That is exactly my experience. It's not overt oppression as in explicitly prohibiting Christians from being able to, as the DEI/woke faithful love to say "bring their whole selves to work." It's the indirect discrimination by way of demanding obeisance to the social/cultural policies they are promoting.AGC said:Windy City Ag said:Quote:
If Christianity has a view of sex and gender associated with morality, to actually live according to it is to discriminate in your mind and you can easily hand waive people fired over pronouns or taking stances on morality of sexual behavior (several university cases, the business world, women's soccer, etc.).
So you are saying you feel structurally oppressed because you cannot communicate your views on homosexuality or transgender people in the workplace? You fear reprisal because of your religious views?
Genuinely curious. . . .
Is it communication or living out religious beliefs? Parse that difference for me if you're "genuinely curious". It's pretty clear to me how I have to live at work and what flags I have to fly for career opportunities and promotion in greater industry.
I asked for other nominations earlier and you didn't provide any.
Boston Celtics HC joe mazzulla...
8,145 Views |
97 Replies |
Last: 5 mo ago by 747Ag
I'm sure you're busy....dermdoc said:
https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/6c5720a4-9546-49ce-818e-774b03ac2dcd/gif
Thanks man.
When comedy hyperbole becomes "real" life something is really wrong.
When comedy hyperbole becomes "real" life something is really wrong.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
And this is not new. Read Romans 1.
When right is wrong and wrong is right bad things happen.
When right is wrong and wrong is right bad things happen.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Sapper Redux said:Serviam said:
We are not far from a place of government mandated homosexuality. You already see some of the fringier mouthpieces of the establishment complaining about the inherent discrimination in people who wouldn't date a woman "just because she was born a man".
If you thought the Civil Rights Act was bad, wait until you have the Sexual Rights Act. The "I just want the government out of my bedroom" folks will morph into "The government needs to be in your bedroom to assure sexual equity".
That's the most impressive thing about progressivism, it has no actual rules other than "WIN". They'll morph from classical liberals into draconian autocrats in a second without a shred of hypocrisy as long as it moves the football towards the endzone.
Uhhhhhhh…. This explains a lot.
Like most pieces of government legislation it had the exact opposite effect it was supposed to have and made the country even more tribal.
Before they were protected classes people would stay away from where they weren't wanted, after the CRA, they would "spike the football" in the face of the person who wouldn't serve them before leading to increase animosity.
Take a modern example, the "bake the gay wedding cake" Colorado example. When sexual orientation was ruled to be a protected class covered by the Colorado CRA, gay people literally targeted a cake owner who they knew wouldn't bake a cake for their wedding so as to make an example of him. They could have gone to a dozen other gay friendly bakeries, but where would the virtue signaling be in that?
Luckily the Supreme Court ruled in his favor, but years after that would affirm that Title 7 of the CRA included sexual orientation as a protected class, which prompted a new slew of attacks.
Racism has no place within the body of Christ, but in society people should be able to freely associate. If some ******* wants to deny service to anyone; let him; go somewhere else; better that than having some doofus spit in your sandwich because he's legally forced to serve you.
Quote:
Like most pieces of government legislation it had the exact opposite effect it was supposed to have and made the country even more tribal.
Do you even ****ing understand what Jim Crow was? How about red lining?
The Boston Celtics are just one game away from clinching their first NBA title since 2008 — and their head coach Joe Mazzulla has already decided what he will do if they win. https://t.co/xv82PSrBtI
— Catholic News Agency (@cnalive) June 14, 2024
Sapper Redux said:Quote:
Like most pieces of government legislation it had the exact opposite effect it was supposed to have and made the country even more tribal.
Do you even ****ing understand what Jim Crow was? How about red lining?
Yes
It doesn't get more tribal than the pipeline of slavery to terrorists who murder to preserve white supremacy to Jim Crow. But no, what was worse was the law that required actual equal rights for all American citizens.
Sapper Redux said:
It doesn't get more tribal than the pipeline of slavery to terrorists who murder to preserve white supremacy to Jim Crow. But no, what was worse was the law that required actual equal rights for all American citizens.
We've already had this discussion. Western civilization did in 300 years what the rest of the world couldn't do in 12,000; end slavery. The fallout of that was messy, but the end result was a foregone conclusion. The CRA did nothing but ensure that the flame of hatred would be stoked for a long as possible.
Holy ***** No, it didn't end slavery. It just shifted it around and changed the name. "The fall out was messy" is a hell of a way to dodge the legacy of terrorist violence against freed slaves and Jim Crow without addressing anything. It seems you think white Southerners were the aggrieved party who should have been allowed to decide when treating Black Americans as subhuman should end.Serviam said:Sapper Redux said:
It doesn't get more tribal than the pipeline of slavery to terrorists who murder to preserve white supremacy to Jim Crow. But no, what was worse was the law that required actual equal rights for all American citizens.
We've already had this discussion. Western civilization did in 300 years what the rest of the world couldn't do in 12,000; end slavery. The fallout of that was messy, but the end result was a foregone conclusion. The CRA did nothing but ensure that the flame of hatred would be stoked for a long as possible.
Aside from his numbers being extremely selective and ignoring the generations born into permanent slavery in North America (as well as ignoring the millions who went to the Caribbean, which the 13 colonies were an intricate part of that economic model), what the **** does the Ottoman Empire have to do with Jim Crow in the United States?FTACo88-FDT24dad said:
Sapper Redux said:Holy ***** No, it didn't end slavery. It just shifted it around and changed the name. "The fall out was messy" is a hell of a way to dodge the legacy of terrorist violence against freed slaves and Jim Crow without addressing anything. It seems you think white Southerners were the aggrieved party who should have been allowed to decide when treating Black Americans as subhuman should end.Serviam said:Sapper Redux said:
It doesn't get more tribal than the pipeline of slavery to terrorists who murder to preserve white supremacy to Jim Crow. But no, what was worse was the law that required actual equal rights for all American citizens.
We've already had this discussion. Western civilization did in 300 years what the rest of the world couldn't do in 12,000; end slavery. The fallout of that was messy, but the end result was a foregone conclusion. The CRA did nothing but ensure that the flame of hatred would be stoked for a long as possible.
Please calm down, you aren't making any sense
Do you think Jim Crow should have been allowed to persist vs passing the Civil Rights Act to end it?
It has nothing to do with Jim Crow. It just shows that the evil of slavery is not a uniquely American experience.Sapper Redux said:Aside from his numbers being extremely selective and ignoring the generations born into permanent slavery in North America (as well as ignoring the millions who went to the Caribbean, which the 13 colonies were an intricate part of that economic model), what the **** does the Ottoman Empire have to do with Jim Crow in the United States?FTACo88-FDT24dad said:
I think we all know that, but we live in America so slavery in America is more relevant.FTACo88-FDT24dad said:It has nothing to do with Jim Crow. It just shows that the evil of slavery is not a uniquely American experience.Sapper Redux said:Aside from his numbers being extremely selective and ignoring the generations born into permanent slavery in North America (as well as ignoring the millions who went to the Caribbean, which the 13 colonies were an intricate part of that economic model), what the **** does the Ottoman Empire have to do with Jim Crow in the United States?FTACo88-FDT24dad said:
wait, how did a thread about the Celtics HC get to a discussion about slavery?
Progressives...
Quote:
wait, how did a thread about the Celtics HC get to a discussion about slavery?
I think it was the position that centuries of slavery was snuffed out in an instant in the 1800s with no lingering social, educational, or emotional impact on the former slaves hence no need for the Civil Rights Act hence Well-off religious folks can claim status as the most structurally oppressed group in the country because they are not able to complains about pronouns at work.
I think that sums this thread up so far.
I think we need to understand there's a difference between private business and public accommodations; so if you're using "Jim Crow laws" in a narrow sense to apply to the laws mandating segregation in public facilities, then no I don't think it should have been allowed to persist.Sapper Redux said:
Do you think Jim Crow should have been allowed to persist vs passing the Civil Rights Act to end it?
However, I think there's a smarter way you can go about things. I think the smartest way would have been to force the South to live up to their "separate but EQUAL" mandate concerning public facilities as found in Plessy V Ferguson, and when found that the facilities obviously weren't equal; forced them to capitulate.
Forcing people together doesn't work. You can see this after the fall of apartheid where they just expected everyone to play nice despite hundreds of years of well-placed grievances. Now things are worse for both the blacks, and the whites in South Africa. Century old sins can't be undone instantly; unfortunately the world doesn't work like that.
"Forcing people together doesn't work"
What about the reverse of this understanding that it is about equal access to neighborhoods, restaurants, buses, etc.?
What about the reverse of this understanding that it is about equal access to neighborhoods, restaurants, buses, etc.?
I mentioned that above, equal access to public accommodations is necessary; but for private businesses it is murkier. A person should be able to refuse service for any reason in a place that they own, as long as they truly own it (and they don't have a rental contract that stipulates conditions of operation).PabloSerna said:
"Forcing people together doesn't work"
What about the reverse of this understanding that it is about equal access to neighborhoods, restaurants, buses, etc.?
Just… wow.
Your last few responses show that you're just sour about desegregation. Sorry you have to share a restaurant dining room with someone who isn't white.
The line goes "…all men are created equal", period.
Your last few responses show that you're just sour about desegregation. Sorry you have to share a restaurant dining room with someone who isn't white.
The line goes "…all men are created equal", period.
I'm not sour at desegregation, I would rather eat with a Catholic of any color or ethnicity than a person whose ancestors come from the same village as mine.boredatwork08 said:
Just… wow.
Your last few responses show that you're just sour about desegregation. Sorry you have to share a restaurant dining room with someone who isn't white.
The line goes "…all men are created equal", period.
Low wattage post. Give the engine a few more cranks.
boredatwork08 said:
Just… wow.
Your last few responses show that you're just sour about desegregation. Sorry you have to share a restaurant dining room with someone who isn't white.
The line goes "…all men are created equal", period.
Do you feel better now?
Maybe I was reading the part where you mentioned that a better way would have been to force those entities that failed to provide separate but equal to step it up?
I don't think that would work because the power structure would need more check and balances to ensure that they indeed were making efforts to provide equal facilities in the case of public schools. Therefore integration was the right way to go.
A current example is the American with Disabilities Act passed in 1990 that many still confuse as optional when constructing/renovating new buildings. It was necessary to codify this at the federal level so that all municipalities throughout the land would have to comply.
It comes down to public access. If you are a business that serves the public, you must make accommodations such as lower pay counters, accessible bathrooms, accessible parking spaces, zero height thresholds, etc.
This has come to be known as "universal design" and is now a normal part of the design and construction process, no different than other areas of building code that ensure life safety for the built environment that everyone takes for granted.
I don't think that would work because the power structure would need more check and balances to ensure that they indeed were making efforts to provide equal facilities in the case of public schools. Therefore integration was the right way to go.
A current example is the American with Disabilities Act passed in 1990 that many still confuse as optional when constructing/renovating new buildings. It was necessary to codify this at the federal level so that all municipalities throughout the land would have to comply.
It comes down to public access. If you are a business that serves the public, you must make accommodations such as lower pay counters, accessible bathrooms, accessible parking spaces, zero height thresholds, etc.
This has come to be known as "universal design" and is now a normal part of the design and construction process, no different than other areas of building code that ensure life safety for the built environment that everyone takes for granted.
Yes, I don't think it would work better; that's the point. They would have been forced to integrate either way, but without the mess that the Civil Rights Act caused.PabloSerna said:
Maybe I was reading the part where you mentioned that a better way would have been to force those entities that failed to provide separate but equal to step it up?
I don't think that would work because the power structure would need more check and balances to ensure that they indeed were making efforts to provide equal facilities in the case of public schools. Therefore integration was the right way to go.
A current example is the American with Disabilities Act passed in 1990 that many still confuse as optional when constructing/renovating new buildings. It was necessary to codify this at the federal level so that all municipalities throughout the land would have to comply.
It comes down to public access. If you are a business that serves the public, you must make accommodations such as lower pay counters, accessible bathrooms, accessible parking spaces, zero height thresholds, etc.
This has come to be known as "universal design" and is now a normal part of the design and construction process, no different than other areas of building code that ensure life safety for the built environment that everyone takes for granted.
And I know about the ADA requirements very well, all of my buildings are ADA compliant even though we've never had a single disabled person enter our doors nor work for us. 2% of my parking spots are handicapped and every bathroom I've got is built exactly to ADA code, despite the fact that they'll never be used. I don't think as a heavy equipment manufacturing company we should qualify as as public business, but that's the only way our builder would build it to avoid any sort of hassle. My private bathroom in my office at the HQ is ADA compliant!
Either way that's not the point.
747Ag said:
Currently, I don't like him. His team is up 2-0 on my Mavericks. I'll weigh in after bouncy ball is done
Bouncy ball is done. I need some time to finish going through the stages of grief. I don't want to like him... but...
Featured Stories
See All
85:33
4h ago
3.3k
7:22
9h ago
6.1k
35:15
7h ago
660
Pick 'Em & Rip 'Em sponsored by PrizePicks: Week 14
by Matthew Dawson
tylhair
If Elko said "if you give NIL $30M I'll get a championship roster" would you give?
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
119
nsAg21
Will it take a couple years to restore the hatred/rivalry?
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
77