California moves to Ban Judges affiliated with the BSA - Galt's Gulch

Remove this ad.

3

California moves to Ban Judges affiliated with the BSA

Posted by SRS66East 10 years, 7 months ago to Government

9 comments | Share | Flag

Why is it that Californians miss the mark by so wide a margin? Are they that gullible, or does Hollywood and the media simply manage to manipulate fact so well near their bases of operation.

SOURCE URL: http://dailycaller.com/2014/04/21/california-proposes-to-ban-judges-affiliated-with-the-boy-scouts-because-the-group-doesnt-allow-gay-troop-leaders/

Add Comment

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
2

Posted by Maphesdus 10 years, 7 months ago

Oh come on now. I'm a big supporter of LGBT rights and everything, but this is a bit ridiculous. Freedom of association is supposed to be a protected right.

Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink
- 1
  
  Posted by khalling 10 years, 7 months ago
  
  We've been trying to tell you...
  
  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
  - Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  - 1
    
    Posted by Maphesdus 10 years, 7 months ago
    
    This is a little different, though. :P
    
    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
    - 1
      
      Posted by khalling 10 years, 7 months ago
      
      you mean, nuanced?
      
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
      - Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      - 0
        
        Posted by Maphesdus 10 years, 7 months ago
        
        Not really. It's just that there's a clear difference between government and private business.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        -
        
        1
        
        Posted by khalling 10 years, 7 months ago
        
        yes there are differences, but please explain further I'm not sure of the distinctions here in this case.
        Hey, have you been following this big Euro sing-off and the frontrunner is someone with a female name but sports groomed facial hair? Do you know anything about her?
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
        
        0
        
        Posted by Maphesdus 10 years, 7 months ago
        
        If we're comparing this bill to the recent incident with Brendan Eich, the difference there is that the government never got involved with the Eich incident. That was an interaction purely between a business and the general public. Mozilla nominated a new CEO, the public objected to their choice, and Mozilla responded to that feedback. No problems there. Also, the incident with Eich was about people's legal right to marriage, which is a far bigger issue than membership in some knot tying club for boys. Besides, the basis for the argument behind the bill is the claim that members of the Boy Scouts must be assumed to be biased against LGBT people, which I don't think is a reasonable claim to make.
        
        As for the European sing-off, are you referring to Conchita Wurst, from Austria?
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink

Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
1

Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 7 months ago

Couldn't this also prohibit anyone affiliated with an institution, like state colleges, that practice affirmative action? Which is nothing more than reverse discrimination (using discrimination to advantage rather than disadvantage)?

Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink
- Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
- 0
  
  Posted by Maphesdus 10 years, 7 months ago
  
  Well, affirmative action could reasonably be argued as necessary to counteract the other forms of institutionalized discrimination which already exist.
  
  For example, suppose white supremacists heading a union were able to get certain laws passed which inhibited the ability of the black community to get into colleges, universities, and other forms of higher education. And so in response, the black community defended itself by persuading law makers to implement affirmative action laws to negate the social disadvantage which had been imposed on them by the white union leaders. In that scenario, it becomes clear that affirmative action isn't the real problem, but rather simply a workaround to solve a previous problem.
  
  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink

Comment hidden.