Comments on: Vanasco: Quick take on Biden and gay issues

By: Rick

Rick — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 02:44:14 +0000

Employment at will and continued employment based upon acceptable performance are two different things, Trace. Employment at will permits employers to terminate you because of the color of your skin, your political beliefs, your religion or anything else about you that they don’t like. They could simply terminate you just because they were having a bad day and wanted to make someone else feel as bad as they do and you just happened to handy. Laws prevent discriminatory reasons for termination based upon defined protected classes but the employment at will doctrine allows an employer to terminate you for any of these or other reasons, or no reason, to do so by simply saying, “Your services are no longer required.” They could even say, “I don’t like you.” As long as they don’t say they’re firing you because you’re (fill in the protected class here) or give a reason that could be proven false then they have carte blanch to terminate and discriminate freely. We simply cannot have a society based upon equality and the promise of rewards for hard work without these protections.

By: Rick

Rick — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 02:25:01 +0000

If people insist on claiming that marriage is a religious institution then I’m all for making the distinction law. Marriages will have no meaning outside the religious institution they’re conducted in unless the couple also join in a civil union. Equality achieved, separation of church and state protected.

By: DOUG LOVES YOU

DOUG LOVES YOU — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 02:08:04 +0000

Dear Jenn,
I’m sorry. It won’t occur again. Forgiven? Write me at home, ok? Doug

By: gwychooch

gwychooch — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 14:36:53 +0000

Regarding the “catch phrase” marriage…we seem to forget that all matrimonial cleavings, regardless of who performs the ceremony or where it is held, are in fact, in the eyes of the law, nothing more or less than Civil Unions. It is simply a matter of common usage that we as a society use the term “marriage” to denote that couples are legally bound as a single unit. Furthermore, marriage in the modern sense was created for the single purpose, only, to control wealth. If the gay community were wise, it would channel its energies toward getting legislation passed to insure that we have the legal right to inter into a Civil Union. Who officiates under any sitution is really inmaterial, be it priest, preacher or justic of the peace. Anyone who performs a “marriage” ceremeony has to be licensed by the state, which by definition makes anyone of them a civil servant and thereby an agent of the government. Lets stop antagonizing the Republicans and Right Wing Christian nut heads and rally our efforts toward demanding Civil Unions as our legitimate legal right to bond as a family unit. Once Civil Unions are achieved, we can then work toward getting full and equal governmental benefits and protections that heterosexual couples expect. My partner and I would be more than happy to be “Unioned” by the Court Clerk at the local Court House. A unionizing ceremony by any name would be just as sweet.

By: queerunity

queerunity — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 01:19:21 +0000

i hope he joins obama in supporting a repeal of DOMA
http://www.queersunited.blogspot.com

By: Brian

Brian — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 00:17:45 +0000

Obama/Biden would be better overall than McCain, but not by much. I won’t be supporting either as neither support me.. Gay people I can understand voting for Obama; however, don’t give your money to someone who really doesn’t consider you an equal.

By: Leo

Leo — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 02:00:48 +0000

I think Mr. Obama made a good choice with Mr. Biden. Mr. Biden has good experience in the Congress, been there since he was 29. He is able to connect with the everyday person. He is one of the poorer Senators, all the other ones are millionares, even though they get about a $100,000 pay check. Mr. Biden also has a striking personal story: He lost his wife & his daughter aswell in a car accident right before he came to Congress. He took out 2nd & 3rd morgageous (Spelling error, please forgive) to put his son thru college. He also suffered a brain anerism during his previoius presidential bid in the 80s.

Mr. Biden is a good choice because he is identifable. He connects with everyday people in a way the Mr. Obama cannot, which is very important. Choosing Mr. Biden will help win over some purple & blue states.

& i believe that Mr. Biden does not outright support gay marriage because it would be harmful to his chances of winning over some states who oppose gay marriage. By not outright supporting it,but support the ENDA, he is most likely biding time till the country is more supportive of gay marriage. Sort of like watering & tending to a plant, waiting for it to bloom. If he jumps too early, gay marriage might not pass.By waiting, he is increasing the chances of it passing.

By: Frank

Frank — Sat, 23 Aug 2008 23:45:30 +0000

Obama doesn’t care about gay rights, he may talk a good game but when it comes down to it he hires homophobes to work on his value voters. two faced and unreliable..that’s the true Obama,,,enjoy Mcain for 4 years

By: Steve

Steve — Sat, 23 Aug 2008 22:17:31 +0000

Well, p.j., I’m one of the many Obama supporters who didn’t want Hillary or, especially, her sleazy husband anywhere near the Democratic ticket. She ran an incompetent campaign and destroyed her chances at the nomination by refusing to repudiate her Iraq War vote. Quit your whining and get over it.

By: Ross

Ross — Sat, 23 Aug 2008 22:01:55 +0000

“Employment should be at will for both the employer or the employee. You do a job and do it well there should be no issues.”

While I agree with you on this point the problem arises when you realize that this is an ideal situation, and often not a reality. You yourself have faced this kind of discrimination, and while I applaud that you now have a solid career under your belt, you shouldn’t be forced from a job for reasons not relating to do with your work.