RECENT  POSTS:  » READ: Very anti-gay crew vows to never recognize civil marriage equality (even though they so will or face penalties) » NOM #March4Marriage coalition partner, religious liaison: 'Homosexuality is behavior and choice...immoral' » Mike Huckabee blatantly lies about something no civil marriage activist is seeking » Video: Man who once called for ban on gay teachers promotes #March4Marriage; because of course he does » FRC Senior Fellow: We are prepared to 'give our lives' to fight same-sex marriage (i.e. 'our eternal destruction') » Questions 'Face The Nation' should ask Tony Perkins (but likely won't, sadly) » Gorgeous clip from PFLAG Canada recognizes the many marriage memories that never were » On marriage, FRC prays SCOTUS will 'rule in the fear of the Lord' » AFA's new desperation: Marriage equality will turn bible into 'Mein Kampf' » Stop me if you've heard this one: Gay men throw reception for Ted Cruz; Cruz doesn't act as super anti-gay as usual  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

11/08/2013

Supposed 'protect marriage' group continues to protect invasive workplace discrimination

by Jeremy Hooper

The National Organization For Marriage, a once pragmatic organization that was very protective of the idea that it is simply a "traditional marriage" rather than an animus-driven anti-LGBT group, is continue its drift toward full-blown extremism. In yet another piece pertaining to the Employment Nondiscrimination Act, NOM 6A00D8341C503453Ef017Ee73Fdcfb970D-2president Brian Brown, who is on apparent break from stirring up ill feelings toward LGBT people in Russia, goes after the U.S. Senate (and particularly the ten Republicans who backed ENDA) for daring to believe that LGBT workers should be judged on the basis of their work performance rather than who they are or who they love:

We are very disappointed by the Senate's passage of this bill," said Brian Brown, NOM's President. "While protecting people against discrimination is a very important goal, this legislation is problematic because of its broad and unclear definitions. Concepts like 'sexual orientation' and 'gender identity' are too vague to be a basis for such a law which could lead to individuals facing reprisals or even criminal action simply for expressing their values in the workplace."

Brown went on to note that NOM was especially disappointed in the measure's support by several Republican Senators: "We are disappointed with the Republican Senators who voted for this bill for failing to see its dangerous implications for pro-family Americans. Many of these Senators' constituents hold to traditional values like the belief in marriage as the union of one man and one woman, but ENDA could be a Trojan horse that enables the marriage redefinition agenda to be forced on the entire nation through the courts."
FULL: National Organization for Marriage Disappointed with Senate Passage of ENDA; Confident Speaker’s Leadership Will Defeat Measure in House[NOM]

I "love" how sexual orientation and gender identity are supposedly vague, yet Brian thinks the completely chosen, diverse, fluctuating concept of faith is to be protected above all else (*including in workplace protection, where religion is, in fact, protected under federal law).

Now that the cat is so fully out of the bag, we'll have to wait and see if the "for marriage" organization finally changes its name to reflect is patently obvious cause "for discrimination. NOD does have a certain ring to it.

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails