Attempted voter blackmail?

[STLantny]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So if a sympathetic Human Resources employee checks this list for everyone his company is considering hiring, you would have no problem with that?

[/ QUOTE ]

No more than I would someone googling a prosepctive hire or checking their political contributions.

[/ QUOTE ]


So, then you also must have no problem, with a company choosing not to hire someone because they are Gay? If you dont I dont see how your reasoning/logic works. If you are not going to hire someone for being "anti-gay" and proud enough to sign a petition, you CAN NOT reasonably have an objection to an employer not highering somone because they are "gay and proud". I cant wait to hear an answer on this....do you need me to get you some gas for your spin machine????


Edit: I have no problem with your political views, just your logic to reach the decision.

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
A pair of gay activists are raising the stakes in the fight over same-sex marriage, vowing to post on the Internet the name and address of anyone who signs a petition to ban gay marriage and civil unions in Massachusetts.


[/ QUOTE ]

That's so not on, they should get the [censored] chair, just for threatening that.

Yuck Mack

[STLantny]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A pair of gay activists are raising the stakes in the fight over same-sex marriage, vowing to post on the Internet the name and address of anyone who signs a petition to ban gay marriage and civil unions in Massachusetts.


[/ QUOTE ]

That's so not on, they should get the [censored] chair, just for threatening that.

Yuck Mack

[/ QUOTE ]

I dont get what you are saying? The gay couple should get in trouble for it??? Its is very well within their rights to do that though, thats why its a public petition.

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A pair of gay activists are raising the stakes in the fight over same-sex marriage, vowing to post on the Internet the name and address of anyone who signs a petition to ban gay marriage and civil unions in Massachusetts.


[/ QUOTE ]

That's so not on, they should get the [censored] chair, just for threatening that.

Yuck Mack

[/ QUOTE ]

I dont get what you are saying? The gay couple should get in trouble for it??? Its is very well within their rights to do that though, thats why its a public petition.

[/ QUOTE ]

It hardly seems much different from painting 'queer' on their doors. It's offensive and threatening behaviour, whether permitted or not. Incase you wonder I could care less about the 'sanctity of marriage' or whether they are allowed to get married, I just think this is out of order.

Mack

[STLantny]

The gays putting putting up the website, dont really "do anything" to the straights property. All they are doing is hosting a website with a list. I think its wrong to do, but I will defend their right to do it (see flag burning).

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
The gays putting putting up the website, dont really "do anything" to the straights property. All they are doing is hosting a website with a list. I think its wrong to do, but I will defend their right to do it (see flag burning).

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay, again let me say I don't have a probelm with what they want, their way of going about it is not clever though. People should be entitled to disapprove of it without being branded bigots.

Mack

[STLantny]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The gays putting putting up the website, dont really "do anything" to the straights property. All they are doing is hosting a website with a list. I think its wrong to do, but I will defend their right to do it (see flag burning).

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay, again let me say I don't have a probelm with what they want, their way of going about it is not clever though. People should be entitled to disapprove of it without being branded bigots.

Mack

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I think that is the whole point, brand them as bigots. I just do not think I can ever defend squelching speech. BUT! I think that if a private citizen, wanted to list a bunchc of Gay people at his work/neighboorhood/city, on a website, there should be nothing wrong with that.

[ QUOTE ]
So, then you also must have no problem, with a company choosing not to hire someone because they are Gay? If you dont I dont see how your reasoning/logic works. If you are not going to hire someone for being "anti-gay" and proud enough to sign a petition, you CAN NOT reasonably have an objection to an employer not highering somone because they are "gay and proud". I cant wait to hear an answer on this....do you need me to get you some gas for your spin machine????

[/ QUOTE ]

What are you, five years old? You don't see a logical distinction between discrimination based on an essentially immutable characteristic likely not related to any job function and discrimination based on someone's bigotry, which bigotry may well result in the company having legal problems down the road? Never mind that in many places, discrimination based on sexual orientation is illegal. Do you know the difference between legal and illegal discrimination?

[MtSmalls]

[ QUOTE ]
People should be entitled to disapprove of it without being branded bigots.


[/ QUOTE ]

If Archie Bunker's shoe fits....People who are against this initiative are no less bigots than people who were against school integration.

[CollinEstes]

If this situation was reversed and it was a petition in favor of legalizing gay-marriage and those against it used the names on the list to boycott services or publicly brand those as gay on the internet then there would be nothing but outrage from society.

Yet when a gay person uses this to discriminate against someone else against gay-marriage then everything is fine and dandy.