Salon.com once again promoting pedos.

[*bfine32*]

(05-25-2016, 05:19 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Can you explain?

(05-25-2016, 05:23 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Since everyone in existence falls into all classes protected by the CRA, can you explain how someone would not fall into a protected class? By using the terminology that they must fall into one of the protected classes you are implying that there are those that do not. This is what I am referring to when I speak of the myth that it only protects minorities, is that there are people that think the CRA could not apply to discrimination you face.

Of course everyone falls into a protected class and you cannot be discriminated because of it. A trans falls into the protected class of Sex (there is not one for gender) however, they are not being discriminated against because of their sex; as they are actually fighting to go against their sex in regards to policy. So in reality they are the only ones discriminating against themselves because of sex.

For instance you brought up sex in reference to employment. There was a time when men went it was suggested that men were being discriminated against being flight attendants.

The point is that congress should do there job and expand it to either include or exclude the envogue issues. For instance if they extended it to include sexual orientation, you could not be discriminated because of it; even though everybody has one.