brunson@usfbobo.UUCP (David Brunson) (10/23/84)
[] I've said it before and I'll say it again. I am NOT advocating discrimination against blacks, jews, women, hispanics or people who eat peanut butter and jelly sandwiches. I am not trying to start the Fourth Reich. I do not belong to the KKK. I don't want to belong to the KKK. I have never wanted to belong to the KKK. I won't want to belong to the KKK in the future. I don't want to put blacks, jews, women or people who eat peanut butter and jelly sandwiches in gas chambers. I have never wanted to put people in gas chambers. I won't want to put them in gas chambers in the future. I am not a fascist. I have never been a fascist. I won't want to be a fascist in the future... What's more, if you had been reading carefully, you would know that I am not advocating discrimination against homosexuals. And I am not advocating that homosexuals be put in gas chambers. I don't want to put homosexuals in gas chambers. I have never ... But I also don't want a law that would force me to hire, or otherwise do business with homosexuals IF I DON'T WANT TO. There is currently no such law at the federal level. Some are proposing one. I've said it before and I'll say it again. Why will you have me thrown in jail or forced out of business if I refuse to associate with homosexuals? I thought jail was for criminals. -- David Brunson Making the net a more decent place to raise your children.
bch@mcnc.UUCP (Byron Howes) (10/23/84)
In article <usfbobo.207> brunson@usfbobo.UUCP (David Brunson) writes: > >... if you had been reading carefully, you would know that I >am not advocating discrimination against homosexuals... > >But I also don't want a law that would force me to hire, or otherwise >do business with homosexuals IF I DON'T WANT TO. There is currently no >such law at the federal level. Some are proposing one. > I'm not sure that your definition of discrimination and mine agree. As I look at the things you don't want (in the second paragraph above) it occurs to me that these have been time-honored justifications for blatant discrimination against blacks, jews, women, and other minorities. At least that's the kind of thing I heard 25 years ago. In an historical sense you are indeed advocating discrimination against gays. No, there are no federal laws which force you to hire or do business with gays. There are, however, laws which prohibit you from discriminating against gays. This may seem a fine point, but it is the law and you have (hypothetically) overstepped it in previous postings. The operative phrase is "equal protection under the law." I may not discriminate against you on the basis of your fundamentalist views (provided they do not impact your performance on the job.) I may not turn down Jane Doe for a job because she is female and I may not fire or turn down John Doe for a job simply becaused he is gay. Note that I am not forced to hire you because you are a fundamentalist, nor am I forced to hire females or gays. In fact, if there are clearly better qualified candidates on hand, I am not forced to hire *any* minority candidate under current law. It is when the difference in qualifications becomes unclear that the appropriate laws take effect. I don't think anyone here is suggesting anything different, but of course I may be wrong. At any rate, refusal to grant equal protection to any citizen is as much a criminal act as theft or murder, though it may seem to differ by degree. These rights are guaranteed to you as much as to anyone else, and it serves us all well when we uphold them. -- Byron C. Howes {decvax|akgua}!mcnc!ecsvax!bch
hav@dual.UUCP (Helen Anne Vigneau) (10/25/84)
<*munch*>
Brunson, *you're* a sick man. And if you don't think you are a fascist, I
suggest you take another look at your dictionary. If that doesn't help (I
doubt it will), you are probably in the dire need of intensive psychiatric
help that I've always suspected.
Helen Anne Vigneau
Dual Systems Corporation
P.S. I'm sure the KKK would be proud to have yet another animal like you as
a member of their organization.ag5@pucc-i (Dish of the Day) (10/25/84)
.>[]
.>David Brunson, Bozo Extraordinaire
.>
.>I've said it before and I'll say it again. I am NOT advocating discrimination
.>against blacks, jews, women, hispanics or people who eat peanut butter and
.>jelly sandwiches. I am not trying to start the Fourth Reich. I do not
.>belong to the KKK. I don't want to belong to the KKK. I have never wanted
.>to belong to the KKK. I won't want to belong to the KKK in the future.
.>I don't want to put blacks, jews, women or people who eat peanut butter and
.>jelly sandwiches in gas chambers. I have never wanted to put people in
.>gas chambers. I won't want to put them in gas chambers in the future.
.>I am not a fascist. I have never been a fascist. I won't want to be a
.>fascist in the future...
Now write that one hundred times... ;-}
.>What's more, if you had been reading carefully, you would know that I
.>am not advocating discrimination against homosexuals. And I am not advocating
.>that homosexuals be put in gas chambers. I don't want to put homosexuals
.>in gas chambers. I have never ...
Well, if I didn't want to do business with blacks, nor Jews, nor
peanut-butter-n-jelly-sandwich-eaters nor with nubile sheep, then what
would you call that? It sounds like DISCRIMINATION to me . . .
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Henry C. Mensch | User Confuser | Purdue University User Services
{ihnp4|decvax|ucbvax|purdue|sequent|inuxc|uiucdcs}!pur-ee!pucc-i!ag5
{allegra|cbosgd|hao|harpo|seismo|intelca|masscomp}!pur-ee!pucc-i!ag5
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Hit me with your laser beam!"agz@pucc-k (Andrew Banta) (10/25/84)
I think we've hit on a key point here. I think if we start treating
fundamentalists as "minorities", they might start to get the message. If
they say that they won't hire based on religious practices, lifestyle,
whatever, I think that they should be given an equal dose of the
punishment. I can't think of any "minority" (read:group that is singled
out for some reason) that I wouldn't hire for any job, save something
like hiring someone confined to a wheelchair to do roofing or something
like that.
I seriously think things might change if this sort of thing happened. I
don7t think I'd do it myself right now, btu I think that having these
bigots (fundamentalists) discriminated against might make the point of
other people a little more clear: that you have no reason not to hire
someoen simply because you don't like his practices or cultural
feelings. Think about it ...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Banta {decvax!allegra!ihnp4}!pur-ee!pucc-k!agz
Dept. of Mental Instability, Purdue University --- "I'm OK, You're a CS Major"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"... Say we can't write, can't sing, can't play anyway ... "smb@ulysses.UUCP (Steven Bellovin) (10/26/84)
> From: brunson@usfbobo.UUCP (David Brunson) > Message-ID: <207@usfbobo.UUCP> > Date: Mon, 22-Oct-84 23:46:02 EDT > I've said it before and I'll say it again. I am NOT advocating discrimination > against blacks, jews, women, hispanics or people who eat peanut butter and > jelly sandwiches.... Let me try to explain my objection (and I think the objection of others) to your position. You claim that to compel you to do business with gays would violate your religious beliefs. However, your basis for for that claim is grounded in your own personal interpretation of your own religion -- and we cannot allow one individual's religion to dictate the behavior of others; that's what the First Amendment is all about. But the real question I want to address to you is this: what of someone who claims, on religious grounds, the right not to hire Jews? After all, I've heard it said (and I'm not saying I've heard it from you) that we're damned. What of a Catholic who doesn't want to hire someone who's been excommunicated for (what the hierarchy perceives as) heresy? Or an Orthodox Jew who might find it improper to work with a woman (under certain circumstances)? Homosexuality is different, you say? How? Can you give a rule that can be used to distinguish, objectively and without recourse to your own religious beliefs, amongst these cases? (Note that I will not accept the claim that "homosexuality is a matter of choice". Apart from that fact that that claim is at the very least controversial, religious beliefs are equally a matter of choice.) > What's more, if you had been reading carefully, you would know that I > am not advocating discrimination against homosexuals.... I regard the arbitrary refusal to hire someone, based on assorted stated grounds (race, creed, color, sexual preference, etc.) as discrimination by definition. How is it not?
manis@ubc-vision.CDN (Vincent Manis) (10/27/84)
Andy Banta has unfortunately engaged in some unconscious stereotyping. Fundamentalism (biblical literalism) is a religious doctrine regarding interpretation of religious writings. Soe fundamentalists are violently homophobic, while some (such as many members of the Metropolitan Community Church) are openly and comfortably gay. Let's watch out that we don't engage in our own stereotyping. [Usual defensive aside: no, I'm not a fundamentalist, but some of my best friends...] If David Brunson were in my data structures class, maybe I should fail him even if he were an A student. After all, giving an anti-gay bigot a university degree gives him a cachet of authority which anti-gay bigots ought not to have. Hmm...
6912ar04@sjuvax.UUCP (rowley) (11/14/84)
(munchmunchmunchmunchCHOMP!)
Like they say, the Moral Majority is NEITHER!!
A. J. Rowley
--
There is no dark side of the moon really; as a matter of fact, it's all dark...
-"Eclipse", Pink Floyddubois@uwmacc.UUCP (Paul DuBois) (11/21/84)
> (munchmunchmunchmunchCHOMP!) > > Like they say, the Moral Majority is NEITHER!! > > A. J. Rowley So the majority are immoral. Terrific. -- Paul DuBois {allegra,ihnp4,seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!dubois "Jesus Christ is not Cute." John Fahey
teitz@aecom.UUCP (11/27/84)
> > (munchmunchmunchmunchCHOMP!) > > > > Like they say, the Moral Majority is NEITHER!! > > > > A. J. Rowley > > So the majority are immoral. Terrific. > -- > Paul DuBois {allegra,ihnp4,seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!dubois > > "Jesus Christ is not Cute." John Fahey no. just those who purport to be both are neither. Eliyahu Teitz.
ag5@pucc-k (Henry C. Mensch) (11/27/84)
<<>>
X=> Like they say, the Moral Majority is NEITHER!!
X=>
X=> A. J. Rowley
X=So the majority are immoral. Terrific.
X=--
X=Paul DuBois {allegra,ihnp4,seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!dubois
X="Jesus Christ is not Cute." John Fahey
Wonderful. Since morality usually involves a very subjective
judgement on some mortal's part, I won't worry about this too much.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Henry C. Mensch | User Confuser | Purdue University User Services
{ihnp4|decvax|ucbvax|seismo|allegra|cbosgd|harpo}!pur-ee!pucc-i!ag5
-------------------------------------------------------------------
"Ackphft!"rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen) (11/28/84)
X=> Like they say, the Moral Majority is NEITHER!! [A. J. ROWLEY] X=So the majority are immoral. Terrific. [PAUL DUBOIS] > Wonderful. Since morality usually involves a very subjective > judgement on some mortal's part, I won't worry about this too much. > [HENRY MENSCH] To clarify: saying "The Moral Majority is neither" implies that those associated with that group do not represent a majority nor are they "moral". It does not imply that the majority is immoral, as Paul would have it. (Believing that must somehow make him feel justified in his feelings for humanity.) Fact is, the majority is probably "immoral" by Paul's standards, in that Paul doesn't like their actions and beliefs. I DO worry about things like this because they represent the mood of a significant number of people who would like to see the majority become "moral" by their standards. ("Or else what?" is a reasonable question to ask them. As is "Why?".) -- WHAT IS YOUR NAME? Rich Rosen WHAT IS YOUR NET ADDRESS? pyuxd!rlr WHAT IS THE CAPITAL OF ASSYRIA? Nineveh (GOTCHA!) ALL RIGHT, OFF YOU GO...