New Jersey just passed a law protecting people from discrimination on this basis.
What do you think? Also, what exactly does the phrase mean?
Thanks.
2007-06-19 04:10:40 · 10 answers · asked by American citizen and taxpayer 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
It absurd that we need all these laws.
Why cant people just not be jerks? I agree the people should not be discriminated against, but the laws are just building up. The more laws the more loopholes.
Besides, if they dont like that theyll just not hire you for a different reason.
2007-06-19 04:21:00 · answer #1 · answered by Showtunes 6 · 5⤊ 2⤋
Although I haven't read the specific legislation that you are referring to, I think that such laws are necessary to protect people from discrimination - they aren't harming anybody so have the right to be treated the same as everybody else. There are more and bigger "loopholes" if there is no legislation in place to prevent discrimination on these grounds. What reasonable excuse is there for such discrimination? Just relying on people's good nature doesn't protect victims of discrimination by those who don't possess such a good nature.
The purpose of the legislation surely isn't to provide work and hence justification for civil servants' positions - it is to provide a level playing field for all. I would have thought that that would be seen as a prerequisite in the land of the free. Freedom includes freedom from discrimination and all people in the USA are supposed to be equal in the eyes of the law - that means that some groups of people who deviate from the norm of the majority need legal protection to ensure that they too are treated equally. Work-based discrimination (including positive discrimination, with which this should not be confused) also holds the economy back as it interferes with objectivity in business.
It might lead to attention-grabbing frivolous claims, but will also lead to genuine (and less-publicised) claims.
You don't need to be "into" gender identity or expression issues to have the strong opinion that such people deserve equal treatment.
2007-06-19 11:50:51 · answer #2 · answered by manneke 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think they are trying to prevent discrimination against people that were born one gender, but have chosen to live as the opposite gender. Man lives as a woman or vice-versa. That's a tough one. We had a case of this locally where a man who was a high school teacher decided to live as a woman. The school and many parents wanted the teacher fired. The funny thing is, most of the kids didn't care and still liked the teacher. I guess if it doesn't interfere with their ability to perform a job then I would have to err on the side of freedom and say they deserve protection.
2007-06-19 11:14:41 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
It means they've outlawed discriminating against transgender individuals. You know, men who feel like women, so they dress and act like women, and vice versa. All I've got to say about that is, I certainly don't want my children to come in contact with transgender people, at least until they are older. I'm not ready to explain it to them yet. So, if they passed that kind of law, the school systems, daycares, etc. would, by law, have to hire an otherwise qualified transgender person. I am not comfortable with that.
2007-06-19 11:19:51 · answer #4 · answered by Zuker 5 · 3⤊ 2⤋
I think that it's a great idea. I think that not only would the law protect men and women from discrimination based on gender, but it would also prevent discrimination against transsexuals and transvestites based on their gender identity.
2007-06-19 11:16:28 · answer #5 · answered by tangerine 7 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Some people have to wear uniforms. And if they don't follow it, they can get fired. Just as many places of employment have dress codes. I don't think cross-dressers should have any rights at all regarding work attire just like everyone else.
2007-06-19 11:20:48 · answer #6 · answered by Eisbär 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
That's Good. Beaurocrats putting up another law for the sake of justifying their jobs and the public gulible enough to think it's a law that protects them. If I send a resume to an employer and my name is Sue, applying for a midwifes job, they hire me, I show up at the home of a woman ready to deliver , (a red neck with a beer belly , whiskers, and a baseball cap, (not really, but you get the picture)), well, guess what , I can't get fired. LOL LOL LOL. I kill me!!!!!
2007-06-19 11:27:56 · answer #7 · answered by reinformer 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
It means you cant discriminate against crossdressers or transvestites. And i do think it should be passed. People are stupid enough already, you gotta give them boundries.
2007-06-19 11:14:38 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Since the behaviors in question are harmless to society, they shouldn't be discriminated against.
Simple.
2007-06-19 11:17:23 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
what was the hold up to start with.
2007-06-19 11:15:49 · answer #10 · answered by ? 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋