Active Users:614 Time:15/11/2024 10:59:32 AM
How about DADT, or employment non discrimination, or federal benefits for civil unions/marriages? Roland00 Send a noteboard - 24/10/2009 01:23:06 AM
How about DADT, or employment non discrimination, or federal benefits for civil unions/marriages?

For pete sake, employment non discrimination failed by 1 vote (in the senate) in 1996, this vote occurred on the SAME FRICKIN DAY, that the senate passed the Defense of Marriage ACT 85-14. This occurred 13 years ago.

I repeat 13 years ago.

Yet Employment Non Discrimination Act (ENDA) has not even been touched this year, when the democrats rule both house, senate, and president.

On the SAME FRICKIN DAY, that the senate passed DOMA, ENDA lost by 1 vote. Only 59 minutes, after the senate passed DOMA, the didn't approve ENDA by 1 vote, less than 1 FRICKIN HOUR. No other issues were discussed, they discussed DOMA voted on it, and then less than an hour later of debate then hold the vote for ENDA.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=104&session=2&vote=00280

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=104&session=2&vote=00281
Reply to message
Matthew Shepard act passed - 23/10/2009 07:54:07 PM 781 Views
Meh - 23/10/2009 08:06:22 PM 372 Views
Federal punishment is usually harsher then state law - 23/10/2009 09:27:49 PM 356 Views
I honestly don't care that federal law is more harsh - 24/10/2009 01:04:16 AM 346 Views
68-29, eh? Party line division? *NM* - 23/10/2009 08:25:07 PM 137 Views
More or less - 23/10/2009 08:35:10 PM 355 Views
All hate crime legislation is stupid..... - 23/10/2009 10:15:02 PM 372 Views
I'm sure Orwell would be intrigued by his own prognosticative abilities. - 24/10/2009 12:52:24 AM 381 Views
Didn't we already slice crimes by degree of intention (e.g., murder vs. manslaughter) pre-Orwell? - 24/10/2009 05:23:56 AM 358 Views
Not sure I agree there - 24/10/2009 02:29:13 PM 329 Views
How about DADT, or employment non discrimination, or federal benefits for civil unions/marriages? - 24/10/2009 01:23:06 AM 362 Views
So it's inherently worse for a gay man to get beaten up than a straight guy? - 24/10/2009 03:45:43 AM 314 Views
Doesn't there have to be an indication ... - 24/10/2009 04:33:49 AM 336 Views
Doesn't matter, Same crime, same punishment, with no extra preference given to anyone. - 24/10/2009 04:48:22 AM 324 Views
It does matter to what you were saying, though. - 24/10/2009 06:32:32 AM 390 Views
One factor in this I don't like though - 24/10/2009 01:54:53 PM 326 Views
Correct - 24/10/2009 04:55:43 AM 332 Views
All orientations are protected. - 24/10/2009 05:17:55 AM 333 Views
Isn't killing or assaulting someone already illegal? - 24/10/2009 05:50:15 AM 331 Views
As per my reply to you above: - 24/10/2009 06:42:24 AM 348 Views
I said nothing as to what I think about hate crimes laws. - 24/10/2009 06:47:51 AM 338 Views
yes and how many black men are sentenced for attacking white men? - 24/10/2009 02:00:26 PM 307 Views
Couldn't say, Ray. - 25/10/2009 04:43:12 AM 469 Views
I don't support that anymore then I support hate crime laws. - 25/10/2009 02:33:27 PM 348 Views
they need to throw out all of the thought crime laws *NM* - 24/10/2009 02:04:30 PM 122 Views
Minor point. - 24/10/2009 04:46:25 PM 355 Views
Yeah I saw that and kind of scoffed as well - 24/10/2009 07:57:23 PM 353 Views
well since almost everything he said turned out to be BS why not that too? - 25/10/2009 02:36:25 PM 341 Views
That's my main objection, yes. - 25/10/2009 10:50:49 PM 339 Views

Reply to Message