Hello Pilot,

I like your allusion to the sea-times of the past.  I like the salt water, too, just not the sun so much anymore.

Yes, I admit that I'm set in my ways primarily, but I'm open to change when I see a better way. Just ask the posters Mike, Suzy, or Karie on here. I've learned from them, and we have some differences of opinion.

Pilot, I hope to visit your blog and pluck your brain, and you're welcome to come and shoot some friendly fire at me next week, if I get the blog going.

 

Okay, I'll not take either personally.........and if you saw me on the high seas, you'd likely hide the women and children, and look for the Jolly Roger too. Had I been born two hundred fifty years ago, I would likely have been a swashbuckler, or a sailor, but had I been a pirate, likely there would have been some Robin Hood mixed in as well. You seem set in your ways, and tenacious about pointing that out. However your comment about "if they can ever prove to me it doesn't......", tells me that when your children are tossed into the mix, deep down, there is a door open that you have for those who may have a different point of view. As long as we all have that...........yeah, Peace

Hello Pilot,

BTW, I apologize for calling you "Pirate." My boys are really into Pirates of the Caribbean, and I guess I mixed up pilot/pirate. My error!

I just want to say this topic you wrote on is interesting to me; therefore, I commented on it. I am in no way trying to gun anyone down, nor could I.

I enjoy a civil exchange of ideas, and I have learned from people in the past on this forum. Passion I have, yes.

If I come on strong, Pilot, it's because, well, you kind of do yourself. Please don't take it personally.

Peace?

 

Hello Pilot,

I don't think any law should make any PRIVATE employer accomodate one's sexual behavior. If someone is well qualified for a job, but feels that he or she has been discriminated against because of sexual behavior, then I don't think the law needs to get involved.

If I'm a swinger and a swapper and the local Christian bookstore doesn't want to hire me, it's his perogative. He shouldn't have to hire me, a hypothetically well-qualified bibliophile just because of my sexual behavior. Notice I didn't use homosexual in this example.

But if we have laws that say transsexuals or homosexuals MUST be hired, then I think swingers and other groups identified by their sexual behavior will FEEL DISCRIMATED against, and we'll have another LAW helping them out.

I'm kind of from the 60s too, though I turned 8 when the 70s rolled around, and I identify more with the 70s. I didn't burn my bra 'cuz  was too young to have one, but I have been quite a rebel at times. Been there and done that.

I too have a few young boys. I am taking the initiative and teaching my children my own set of values before pop culture or their peers beat me to it. I don't call it indoctrinating, but responsible parenting.  What you and I used to experience in the culture is nothing compared to what our kids can experience now, both good and bad.  I teach my boys to follow truth and to think for themselves. Yea, I think all truth comes from God, but if they can ever prove to me it doesn't, then I won't be too sad to see them take on differing values.

You stated: "You do not have to agree with them, but as long as they follow the laws on the books, and avoid blatant attempts to subvert your own lifestyle or interfere with your raising your MINOR children, then you do not have the right to publicly discriminate against them."  But this law WILL interfere with my raising of my minor children.

If ENDA or similar laws pass, then textbooks will be required to present homosexuality as just another lifestyle, and not report on the greater increases in depression, suicide, health problems, and a shorter lifespan that comes along with the lifestyle. 

Hey, if you don't want your kids being blatantly taught about Christian beliefs, fine.  I don't want mine to be taught that sodomy is natural and healthy.  

 

Maryann - forgive me, but I do think I see both sides of the story. I even have a wikipedia window open on sodomy as well, in case I need to get technical. Best I can tell, this law specifically refers to workplace discrimination. That shouldn't impact your pastor's preaching to the choir on Sunday, Wednesday and when the urge hits him. In fact, unless he meets a contractor he's hired to fix the sanctuary A/C system, and begins to suspect the person is gay  and says something like "you're fired queer", and in front of witnesses, he's probably not going to jail. And certainly not for preaching his beliefs to his flock. That is called freedom of religion. Agree or disagree with a lifestyle or someone's sexual orientation, it's just not anyone's business but theirs, other than in the instances I mentioned in my post. The truth of the matter, is that in my experience, gay or straight is not something folks tend to advertise and wear on their name tag. And that is the way it should be. If you try to compare the Christian extreme stereotypical conservative lady having to  wrestle with her moral obligations, as she shields her kids eyes from a flaming ladyboy Kojo type, then you are going to extremes to make your point. It doesn't work that way in real life.........(except in certain parts of town, which I doubt you'll be visiting). People are people, and they are all different. Unless that difference is illegal, or in an obvious outward manner, impacting a persons ability to perform his or her job, or is detrimental to the business and profit of a company, then it should be illegal to deny that person employment based on his  or her private lifestyle. You are a Christian - I don't get any closer to that, than possibly the "missionary" position. And on the subject of sodomy, I am with you on one point. Having looked at both the Christian and legal definitions of the word, I'd rather not have my young children taught about it in class either. If they haven't already found out about it at school behind the gym from friends, or on the internet, I'd really like to be the one who answers such questions for them. Lord knows, from the legal definition, I have certainly broken the law, and from the religious angle, sinned as well.  I'm from the sixties......When the smoke clears though, I think that if someone were to query yours or my children about right and wrong and good and evil, they would probably come up with very similar answers. I am trying to raise decent, honest, honorable, and moral boys. I hope by example I am teaching them to be gentlemen as well. A point will come though, when they are old enough, for them to draw some of their own conclusions about life and creation, and the deeper aspects of doing time on this planet. I'm going to let them be kids for now, and enjoy that part of the trip. I do not plan to try to indoctrinate or brainwash them with a set of beliefs. I will be there to take questions at all times though.......... 

Hello CF,

I doubt if President Johnson would have vetoed his own Executive Order, BUT I think I know what you were referring to!!

I don't believe that private employers need to be in the business of having to accomodate sexual behaviors. Under this law, the faith of the employer, his morals, or even his clientele, have no bearing on who he might be required to hire.

I think EO 11246 was a fine piece of legislation.

I doubt if they would WANT to hire me at a homosexual on-line dating service, as I would be a liability. I would respect the RIGHTS of a bookstore owner who is a homosexual to NOT want to hire me, even though I have a degree which would lend to my helping out quite well with books. 

 

 

 

 

I'm sure people hoped that Executive Order 11246 would be vetoed, too.  But 42 years later, it's still going strong.

I think you only got part of the story correct here, Pirate.

I don't want anyone to be unjustly discriminated against either.

My hope is that ENDA will be vetoed, as it puts religious rights up against the rights of those promoting homosexual sex. I do not want my pastor jailed because he preaches from the pulpit the biblical message that homosexual acts are sinful. This happens in Canada, where the homosexual lobby has trumped the right to free speech. 

We might disagree, but I don't want to be muzzled. Hopefully, Americans can still debate things without the long arm of the law silencing those who oppose anyone's lifestyle, including those who oppose mine.

I do not want my children being taught in textbooks that sodomy is natural OR healthy, which is one thing that a law such as this will eventually lead to.

 

You and I both know that I'm the farthest thing from Christian, but this rant definitely deserves an enthusiastic, "AMEN, brother!" 

The news story you heard sounds like it was referring to the passing of ENDA, which is the Employee Non-Discrimination Act (HR 3685).  Because Executive Order 11246, signed into law in 1965, barred discrimination based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, age or disability, but not sexual orientation, this new bill was SO desperately needed.  Up until a few days ago, it was still LEGAL to fire someone based on sexual orientation.  Seriously.  (Makes you ask yourself, "And we're living in what century now....?")

Can you tell I was a big supporter of the bill?  *grin*

And your "electric bleachers" comment was so freakin' hilarious that I literally laughed out loud with that one!  I'm sure my office cube mates sure loved that one, hee hee hee.

And therein lies a great rant! Thanx for making my point, Mike!