Entertainers Playing Politics in NC and MS

[ClydeR]

Bruce Springstein (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPhWR4d3FJQ) and Bryan Adams (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9f06QZCVUHg) are boycotting North Carolina (http://brucespringsteen.net/news/2016/a-statement-from-bruce-springsteen-on-north-carolina) and Mississippi (http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/music/2016/04/11/bryan-adams-cancels-mississippi-gig-over-anti-lgbt-bill/82894202/) because of laws recently passed in those states protecting Christians from discrimination based on their religious beliefs -- a clear problem in this country that may affect only bakers and photographers at the moment but will surely spread to afflict us all in a short time. Springstein and Adams are turning things on their heads by claiming that the new laws discriminate, instead of protecting from discrimination. Entertainment stars should stick to entertaining and stop playing politics.

[Gelston]

They'll forgot about the laws a year or so from now and go play there then.

[Ardwen]

Oddly your last sentence applies a hell of a lot to someone named Trump Clyde does it not?

[Tgo01]

Yet Bryan Adams as recently as 2010 performed in Syria. I wonder how gays are treated over there?

What's up with the selective morality of these "performers" and businesses? I wonder if PayPal refuses to employ people in countries where you can literally be stoned to death for being gay.

[drauz]

Yet Bryan Adams as recently as 2010 performed in Syria. I wonder how gays are treated over there?

What's up with the selective morality of these "performers" and businesses? I wonder if PayPal refuses to employ people in countries were you can literally be stoned to death for being gay.

They are contractors not employees.

[Gelston]

It is just a publicity thing. They don't actually give a fuck.

[SylphSorc]

You know as a homosexual living in North Carolina I have to say that it is a somewhat scary thing. People are scared Christians are getting oppressed with their rights. What about all the years, decades, centuries of gays being oppressed? Is it cool that some places are still extremely violent towards us? Either way, I still think it is more publicity then anything. Regardless major companies are pulling out of NC and NC is losing a lot of money.

[Wrathbringer]

omg trying so hard not to troll this thread

[SylphSorc]

Do it :D

[Wrathbringer]

.

[SylphSorc]

I honestly am not a fan of either liberals or conservatives. All I want is to be able to live without worrying someone is going to lynch me because I happen to love women while being a woman myself. Outside of that what-the-fuck-ever. I love how people say giving us homos the right to marry is giving us special rights. When in truth it gives us equal rights. Don't want to marry me and my girlfriend? Fine, whatever, there is someone who will.

[Wrathbringer]

I honestly am not a fan of either liberals or conservatives. All I want is to be able to live without worrying someone is going to lynch me because I happen to love women while being a woman myself. Outside of that what-the-fuck-ever. I love how people say giving us homos the right to marry is giving us special rights. When in truth it gives us equal rights. Don't want to marry me and my girlfriend? Fine, whatever, there is someone who will.

I actually agree with you. I think I'm tired of trolling. I'm deleting my previous troll.

[SylphSorc]

It just blows my mind that this somehow offends people. Like my personal life affects anyone else outside of myself and my (currently imaginary lol) girlfriend. Why can't we focus on actual issues? Like the economy? Overbearing police?

[Kembal]

Yet Bryan Adams as recently as 2010 performed in Syria. I wonder how gays are treated over there?

What's up with the selective morality of these "performers" and businesses? I wonder if PayPal refuses to employ people in countries where you can literally be stoned to death for being gay.

https://www.paypal.com/uk/webapps/mpp/jobs

Looking at the location list, I'd say the only place that I don't know right off the bat is Malaysia, but I don't believe they stone people to death for being gay there. Since it was a British colony, there is almost certainly a law on the books that criminalizes homosexuality. (pretty much every British colony that did not have a revolution to declare independence had such a law on their books at the time of independence. The British enacted it everywhere they ruled in the 1800s.) I doubt it's been repealed.

Selective? Maybe. You do have to account for the fact that foreign corporations don't really have as much leverage as they do in their own domestic countries.

[Tgo01]

https://www.paypal.com/uk/webapps/mpp/jobs

Looking at the location list, I'd say the only place that I don't know right off the bat is Malaysia, but I don't believe they stone people to death for being gay there. Since it was a British colony, there is almost certainly a law on the books that criminalizes homosexuality. (pretty much every British colony that did not have a revolution to declare independence had such a law on their books at the time of independence. The British enacted it everywhere they ruled in the 1800s.) I doubt it's been repealed.

You're seriously implying this is some sort of moral brigade on PayPal's part to not hire people in countries where gays are stoned to death?

I guess we just ignore for a moment that other than being gay is not outlawed in China just about every other aspect of being gay is; ie adopting children, protection from being discriminated against, same sex marriages, etc.

Meanwhile in India it is literally against the law just to be gay, not to mention all of the other things that go along with being gay; such as not being able to adopt children, discrimination, no same sex marriage, etc. Oddly enough transgender people have more rights than gays in India, I guess as long as they stick to people of their old gender? Or...new gender? That's so confusing.

But yes, gays aren't stoned to death in those countries so I guess all is well.

I wonder how many countries PayPal does business in where gays are stoned to death?


Selective? Maybe. You do have to account for the fact that foreign corporations don't really have as much leverage as they do in their own domestic countries.

They don't have to do business in countries where they don't agree with the government's ideals. You know, sort of like how PayPal doesn't have to expand in NC.

[SylphSorc]

Still a long way to go everywhere.

But glad I am no longer going to be lynched in the American South where I grew up. Woot. 30 years old. I just missed that time period. Woot. Can finally get married. Another woot. Yet people cry out this is all just inequality to regular straight people.

[Velfi]

Yet people cry out this is all just inequality to regular straight people.

It is, in that it is slowly removing their ability to dictate the lives of everyone else to their satisfaction.

[SylphSorc]

How do I give rep to someone? lol

[Velfi]

How do I give rep to someone? lol

The little sheriff's star below someone's post.

[Gelston]

The little sheriff's star below someone's post.

Your words suck and you are stupid. I know a lot of words, I know the best words.

[Wrathbringer]

Your words suck and you are stupid. I know a lot of words, I know the best words.

This sounds like something Trump would actually say from the podium in a debate.

[SylphSorc]

In between telling people how much he wants to sleep with his daughter if she wasn't his daughter?

[Gelston]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KU_Jdts5rL0

[Wrathbringer]

In between telling people how much he wants to sleep with his daughter if she wasn't his daughter?

Hey, if two consenting adults want to love each other who are we to judge, right?

[SylphSorc]

You know usually I am behind this statement a hundred percent. Yet I think this falls within the "oh my god this is fucking creepy" zone.

Unless you were trolling me. Then you succeeded XD

[Velfi]

Your words suck and you are stupid. I know a lot of words, I know the best words.

http://i.imgur.com/TuXkX16.gif

[Velfi]

Unless you were trolling me.

With time you will learn how unnecessary this decision process is.

[Ardwen]

My outlook is simple on this, if a christian business can deny you service for being homosexual, can you as a homosexual deny them service for being christian, if the answer is no, then guess what theres an issue somewhere.

[SylphSorc]

Of course there is a issue and the answer is more than likely no. Because you can't discriminate for religion but sexuality isn't included in discrimination laws. If I am not mistaken.

[Tgo01]

My outlook is simple on this, if a christian business can deny you service for being homosexual, can you as a homosexual deny them service for being christian, if the answer is no, then guess what theres an issue somewhere.

Yeah, "sincerely held religious beliefs" is such a bullshit argument in these contexts.

I also dislike it when this shit applies to things like not be required to follow all rules/laws in regards to Obamacare (even though I hate Obamacare), or not being required to get a photo ID or whatever other bullshit reasons they insert this shit into.

I'm all for private organizations being able to discriminate against anyone at anytime, that is their right after all. However when you open up a place of business to the general public then you know there are certain rules and laws you have to follow, so start following them.

[SylphSorc]

I am in the middle with Obamacare as it helped me a lot last year when I got hurt bad at work (and still recovering from). That being said I remember several years back when my girlfriend, then girlfriend, got into a car accident. The hospital wouldn't let me see her because I was neither family nor a straight partner. They supposedly stopped that shit, but according to friends they haven't. Here in NC anyways.

[Kembal]

You're seriously implying this is some sort of moral brigade on PayPal's part to not hire people in countries where gays are stoned to death?

I guess we just ignore for a moment that other than being gay is not outlawed in China just about every other aspect of being gay is; ie adopting children, protection from being discriminated against, same sex marriages, etc.

Meanwhile in India it is literally against the law just to be gay, not to mention all of the other things that go along with being gay; such as not being able to adopt children, discrimination, no same sex marriage, etc. Oddly enough transgender people have more rights than gays in India, I guess as long as they stick to people of their old gender? Or...new gender? That's so confusing.

But yes, gays aren't stoned to death in those countries so I guess all is well.

I wonder how many countries PayPal does business in where gays are stoned to death?

That'd depend on what banks it's set up to interact with. Interesting question that would take way too much research to figure out.

Yeah, same British law on the books in India. India was the first colony it was enacted in. The sad part is, if you look through Hindu scripture, there's zero specific condemnation of homosexuality. Adultery between a married man and a married woman or a married woman and another married woman had the exact same punishment in the last major Hindu legal scripture, for example. It appears that the British law and their Victorian attitudes warped Indian culture on the subject. Transgender people have more rights in India because of a long Hindu tradition respecting them as a different gender to begin with. Weirdly, the British didn't mess with that.



They don't have to do business in countries where they don't agree with the government's ideals. You know, sort of like how PayPal doesn't have to expand in NC.

They are doing business in NC. (accepting payments and such) They're just not opening up a new office....and now I've figured it out. They were probably getting state tax incentives to open the new office. That's what makes it different than the foreign offices.

[drauz]

Yeah, "sincerely held religious beliefs" is such a bullshit argument in these contexts.

This can literally be applied to anything and can't be challenged by even SCOTUS. Meaning you can say that my religion doesn't condone gay people so I don't want to serve them. You don't have to offer any proof that your religion actually says that. You just have to believe.

[Parkbandit]

I am in the middle with Obamacare as it helped me a lot last year when I got hurt bad at work (and still recovering from). That being said I remember several years back when my girlfriend, then girlfriend, got into a car accident. The hospital wouldn't let me see her because I was neither family nor a straight partner. They supposedly stopped that shit, but according to friends they haven't. Here in NC anyways.

I was in the hospital a few years ago and they had the nerve to let a lesbian friend of mine in. Not once, but twice!

Between you being denied visitation visits and having to take back streets to get away from all the people who want to lynch you.. you've had a very difficult life. Good thing you play the victim card so well.

Maybe you should put down your social media for a bit and live in the real world.

[Methais]

You know as a homosexual living in North Carolina I have to say that it is a somewhat scary thing. People are scared Christians are getting oppressed with their rights. What about all the years, decades, centuries of gays being oppressed? Is it cool that some places are still extremely violent towards us? Either way, I still think it is more publicity then anything. Regardless major companies are pulling out of NC and NC is losing a lot of money.

If these people actually gave a shit, they'd raise hell over those places that are still violent toward gay people (i.e. Not here) instead of taking a stand against people that don't want to bake gay cakes or whatever.

The funny part is how the same people fall for this same shit whenever some celebrity needs attention.


All I want is to be able to live without worrying someone is going to lynch me because I happen to love women while being a woman myself.

Where are you hanging out that you're scared someone is going to lunch you?

People who hate gays still love lesbians. Especially if allowed to watch. Everyone loves lesbians, at least as long as they're hot.

[SylphSorc]

I won't admit to being hot, though. lol

[SylphSorc]

Not even worth it.

[Wrathbringer]

I won't admit to being hot, though. lol

Is that you in your avatar?

[SylphSorc]

I wish. No, that is Tegan Quin from Tegan and Sara. XD Kind of one of my favorite bands up until they became, um, New Wave-ish.

[Wrathbringer]

I wish. No, that is Tegan Quin from Tegan and Sara. XD Kind of one of my favorite bands up until they became, um, New Wave-ish.

Oh, cool. I wondered.

[SylphSorc]

Really had no idea what to use as my avatar, honestly. Couldn't find any fantasy pictures that reminded my of my character.

[Dendum]

Whats yiur character look like?

[SylphSorc]

You see XXX the Fighter.
She appears to be a Half-Sylvan.
She is average height and appears to be extremely young. She has almond-shaped pale blue eyes and fair skin. She has short, tied back strawberry blonde hair. She has a heart-shaped face, a small nose and wide hips.
She has minor cuts and bruises on her abdominal area.
She has old battle scars on her left leg, and old battle scars on her left arm.
She is wearing a crystal amulet, a bone-clasped forest green backpack, some reinforced silver-buttoned leathers, a waxed black leather pouch, some dark silver-buttoned breeches, and a pair of glazed leather boots.

[Gelston]

Heh, still in all the starter gear?

[SylphSorc]

For now. lol This is my current long term toon. I had a sorc, but I am not the best at pures. lol

[Gnomad]

If these people actually gave a shit, they'd raise hell over those places that are still violent toward gay people (i.e. Not here) instead of taking a stand against people that don't want to bake gay cakes or whatever.
If these people actually gave a shit, they'd raise hell over those places that are still violent toward gay people (i.e. Not here) instead of taking a stand against people that want two dudes in tuxes on top of their cake.

whoa look at that, it's a worthless argument no matter which side uses it

[Gelston]

If these people actually gave a shit, they'd raise hell over those places that are still violent toward gay people (i.e. Not here) instead of taking a stand against people that want two dudes in tuxes on top of their cake.

whoa look at that, it's a worthless argument no matter which side uses it

Yours doesn't make any sense though. The people here against gay marriage don't care about violence towards gays.

[SylphSorc]

Except for maybe Westboro.

Not that I've ever ran into them outside of Gay Pride events.

[Candor]

You know as a homosexual living in North Carolina I have to say that it is a somewhat scary thing. People are scared Christians are getting oppressed with their rights. What about all the years, decades, centuries of gays being oppressed? Is it cool that some places are still extremely violent towards us? Either way, I still think it is more publicity then anything. Regardless major companies are pulling out of NC and NC is losing a lot of money.

A lot of people in NC could care less that the law is causing companies to move out of the state.

But this is bad law. As I stated a few months ago, the solution is very simple. If a business does not want to serve certain people due to their religion/sexual orientation/whatever, the business should simply post a sign stating that they would prefer not to serve such customers. The sign might also state that the business supports certain organizations, for example a business that does not want to serve homosexuals could state that they support organizations working to repeal gay marriage. Such a sign should resolve the issue for both sides. However if someone the business did not want to serve still wished to patronize them (a rare event I would assume), the business must still do so regardless of their objections.

The issue works both ways - for example businesses owned by gay couples cannot refuse business to Christians.

The NC law is legal discrimination - it must (and I expect will) be repealed. The alternative is a can of worms I don't even want to think about.

[Gelston]

The issue works both ways - for example businesses owned by gay couples cannot refuse business to Christians.


Candor said it folks, gays are anti-christs.

[SylphSorc]

I do not disagree with you Candor. In fact I agree legal discrimination is a very scary slippery slope. Will it be repealed? Time will tell. All I know is that it just seems silly for people to care who another person fucks and loves.

[Candor]

Candor said it folks, gays are anti-christs.

Someone needs to create a 12 step program for Internet trolls.

[Gelston]

Someone needs to create a 12 step program for Internet trolls.

Why didn't you create one? You were probably the biggest troll in GS history.

[ClydeR]

You are distracting from the real issue. It's about bathrooms. What is a Christian supposed to do if a transgendered person uses the wrong bathroom? What about Christian battendants?

[Gelston]

You are distracting from the real issue. It's about bathrooms. What is a Christian supposed to do if a transgendered person uses the wrong bathroom? What about Christian battendants?

Piss on the tranny.

[Wrathbringer]

I do not disagree with you Candor. In fact I agree legal discrimination is a very scary slippery slope. Will it be repealed? Time will tell. All I know is that it just seems silly for people to care who another person fucks and loves.

Ah, I'll tell you why they care. They're Christians. They believe God will judge our country for tolerating homosexuality. They're trying to save the country.

[Tgo01]

The NC law is legal discrimination - it must (and I expect will) be repealed.

If it is repealed it won't be repealed on the basis that it's "legal discrimination" because almost everything is legal discrimination.

A business can refuse service to you because you have tattoos, because you're married, because you're a Democrat, or for just about any reason they can think of and it's all perfectly legal.

The only time it's not legal is if they are trying to refuse service to someone because of a protected class, which some are covered under federal law and state and local laws differ.

[SylphSorc]

With homosexuality not being a protected class. Yet you cannot discriminate against religion as it is a protected class.

Oh I guess that applies more to employment and housing. Still.

[Candor]

If it is repealed it won't be repealed on the basis that it's "legal discrimination" because almost everything is legal discrimination.

A business can refuse service to you because you have tattoos, because you're married, because you're a Democrat, or for just about any reason they can think of and it's all perfectly legal.

The only time it's not legal is if they are trying to refuse service to someone because of a protected class, which some are covered under federal law and state and local laws differ.

I was assuming that homosexuality is a protected class, but as SylphSorc pointed out, it is not in this case. Still if the NC law isn't repealed, I am worried what will follow.

[Tgo01]

I was assuming that homosexuality is a protected class, but as SylphSorc pointed out, it is not. Still if the NC law isn't repealed, I am worried what will follow.

Not that I agree with the NC law but it didn't really change anything. Businesses in that state were already allowed to legally discriminate against gays. This was just a move to pander to religious fanatics.

I think sexual orientation should be a protected class.

[~Rocktar~]

Not that I agree with the NC law but it didn't really change anything. Businesses in that state were already allowed to legally discriminate against gays. This was just a move to pander to religious fanatics.

I think sexual orientation should be a protected class.

I really wish that society would grow up and there was no need for protected classes of any kind and people took personal responsability for their outcomes instead of blaming others.

[Methais]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KU_Jdts5rL0

Holy fuckballs that was incredible.

[Kembal]

Not that I agree with the NC law but it didn't really change anything. Businesses in that state were already allowed to legally discriminate against gays. This was just a move to pander to religious fanatics.

I think sexual orientation should be a protected class.

I think Charlotte and a couple of other cities in NC had made sexual orientation a protected class (or had ordinances about to take effect), which the NC law reverses. So yes, it did change things, beyond just pandering to religious fanatics.

It also wiped out all state laws allowing individuals to take private action in state court to remedy any type of employment discrimination, no matter what protected class it was.

[Tgo01]

I think Charlotte and a couple of other cities in NC had made sexual orientation a protected class (or had ordinances about to take effect), which the NC law reverses. So yes, it did change things, beyond just pandering to religious fanatics.

Fine, so it did nothing in most of NC.


It also wiped out all state laws allowing individuals to take private action in state court to remedy any type of employment discrimination, no matter what protected class it was.

I'm not sure how NC did things prior to this bill's passage but according to the bill there is a state agency that deals with charges of discrimination, it's not like the state said "Yeah sure, there are protected classes, but if you're discriminated against you're SOL anyways, LOL."

[Kembal]

Fine, so it did nothing in most of NC.



I'm not sure how NC did things prior to this bill's passage but according to the bill there is a state agency that deals with charges of discrimination, it's not like the state said "Yeah sure, there are protected classes, but if you're discriminated against you're SOL anyways, LOL."

http://www.workplacefairness.org/file_NC


Unlike most other states, North Carolina's state administrative agency does not process claims under the state anti-discrimination law.


The North Carolina Equal Employment Practices Act N.C. Gen. Stat. %26sect;143-422.2 makes it illegal for an employer to discriminate on the basis of race, religion, color, national origin, age, sex, or handicap (disability). A separate statute N.C. Gen. Stat. %26sect;95-28.1 to 28.1A makes it illegal for an employer to discriminate on the basis of traits for sickle cell or hemoglobin C, or other genetic information. None of these laws provide a specific remedy, so the only way to enforce them is through a lawsuit in court based on the common law.

I don't think this page has been updated with the passage of the new law.

[Gelston]

http://www.workplacefairness.org/file_NC





I don't think this page has been updated with the passage of the new law.

None of that covered sexual orientation.

[Tgo01]

http://www.workplacefairness.org/file_NC


None of these laws provide a specific remedy, so the only way to enforce them is through a lawsuit in court based on the common law.

So none of those laws provided a specific remedy, so they rectified the situation and thus removed the need for lawsuits. What exactly is the problem here? This is exactly how the case in Oregon was handled, through a state agency. Is it only bad when "red" states do this shit?

[Ardwen]

NC's legislation was passed in response to Charlotte protecting, LGBT people, they could have just done nothing and the nothing would have noticably changed for most of the state, instead te passed a law revoking a city ordinance the majority of the citizens of Charlotte wanted, basically a dick move lol.

[Kembal]

None of that covered sexual orientation.

Never was covered at the state level. Charlotte and six other cities had local ordinances in place for it, and that's what got wiped out under this law.

[Kembal]

So none of those laws provided a specific remedy, so they rectified the situation and thus removed the need for lawsuits. What exactly is the problem here? This is exactly how the case in Oregon was handled, through a state agency. Is it only bad when "red" states do this shit?

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/politics-government/article70952897.html


Though the act did not include specific remedies, North Carolina courts had held since 1985 that under that public policy doctrine, people who proved discrimination could recover damages in state court under common law.

In one day, that 30-year practice was halted.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/04/12/473982918/n-c-governor-signs-order-that-clarifies-controversial-gender-identity-law


Responding to criticisms over his state's controversial new law that voids cities' anti-discrimination rules protecting members of the LGBT community, North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory has issued an executive order that "seeks legislation to reinstate the right to sue in state court for discrimination."

I think it's pretty clear that even the governor doesn't find the idea of going through the state agency a good idea if he just reversed himself here.

[Tgo01]

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/politics-government/article70952897.html



http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/04/12/473982918/n-c-governor-signs-order-that-clarifies-controversial-gender-identity-law



I think it's pretty clear that even the governor doesn't find the idea of going through the state agency a good idea if he just reversed himself here.

And again this is how things work in Oregon. So I'm just wondering, is this only a problem because this is an evil red state full of racist rednecks or do you have a problem with the way Oregon handled the bakery gay cake case recently?

[ZeP]

The NHL playoffs are more badass than any war after WWII.

We can debate, people will cry.

[Kembal]

And again this is how things work in Oregon. So I'm just wondering, is this only a problem because this is an evil red state full of racist rednecks or do you have a problem with the way Oregon handled the bakery gay cake case recently?

Oregon wasn't employment discrimination, Tgo. That was denial of business service. Two different situations.

Also, reading the NC Department of Labor's webpage (http://www.nclabor.com/edb/edb_faqs.htm), it does not appear the NC DOL can take administrative action against an employer, which is definitely different than Oregon. From what I remember, that was an administrative action first that was then challenged in court.


7. What happens when it is determined that there is a violation of REDA [a 'Merit' finding]?
-The Department of Labor will attempt to eliminate the alleged violation by informal methods which may consist of conference, conciliation and persuasion. If this effort fails, either:
-The Commissioner of Labor may file a civil action in Superior Court on behalf of the complainant; or
-The complainant may be given a Right-to-Sue letter which permits the complainant to file a civil lawsuit in Superior Court. The lawsuit must be filed within 90 days of the date of the Right-to-Sue letter.

That private right to sue in state court has been taken away by the new law. I highly doubt the NC Department of Labor has enough resources to file civil actions on behalf of all merit claims.

I have no problem of it being referred to an administrative agency if the agency can take administrative action. Going to the agency when it can basically do really nothing is just useless bureaucracy that doesn't help those suffering injury. Given that federal employment discrimination claims must be filed within 180 days of the discriminatory act taking place (NC common law had allowed up to 3 years), then everyone will have to bypass the NC DOL and file with the EEOC. Doubt there's enough federal resources to handle all those claims either.

In short, this is not comparable to Oregon.