• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Bullshit Fox News Says

RJKarl said:
She had an easier road by hiding who she was. By the time she came out, she was already beloved and accepted as a person.

If the radically RW Supreme Court says a person can be fired or not hired for being LGBTQ, it will give the next Dem POTUS another arrow in his/her quiver to expand the Court.
Click to expand...

again, people in 2019 can actually be gay comedians and make money whereas she had to hide it until it was basically too late, but even then she could've been fired or blacklisted

so dumb
 
ImTheCaptain said:
again, people in 2019 can actually be gay comedians and make money whereas she had to hide it until it was basically too late, but even then she could've been fired or blacklisted

so dumb
Click to expand...

But it wasn’t too late, she got excoriated in the press, her TV show lost ratings and sponsors and eventually was cancelled, and she was persona non grata for a while. It’s a ridiculous take to suggest she was so successful that coming out was irrelevant.
 
Not saying you had the ridiculous take, ITC
 
At the point she came out, it was too late. If anyone fired her for being lesbian, there would have been a line of companies throwing money at her. Being fired at that time would have been a badge of honor.

It's insane that there's even a discussion whether it's legal to fire or not someone due to their sexual orientation. It would rank up there with Dred Scott if the SC holds that it is legal to do so.
 
Dude, her sitcom got cancelled within weeks of her coming out on the show and in real life. Why are you people denying any correlation and acting like things were so much easier 20 years ago ?
 
Was anybody saying Ellen had it easy 20 years ago?
 
Junebug said:
You know that the SCOTUS case involves the interpretation of a statute, right? And that absent a statute prohibiting it, individuals have the freedom to hire/fire whomever they wish on whatever basis they wish, race, sex, sexual orientation, religion, bad breath, or whatever, right?
Click to expand...

It is as immoral to not hire or fire someone for being LGBTQ as it is because of their color or religion.
 
In an ideal world SCOTUS would rule that Title VII doesn’t apply to sexual orientation and the next day Congress would pass a law preventing this type of discrimination. Since congress doesn’t do so (and seemingly isn’t going to) we are at a difficult juncture IMO. It’s of course ridiculous that you can be fired for your sexual orientation and I won’t lose any sleep if SCOTUS rules this way but I think if I were on the Court I’d side with the employers here strictly from a legal perspective.
 
DG3 said:
This is a good thing, no?
Click to expand...

Which part is good? That Ellen gets all the flack from her own side but GW gets none? That they are friends and can carry in a civil conversation despite deep philosophical differences?
 
People forget, or don't realize, that W did a lot late in his presidency and after combating hiv/aids in Africa. Something like 80 billion dollars. To someone like ellen she might see a genuine change in him and his personal beliefs. Does not excuse his past policies but adds more to his story.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
In an ideal world SCOTUS would rule that Title VII doesn’t apply to sexual orientation and the next day Congress would pass a law preventing this type of discrimination. Since congress doesn’t do so (and seemingly isn’t going to) we are at a difficult juncture IMO. It’s of course ridiculous that you can be fired for your sexual orientation and I won’t lose any sleep if SCOTUS rules this way but I think if I were on the Court I’d side with the employers here strictly from a legal perspective.
Click to expand...

I agree it could go either way, but I think the employees have a pretty decent case that “sex” includes under its penumbra sex-based stereotypes and that firing someone because of their sexual orientation is essentially firing them because they don’t fit the sex-based stereotype of being attracted to the opposite sex.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
In an ideal world SCOTUS would rule that Title VII doesn’t apply to sexual orientation and the next day Congress would pass a law preventing this type of discrimination. Since congress doesn’t do so (and seemingly isn’t going to) we are at a difficult juncture IMO. It’s of course ridiculous that you can be fired for your sexual orientation and I won’t lose any sleep if SCOTUS rules this way but I think if I were on the Court I’d side with the employers here strictly from a legal perspective.
Click to expand...

Sounds like you'd have been the one vote against Brown.
 
Junebug said:
But that would be right up there with DRED SCOTT
Click to expand...

There’s a “Great Scott!” gif to be made with Dred Scott but I am technologically challenged
 
RJKarl said:
Being LGBTQ is no different than Christians being protected.

BTW, sex is mentioned in the law.
Click to expand...

I mean, yeah it is different which is why the case is all the way up to the Supreme Court
 
PhDeac said:
Yeah. But W would have gotten roasted on the right if he had gone public and given a holier than thou speech about getting along with LGBT rights people. And that ignores the fact the left isn’t trying to take away basic rights from the right like the right is doing to the left.
Click to expand...

Ok, but she didn’t have to give that holier than thou speech until people started criticizing her for sitting next to bushII.

I get, I’m conflicted here. If I was some how invited to the Bush Library for an event about bird science or some shit, I’d think back on his time as president and probably decline the invitation. But, in a Machiavellian sense, sometimes it helps to befriend powerful people that oppose your views in order to advance your own agenda. I don’t think that’s what Ellen was doing here, I think she got an invitation and thought it might be fun to attend so she did. However, in her career, Ellen has done far more good for the LGBTQ+ community than a few hours of sitting next to GW can undermine. The liberal red necks guys point was that the left has a habit of eating their own alive while the right supports their guys no matter what. That is a big problem for the left in trying to defeat Trump in 2020 and our adversaries (foreign and domestic) are going to exploit it.

Also, RJ, you’re just flat out wrong here. The very fact that Ellen had to disguise who she was and make jokes about her boyfriends for 15 years, speaks to hardships she endured as a lesbian comic in the 80’s and 90’s. Not to mention her show getting cancelled and her only being able to get voice acting work for several years thereafter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top