![]() |
|
Politics Where we learn not to think less of others who don't share our views |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
![]() |
#1 |
I think this line's mostly filler.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: DC
Posts: 13,575
|
Scalia's objection was that men and women were equally allowed to be heterosexual, so where's the discrimination?
__________________
_________________ |...............| We live in the nick of times. | Len 17, Wid 3 | |_______________| [pics] |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Snowflake
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Dystopia
Posts: 13,136
|
Title VII doesn't define the limits of discrimination between classes of people, it only refers to the individual in each case. To define an individual as having hetero- or homo- sexuality, you necessarily have to include their "sex" in that determination. And because "sex" is a "but-for" cause (but-for "sex" the outcome would be different), you can't discriminate based on that. This is a law that has been on the books for 56 years.
__________________
****************** There's a level of facility that everyone needs to accomplish, and from there it's a matter of deciding for yourself how important ultra-facility is to your expression. ... I found, like Joseph Campbell said, if you just follow whatever gives you a little joy or excitement or awe, then you're on the right track. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Terry Bozzio |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|