06/18/2020 / By Ethan Huff
Homosexuals, transgenders and all others in the rainbow tribe are full of pride after the recent Supreme Court decision adding LGBTQ protections to the Civil Rights Act of 1964. But what about conservatives, who are still discriminated against while being afforded no protections?
The landmark 6-3 vote expands the definition of a key provision known as Title VII that prohibits discrimination against someone on the basis of sex, which the court now says includes LGBTQ status or expression. Employers can no longer do anything to homosexuals or transsexuals that might be deemed as “discrimination,” in other words.
“An employer who fires an individual for being homosexual or transgender fires that person for traits or actions it would not have questioned in members of a different sex,” stated Trump appointee Justice Neil Gorsuch, who wrote the decision for those in favor of the change.
“Sex plays a necessary and undisguisable role in the decision, exactly what Title VII forbids.”
The only dissenters to the ruling were Justices Samuel Alito, Brett Kavanaugh, and Clarence Thomas. Writing for the dissenters, Justice Alito explained that it is “preposterous” for the court to try to convince readers of Title VII that it somehow includes protections for the full LGBTQ spectrum of perversion.
“Even as understood today, the concept of discrimination because of ‘sex’ is different from discrimination because of ‘sexual orientation’ or ‘gender identity,'” he wrote, explaining that the ruling does not represent “merely enforcing the terms of [Title VII].”
Listen below to The Health Ranger Report as Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, discusses how leftists who support these types of agendas are infused with demonic evil that is diametrically opposed to God himself:
Known as Bostock v. Clayton County, the case that led to this ruling involved a homosexual man by the name of Gerald Bostock who had worked in child welfare services in Georgia before allegedly being fired for joining an LGBTQ softball league.
Bostock says he was criticized by his supervisor for his sexual orientation and made to feel less than before ultimately being terminated for “conduct unbecoming” of Clayton County’s employee standards.
Now, some 8.1 million LGBTQ workers across the United States will be shielded from scrutiny, as anything that comes their way that might be unpleasant, whether it be a reprimand for poor work performance or sexually suggestive behavior towards other employees, could be dubbed “discrimination” and ruled as such by the legal system.
The case represents the first involving LGBTQ issues since Justice Anthony Kennedy retired and was replaced by Brett Kavanaugh. Kennedy, as you may recall, was the author of the landmark ruling in 2015 that legalized so-called “same-sex” marriage.
Meanwhile, conservatives, Christians, and other apparent minority groups still have no legal shield against discrimination, hate and violence. They can still be wrongfully terminated from their jobs, or driven out of them by the leftist mob, without consequence.
Will the Supreme Court under Trump ever declare that conservative Christians in America must be afforded the same protections as everybody else? Will they be protected from being driven out of their jobs and livelihoods, or protected from having to bake cakes and perform other business functions that violate their free expression of religion?
At this point in time, only the LGBTQs are getting special treatment, as is usually the case. Somehow, they are always the perpetual victims in society, even as they get most of the attention, support and praise from society for their “bravery” in just being “who they are.”
To keep up with the latest news about the LGBTQ agenda, be sure to check out Evil.news.
Sources for this article include:
Tagged Under:
Bostock v. Clayton County, Civil Rights Act, conservatives, discrimination, gorsuch, insanity, intolerance, kavanaugh, left cult, LGBT, lgbtq, Lunacy, protected class, protections, scotus, Supreme Court, Trans, transgender
This article may contain statements that reflect the opinion of the author
COPYRIGHT © 2018 SPEECHPOLICE.NEWS
All content posted on this site is protected under Free Speech. SpeechPolice.news is not responsible for content written by contributing authors. The information on this site is provided for educational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended as a substitute for professional advice of any kind. SpeechPolice.news assumes no responsibility for the use or misuse of this material. All trademarks, registered trademarks and service marks mentioned on this site are the property of their respective owners.