The Real Problem
Home › Forums › Decaffeinated Coffee › The Real Problem
- This topic has 73 replies, 18 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 11 months ago by commonsaychel.
June 15, 2020 12:14 pm at 12:14 pm #1872513Someone in MonseyParticipant
The Supreme Court has just issued its Bostock v Clayton v County, Georgia decison, which protects gay and transgender people from workplace discrimination. This is the end, folks. It began with Obergefell v Hodges, when the Court legalized gay marriage and now this, which pretty much completely normalizes this class of people. The abortion fight is chicken feed compared to the gay agenda, in terms of its negative influence on society. Sodom has been fully legalized here and nothing good can come of it. You really and truly need to start packing your bags.June 15, 2020 1:28 pm at 1:28 pm #1872559
SiM: The State of Israel is no better in legalizing and protecting these toeivaniks.
Where exactly are you going to go?June 15, 2020 1:29 pm at 1:29 pm #1872572
Hate to break it to you, I am probably as conservative as they come and I have no issue with working along side of who/ what ever my co workers are. If they are competent and do the job well who cares what they are.June 15, 2020 1:29 pm at 1:29 pm #1872578
SiM -“You really and truly need to start packing your bags.”
Where To? Israel?!?
Do you know that Tel Aviv is considered the Gay Capitol of the World?!?June 15, 2020 4:08 pm at 4:08 pm #1872683Someone in MonseyParticipant
commonsaychel, have you worked next to a man wearing a dress, yet? Such a person was one of the plaintiffs in this decision. While gays have been somewhat more on the radar screen in society for many years, transvestism has been highly closeted. No more, as far as the workplace is concerned.
In addressing the issue with Israel, that there’s a high degree of visibility of the gay agenda there, that is not contested. My point is that this level of societal breakdown in the US is going to lead to some very extreme outcomes, to the point that living in Israel will seem preferable, regardless of its imperfection.June 15, 2020 5:36 pm at 5:36 pm #1872717
@Someone, I actually worked with several, gays, trans, etc. Sometime Claire wore a dress and most of the time she/he wore jeans and frankly I could not care less, they were competent employees and had good annual reviews. What they do on the own time is none of my beeswax.June 15, 2020 5:37 pm at 5:37 pm #1872729
SiM -“My point is that this level of societal breakdown in the US is going to lead to some very extreme outcomes, to the point that living in Israel will seem preferable, regardless of its imperfection.”
Whatever breakdown we have here – it will be worse in Israel.
Here we have religious people – ie. Xtians. Most Chilonim are against any type of Jewish Religion!June 15, 2020 10:46 pm at 10:46 pm #1872835charliehallParticipant
It isn’t my business what my employees are doing when they are off the clock, just as it isn’t my employer’s business that I won’t eat at work functions with non-kosher food.June 15, 2020 11:50 pm at 11:50 pm #1872888
Charlie: Then explain why businesses and police departments and non-profits fire employees for racism (i.e. free speech) expressed off hours, off premises, on the employees personal time, if it becomes public in social media, mass media, etc.June 16, 2020 10:28 am at 10:28 am #1872994
@Joesph, this is probably one of the few times I agree with Charlie Hall, The police and the governmental agencies have unions and are part of the bargaining unit and in the contract it would spell out limits of behavior outside of work, if your job involves public trust you can and need to be held to a higher standard.
If an employee sells cameras, rents me a car or works in a library and is a male who is wearing a dress how does that diminish public trust.June 16, 2020 10:36 am at 10:36 am #1873024jackkParticipant
How would frum jews feel if it was legal to be fired for leaving early for shabbos ? Wearing a sheitl and only tzniusdike clothing? wearing a yamulke ?
This is no different in the eyes of the law.June 16, 2020 2:31 pm at 2:31 pm #1873112dbrimParticipant
ATTENTION: After leining last weeks parsha, how you dare to be motzi sheim ra on Eret Yisroel?! How dare you. The meraglim and the entire dor were punished and caused a bichiya l’doros that we continue to endure. You have no idea what kind of ramifications this supreme court ruling will have for shomrei torah u’mitzvos so stop embarrassing yourselves with your naivete and lack of foresight. Eiza hu chochum? Haroeh es Hanoilad. Monsey is so right – RUN, run home before it is too late. Ki tova haarez meod – E”Y is flourishing – in ruchnius, in gashmius, every dalet amos is a mitzvah, avira d’eretz yistoel is machkim. Hashem is calling us all home – how can you turn your backs?June 16, 2020 4:04 pm at 4:04 pm #1873200
@dbrim, hashem will call us home on the great day, it should happen quickly. Until then we are in golus including in Efrat, Bet Shemesh and Chevron etc,
PS lets not turn this into an Israel vs the US, its about a US Supreme Court rulingJune 16, 2020 4:31 pm at 4:31 pm #1873207WolfishMusingsParticipant
I’ve worked with gay people for years. Never once has this been a problem for me or for them.
The WolfJune 16, 2020 4:59 pm at 4:59 pm #1873218
commonsaychel: If private companies shouldn’t be allowed to regulate their employees behavior outside of business hours, during their personal time off premises, by firing them for cross-dressing, posing as the opposite gender, and worse immoral behaviors, then I’m sure you also agree in order not to be hypocritical that private companies should be prohibited from firing employees who during their personal time off premises express very racist and xenophobic ideas in public, on social media, etc.June 16, 2020 5:11 pm at 5:11 pm #1873217
Wolf: How did you know they’re homosexuals? Do you also know which people you work with are adulterers? Why would you know the former but not the latter?June 16, 2020 6:33 pm at 6:33 pm #1873244
Joseph, it depends if your in a collective bargaining unit , then your contract rules supreme, most places of employment when they hire you usually put a clause in the hiring agreement saying they have a right to terminate you if you post something on social media that will reflect badly on the cooperate image.
A far cry from have a trans working a counter at a airline gate or serving meals in a restaurant.
PS its obvious that you never worked outside the daled amos of the frum area.June 16, 2020 6:40 pm at 6:40 pm #1873252anonymous JewParticipant
Joseph, before you start throwing morality bricks, keep in mind how our community has denied the existence of child molesters among us and for decades has protected themJune 16, 2020 10:09 pm at 10:09 pm #1873267
CS: If an employer can fire an employee working a counter at an airline gate or serving meals in a restaurant for expressing very racists or xenophobic on social media during his personal time off premises because it will reflect badly on the cooperate image, then on the same token an employer can fire an employee working a counter at an airline gate or serving meals in a restaurant for posting pictures on social media of himself cross dressing, posing as the opposite general or worse immoral behaviors during his personal time off premises that will reflect badly on the corperate image, as the restaurant or business he works for caters to a very religious clientele who strongly object to such behaviors.
AJ: Completely false. Even if that were true (which it isn’t), it would be irrelevant to this conversation.June 16, 2020 10:23 pm at 10:23 pm #1873282dbrimParticipant
The meraglim of our dor have spoken and without any seichel, using strawman arguments. Yep, clearly, obviously, unequivocally, we are in golus, and for those of us who live in Yerushalayim, daven at the Kosel, the devastation of the churban is clear and present. But living with kedushas Eretz Yisroel is no small matter, and neither is equating living in Beit Shemesh, Bnei Brak, Beitar with living in Chutz L’Aretz. You obviously have missed out on numerous Maamerei Chazal lauding living in Eretz Yisroel. Sad.June 17, 2020 1:18 am at 1:18 am #1873328BY1212Participant
Ok, so you have no problem having a man in a dress teach your children. Or having a man forcing himself into a ladies mikva bc he claims to really be a woman (this happened in l.a.) Or that you can thrown in jail or fined (I know not yet but coming quickly) for ‘misgendering’ .
None of this is a problem in ey. And no hooligans are rioting either and there are no inane calls to defund the police. And in a 180 degree difference, the right is gaining strength every day as opposed to America where AOC has a good chance of becoming President once she is able to start trying (even if she loses once, she can run again and again being quite young and energetic). This last point is the most crucial. The direction of the country.
Yes, the mapai/mapam origins of the Medina are not fully destroyed yet but they are getting weaker by the day. But America is running headlong in the opposite direction for many years now – on the trajectory away from liberty and towards fascism/communism. And to make matters worse, the only force stopping it – trump- is demonized by his own side. Maybe Trump and the normal part of America will succeed in reversing the tide, maybe not, so it is only common sense to be prepared for what has a good chance of coming to fruition.June 17, 2020 1:19 am at 1:19 am #1873329BY1212Participant
The dor hamidbar was in golus also but punished for rejecting Eretz Yisroel, nonetheless. If you have no she’ifa to move to Eretz Yisroel right now and by saying we will wait for Hashem to call us shows you are completely unserious about kibbuz galuyos – when you say ולירושלים עירך תשוב or וקבץ נידחינו מארבע כנפות הארץ you are making a cynical joke since you have no intention of doing anything to help make that happpen (do you wait around for Hashem to miraculouslyyou parnosso?) you are no different than that dor who rejected Eretz Yisroel and the imminent geula of that day. They had terutzim also. Mitzrayim was a much better place to live. No 31 melochim to worry about etc. And yet they were condemned to die in the midbor bc they were not rejecting Eretz Yisroel but Hashem Himself. They were waiting for Him to ‘call’. Or is it ‘dont call me, I’ll call you’?
For 2000 years Jews dreamed about living in Eretz Yisroel, and today when it is finally possible: nah, Brooklyn and Monsey have much more kedusha. Well, if not kedusha, at least much better gashmius. Yankees and mets. Well, not anymore.
That’s all fine to a point But that gashmius is now blinding you to the crumbling of the society around you and the effect that most probably will have on you and based on last 3 weeks events much sooner than I personally had initially thought.
Hashem is calling you. Don’t go deaf from all the fat stuffing your ears. He generally leaves room for בחירה חופשיתso if you ignore his nudges and wake up and warning signs – it’s on you.June 17, 2020 10:49 am at 10:49 am #1873439
@ By1212 and dbrim, the topic here is Bostock v Clayton, somehow or other this morphed into a whole other topic, if you want to go off topic then start a new one relating to Israel v US.
Let me just say this last comment, I am appointing both of you be motza me with the mitzva of Yishuv es haeretz just like I have Hatzloah represent me in saving lives. I will wait here until the geulah comes.June 17, 2020 10:50 am at 10:50 am #1873449
Whether to go to Israel or not is an old halachic discussion. The Aim Habanim Semacha, Rav Yisochor Teichtal ztz’l Hy’d held as the Yerushalmi in Maaser Sheni (5,2) quoted by the Tosfas Yom Tov there. We must go there to start building the Beis Hamikdash on which will descend the one of fire. This must happen before the coming of Meshiach. The Satmar Rav ztz’l says that Eliyahu Hanovi must come first as we don’t know how to build it so the geula will happen spontaneiously strictly from the heaven wthout our intervention. If we do, we violate the three oaths. This was an argument by the Meraglim who held that they must do it themselves as they are not for heavenly intervention.June 17, 2020 11:22 am at 11:22 am #1873494WolfishMusingsParticipant
Wolf: How did you know they’re homosexuals?
Because they openly discuss having same sex partners.
Do you also know which people you work with are adulterers?
No, because no one (to the best of my recollection) has been open about being an adulterer.
Why would you know the former but not the latter?
The WolfJune 17, 2020 11:24 am at 11:24 am #1873497
Should be above, not worthy for heavenly intervention. Moshe Rabbenu wanted to prove that we needed heavenly intervention as they are so strong that they cannot conquer them on their own. As to being worthy, we are not sometimes worthy of our daily sustenance but Hashem keeps his promise to our forefathers even if we are not worthy of it. A promise even on a condition is kept. Once we entered Eretz Yisroel then we have to become worthy to stay there. Look at the first Rashi in Breishis. The land belongs to Him, so He decides who lives there.June 17, 2020 12:48 pm at 12:48 pm #1873514
@Joesph the only time one gets called on the carpet for posting a bigoted comment on the internet is when that person is in the position of power and it may reflect negatively on the perception of unequal treatment, therefore they have a right [and possible obligation] to terminate that person.
In the case of Bostock all he did was promote his gay baseball league, he certainly didn’t make negative remarks about heterosexuals.
In the case of Holly Lobby there are religious exceptions to workplaces.
So If someone works for Avis, Delta, Verizon or my local plumber and is a man who wears a dress who caresJune 17, 2020 12:56 pm at 12:56 pm #1873548
commonsatchel, if there is q mitzva currently of Yishuv Eretz Yisroel, we cannot be motzei the other as it would be a mitzva shebegufa with is mitzva on hin personally as sukkah. The gemora says that people live long in Babel because they only and late to the Beis Hamedrash. Asks the Meharsha, it is stii not Eretz Yisroel? He answers that Beis Hamedrash and Beis Hakneses of Ch’l will become part of EY. What is the answer? Must be that it is donsidered now like being in EY.June 17, 2020 12:59 pm at 12:59 pm #1873507
“I’ve worked with gay people for years. Never once has this been a problem for me or for them.”
but when it comes to religious private schools/institution they dont want to hire a man wearing a dress as a teacher if it goes against their religion!! you tell the kids our religion says it forbidden to be trans/gay/etc and then your forced to give them a teacher whos trans because you dont want to be sued!!
AND it doesn’t matter whether the supreme court thinks its fair and is the morally correct thing to protect gays/trans, thats not their job to legislate! congress and the house is for that! their just supposed to interpret the law , and any sane person can realize that the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. … L. 88-352) , as amended, as it appears in volume 42 of the United States Code, beginning at section 2000e. Title VII prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex and national origin, does not refer to lgbtqJune 17, 2020 1:36 pm at 1:36 pm #1873591
@Reb Elizer, start a new topic on this, the topic we are talking about Bostock v Clayton not about where to liveJune 17, 2020 1:37 pm at 1:37 pm #1873596
@some1, Masterpiece Cakeshop v Colorado allows for religious exemptions for same sex accommodations therefore it affect yeshivas.
As to the second part, that was the whole crux of this case, does the sex discrimination part of the Civil Right Act of 1964 including bases on orientation or just gender? and the Court ruled it to be broadly defined.June 17, 2020 2:48 pm at 2:48 pm #1873632
commonsaychel-“does the sex discrimination part of the Civil Right Act of 1964 including bases on orientation or just gender? and the Court ruled it to be broadly defined.”
the problem is that the 1964 Civil rights act obviously wasn’t 1) talking about gay/lesbian, and 2) obviously doesn’t include gay/lesbian
1) because there a number of times were congress tried to pass legislation against workplace gay/lesbian discrimination since the 1964 act , so it obviously wasn’t included in the 1964 civil rights act
2) because in a case were someone hired a man and 3 months in finds out hes gay and fires him, its obviously not because the workers a man that he was fired, because he knew to begin with he was a man, so the same is when he knows to begin with hes gay and doesn’t hire him, its not because hes a man!June 17, 2020 4:23 pm at 4:23 pm #1873696
some1- Now with this ruling, Bostock v Clayton it includes LGBT. so its a moot point.June 17, 2020 11:46 pm at 11:46 pm #1873872
commonsaychel my point is that the supreme court ruled falsely!!
so its not a moot point !June 18, 2020 1:02 am at 1:02 am #1873897Burnt SteakParticipant
You can say that you don’t agree with the decision, but don’t say that it was a false ruling because you don’t agree with it.
Judges determine how the laws are interpreted. The Supreme Court ruled that the 1964 law extends protection to how one defines their gender identity. There is a lot of precedent of the Supreme Court expanding the original coverage of a law.
Also they are not promoting LGBT culture. They are simply defining the law to protect people for their individual choices and make it harder for employers to fire an employee on a basis other than if they were competent to preform the tasks required for the jobJune 18, 2020 9:07 am at 9:07 am #1873907
Burnt Steak -“They are simply defining the law to protect people for their individual choices and make it harder for employers to fire an employee on a basis other than if they were competent to preform the tasks required for the job”
That’s so nice. When I had my Federal Court case, it wasn’t possible to accommodate me for Shabbos, even though I was Very competent for the job!June 18, 2020 10:23 am at 10:23 am #1873994
@Health. Interesting, I worked for the Federal and NYC government as well corporate America, I never had an issue with Shabbos with one exception, once when I had a openly anti semtic boss who once wrote me a nasty email once for leaving early of Friday, I spoke to the number two person in HR who spoke to her and I never had an issue again.
The one time I had an issue when I was the finalist to get hired for NYC and my boss who was African American and wanted to hire the other finalist who was a African American, long story but I ended up getting the job, and this had nothing to do with Shabbos just that he preferred a African American.
Were you suing a private entity or a governmental agency?June 18, 2020 10:31 am at 10:31 am #1874002🍫Syag LchochmaParticipant
common – I’m not sure if you are saying that you are surprised he had “Shabbos issues” because you never did? A lot of us have. Many can’t get jobs without promising Saturday hours and short Fridays can be a problem as well.June 18, 2020 1:26 pm at 1:26 pm #1874045
Syag, on the contrary, Actually I know discrimination against Frum people is alive and well, I experienced it first hand, I was not hired numerous times even if I was the most qualified person because I am a visibly Frum person.
One of the funniest interviews I ever had was with a guy who was from rural Kentucky who never met a Jew in his life and asked me to explain “what that thing on my head is” I got the job anyway and he was one of the nicest people I ever worked for.
What I was bringing out in my comment is that as a rule once you are working at a place they generally don’t care about Shabbos or Yom tov as long as you carry your weight.
In any event we are veering off topic of Bostock v ClaytonJune 18, 2020 2:12 pm at 2:12 pm #1874094
burnt stake-” They are simply defining the law to protect people for their individual choices and make it harder for employers to fire an employee on a basis other than if they were competent to preform the tasks required for the job”
its an obviously false interpretation, thats why its a false ruling!!
and its obviously false because 1964 Civil rights act obviously wasn’t 1) talking about gay/lesbian, and 2) obviously doesn’t include gay/lesbian
1) because there a number of times were congress tried to pass legislation against workplace gay/lesbian discrimination since the 1964 act , so it obviously wasn’t included in the 1964 civil rights act
2) because in a case were someone hired a man and 3 months in finds out hes gay and fires him, its obviously not because the workers a man that he was fired, because he knew to begin with he was a man, so the same is when he knows to begin with hes gay and doesn’t hire him, its not because hes a man!June 18, 2020 3:15 pm at 3:15 pm #1874104
CS -“Were you suing a private entity or a governmental agency?”
“I got the job anyway and he was one of the nicest people I ever worked for.”
That’s because he probably was a Conservative.
What the Libs (Jewish or not) don’t understand, they are the Biggest Racists!
1. The whole idea of Affirmative Action is to Discrimnate against Others.
2. I wasn’t hired because I kept Shabbos.June 18, 2020 4:31 pm at 4:31 pm #18741772scentsParticipant
“That’s because he probably was a Conservative.”
Never assume facts.June 18, 2020 7:10 pm at 7:10 pm #1874209
@Health, Actually Don was center / center left kind of a moderate blue dog dem on the few time that we talked politics, it was a learning experience for both of us. I had to teach him about Shabbos, Kosher etc. and he told me about life in rural Appalachia. The funnies conversations was when he would speak to my wife and she would speak in Brooklynese and he would talk in Appalachian and they hardly understood each other.June 19, 2020 4:25 pm at 4:25 pm #1874523n0mesorahParticipant
The sin of Sodom was neglecting the poor. There is no reason for this ruling to scare anyone. All they are getting is the ability to keep a job. That does not make a difference to me and you. Of all the things that are failing in our community, this is what will bury American Orthodoxy??????June 19, 2020 8:05 pm at 8:05 pm #1874544n0mesorahParticipant
I was wondering if the Zarda case would be discrimination according to the ruling. The customer was uncomfortable with the way he worked. If he was transgender, he could argue that a female would not be fired. Being gay does not seem to be a defense. He still has to be sensitive to the customers like any other male employee.June 19, 2020 8:07 pm at 8:07 pm #1874548
nomesorah – “There is no reason for this ruling to scare anyone. All they are getting is the ability to keep a job”
thats the problem if im in charge of a religious school i wont want to hire a trans/gay teacher because that would be giving the opposite message to what the school/religion teaches , (that its forbidden to be gay/trans)June 21, 2020 10:55 am at 10:55 am #1874728
@n0m; Moot point, Zarda was consolidated with Bostock as was Harris Funeral Home, all had similar arguments from different circuits, [Georgia, New York and Michigan]June 21, 2020 12:08 pm at 12:08 pm #1874781DovidBTParticipant
that’s the problem if I’m in charge of a religious school …
The Supreme Court decision addresses that, and seems to imply that religious organizations are exempt. Of course, the existence of the decision also increases the likelihood that a religious organization will be prosecuted or sued, and be forced to spend the time and money defending itself.June 21, 2020 2:37 pm at 2:37 pm #1874877
@dovidbt, religious exemptions was cover in the Mastercake decision last year, there are religious exemptions.June 21, 2020 4:18 pm at 4:18 pm #1874895DovidBTParticipant
religious exemptions was cover in the Mastercake decision last year, …
My understanding is that the Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission decision had a very narrow scope, and basically had no impact on general freedom of religious practice.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.