 25, 2009 Posted January 25, 2009 Mobey you know I've got nothing but love for ya (not in a homosexual way of course ), but in this I've gotta disagree. Despite a rocky start, I think Crotchity has backed off of the devil's advocate, poorly argued positions and is starting to post some good threads and input. Previously I was with you in my issues with him, but at this point I have none. We don't agree on many points, but as it stands now I don't have an issue with they way these arguments are presented. I have no problem calling bulls**t on someone, but in this case I don't see the cause.
mobey Posted January 25, 2009 Posted January 25, 2009 Your prolly right Doc.... I guess I got a bad taste in my mouth (also not a homosexual pun) about Crotchity.... I guess I should back off and re-evaluate his recent posts. Thx for keepin it real :wink:
Dustdevil Posted January 26, 2009 Posted January 26, 2009 The term "Sexual orientation" has been used for years over sexual preference, since... of course.... being gay is not a choice! only homophobes think that way. I take personal offence to the term "homophobe". Just because I hate homos doesn't mean I am scared of them. If you must label me, please find a more appropriate term to do so with. But really, if you are going to start labelling people, aren't you sort of defeating your own position?
crotchitymedic1986 Posted January 26, 2009 Author Posted January 26, 2009 I have changed nothing in the email, i just put that quote in bold so it would stand out. I still have the original email in my inbox if anyone wants me to forward it to them. The gentleman's name and phone number are listed if you would like to call him.
Happiness Posted January 26, 2009 Posted January 26, 2009 You know I just had to wait to comment on this thread. So first of all in my small community gays are very much apart of our lives. Now to be honest the ones in the medical professions are female but gay none the less. My favorite Doc is a lesbian, one of my partners is a lesbian, the community health nurse is a lesbian and i could probably go on and find more but to me if they do there job and make me feel comfortable then wtf. And the gay guy in town is about 6ft 6 and can beat the crap out of anyone in town and has so in reality im not thinking he has any problems.
Recommended Posts