Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by LadyEagle, Apr 25, 2003.
[ May 26, 2003, 08:42 PM: Message edited by: 3907 ]
Referring to this:
Does this mean I can start wearing a kilt???
The thing about this though is that the Bill is largely symoblic.
Employers can easily find other things to oppose about "cross-dressers," because if that fact is there, there will be many other character and social shortcomings.
For example, "other employees did not get along well with (said person)." "Customers found (said person) displeasing to work with," and the like.
In other words, the Bill will very probably not have any big effect.
Regretfully, Anthro, it being California, you can lay a sizable chunk of change on the Bill not being purely symbolic. Soon after its passage, some poor snook will find him/herserself in the crosshairs of a sizable law suit.
And I'll just bet no-one can guess where the $ are going to come from for the suer. (pun accidental, but apt!)
And poor ole J Q Businessman will have to foot a hefty legal bill; OR concede! (Ain't "rights" wonderful?)
next thing you know, they will start passing bills making the following of Christian principles illegal. I truly see this starting to happen in this nation. It is slow and easy. We can not afford to be like frogs. If you put a frog in a pot of cold water and slowly heat it up he will just sit there and never get out and will slowly boil to death. This, in my opinion has been happening to us for at least a decade. WAKE UP and see the steam rising.
BTW this just made it to the Bill OReilly show today. One of the guests was a cross-dresser and expressed offense because Bill called him/her a "transvestite" Not politically Correct it seems.
As a California native, I would have to admit, "just what it says."
I heard once that the USA was tipped and all the nuts rolled west. Sometimes, looking around, I don't think that joke was so far off! Things do get pretty weird here! Where else in the WORLD would a water transport canal be left uncovered for hundreds of miles so that the south can not only drain the north's water supply, but so can evaporation?!
Where else do actors and actresses, many of whom do not seem to know the difference between reality and fantasy, get to have so much influence on the politics? Where else will you find Berkeley??? Where else are major cities built on fault lines and flood plains?
Find themselves in a lawsuit--
Hence the need for employers to cover their rears and document reasons for non-hiring/firing of cross-dressers that do not pertain to their cross-dressing, per se. I cannot see how a smart employer cannot do this and essentially avoid this law.
Considering the track record of the State of California's judicial system, it won't matter how well a business tries to comply with a social engineering law. If they are not in full complience (as defined by the law's proponents, they'll get sued anyway, pour les autres. That way, nobody will even think of trying to skim past the law.
The problem becomes that even if they were to pass over a cross-dresserfor someone who is better qualified or some other valid reason, they often get steamrolled over.
This tends to be the case when ever legislation of this sort is implemented.
Sound anything like the infamous "HATE CRIME LEGISLATION"?
Thought police out in full force!!
[ April 30, 2003, 01:04 PM: Message edited by: just-want-peace ]