User Controls

Supreme Court Makes Gays and Trannies Protected Classes

  1. #1
    D4NG0 African Astronaut
    In a stunningly brave 6-3 ruling, the Supreme Court ruled today that sexual orientation and gender identity are now considered protected classes under the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

    Can someone just fucking nuke us at this point? I'd rather get bludgeoned by a wild nigger in a civil war than be arrested and imprisoned for something as lame as discriminating against perverts.

    Link
  2. #2
    aldra JIDF Controlled Opposition
    I read that it's actually more worrying because in that ruling they conflated sexual preference with sex, so they've now set a precedent that could allow SODOMITES full protection under any other statute that was initially meant to relate to women
  3. #3
    STER0S African Astronaut [the disappointingly unanticipated slab]
    god damn it -- shit like this is what happens when women are in charge.

    i don't mind traps and faggots to an extent but it's never enough for them.
    The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
  4. #4
    Technologist motherfucker
    Originally posted by STER0S god damn it – shit like this is what happens when women are in charge.

    i don't mind traps and faggots to an extent but it's never enough for them.

    What woman are in charge? Last I knew the Supreme Court is majority men.😁
  5. #5
    larrylegend8383 Space Nigga
    Originally posted by Technologist What woman are in charge? Last I knew the Supreme Court is majority men.😁

    Conservative justice Roberts and Trump appointed conservative justice Gorsuch made it happen lolz
  6. #6
    Originally posted by D4NG0 In a stunningly brave

    People seem to have forgotten what "brave" and "hero" mean...
  7. #7
    Kev Houston
    Originally posted by Technologist What woman are in charge? Last I knew the Supreme Court is majority men.😁

    The voter base which is majority female maybe? all the politicians are male feminists who pander to their idiocy.
  8. #8
    Originally posted by D4NG0 In a stunningly brave 6-3 ruling, the Supreme Court ruled today that sexual orientation and gender identity are now considered protected classes under the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

    Can someone just fucking nuke us at this point? I'd rather get bludgeoned by a wild nigger in a civil war than be arrested and imprisoned for something as lame as discriminating against perverts.

    Link

    Doesn't really mean much, it's pretty easy to find something to fire someone for...if you can't fire them for being a tranny...there is being late, insubordination (easy to get someone to yell at you etc), stealing (who doesn't steal pens and toilet roll).

    The only difference now is you can't say "you're fired faggit!"...another reason the good ol days were better.
  9. #9
    Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson Doesn't really mean much, it's pretty easy to find something to fire someone for…if you can't fire them for being a tranny…there is being late, insubordination (easy to get someone to yell at you etc), stealing (who doesn't steal pens and toilet roll).

    The only difference now is you can't say "you're fired faggit!"…another reason the good ol days were better.

    its also just as easy for them to prove you fire them for X or Y because your prejudiced.
  10. #10
    D4NG0 African Astronaut
    Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson Doesn't really mean much, it's pretty easy to find something to fire someone for…if you can't fire them for being a tranny…there is being late, insubordination (easy to get someone to yell at you etc), stealing (who doesn't steal pens and toilet roll).

    The only difference now is you can't say "you're fired faggit!"…another reason the good ol days were better.

    The problem is, I can't say, "You're not welcome in my church, you unrepentant faggot."
  11. #11
    Originally posted by vindicktive vinny its also just as easy for them to prove you fire them for X or Y because your prejudiced.

    No it's not. Declaring it isn't proving it. I fired many a nig in my time for being niggerish...that wasn't the official reason given, I've even been through the Texas Workforce "tribunal" over such a case and won it easily.

    Nigs always offer a reason to fire them other than being nigs.
  12. #12
    Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson No it's not. Declaring it isn't proving it. I fired many a nig in my time for being niggerish…that wasn't the official reason given, I've even been through the Texas Workforce "tribunal" over such a case and won it easily.

    maybe you got lucky they didnt have any good pro bono lawyers.
  13. #13
    Originally posted by vindicktive vinny maybe you got lucky they didnt have any good pro bono lawyers.

    Texas is also an "at will" state so you can basically fire anyone for anything (other than the as mentioned official "your a dirty nig" reason)...and lol at lawyers...
  14. #14
    Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson Texas is also an "at will" state so you can basically fire anyone for anything (other than the as mentioned official "your a dirty nig" reason)…and lol at lawyers…

    why so lol ?
  15. #15
    CASPER Soldier of Fourchin
    Just claim you identify as a woman. And if they try to hold you legally culpable for discrimination, just claim that theyre only accusing you because youre a REAL trans, and that a trans cannot discrim8nate against a trans, just like black people cant be racist.


    Checkmate, shitlibs.
  16. #16
    Yeah post your address I'll gladly end your life you bigot piece of shit
  17. #17
    Originally posted by vindicktive vinny why so lol ?

    why so what?? oh me lolling at lawyers?

    I've fired hundreds in my time (literally 1 a day when I was at compaq) and not one has got a lawyer as the reasons I've fired them were legit reasons given.

    The burden of proof is on them to prove otherwise...that's near impossible if the reason they were fired IS provable (being late for example).
  18. #18
    Netflxchillr African Astronaut
    This decision isn't going to sit/fit well with the left-DemoCRAP narrative's on TRUMP and his "appointed" Justices... being nothing but... Republican, "misogynistic racists"






  19. #19
    Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson why so what?? oh me lolling at lawyers?

    I've fired hundreds in my time (literally 1 a day when I was at compaq) and not one has got a lawyer as the reasons I've fired them were legit reasons given.

    The burden of proof is on them to prove otherwise…that's near impossible if the reason they were fired IS provable (being late for example).

    but did you ever fire white people for being late ?
  20. #20
    Originally posted by vindicktive vinny but did you ever fire white people for being late ?

    Non sequitur..but yes.

    However that's not something that you'd have to answer as just like a criminal doesn't have his criminal history read out till after the verdict is in...it's irrelevant to the present case as far as judging it goes.


    The burden of proof is on the prosecution etc.
Jump to Top