Gay federal workers can be fired for orientation

Hamel · Post by **Hamel** » 2004-03-23 06:31pm

March 20, 2004 | Daily Mislead Archive
Bush Allows Gays to Be Fired for Being Gay

Despite President Bush's pledge that homosexuals "ought to have the same rights" 1 as all other people, his Administration this week ruled that homosexuals can now be fired from the federal workforce because of their sexual orientation.

According to the Federal Times, the president's appointee at the Office of Special Counsel ruled that federal employees will now "have no recourse if they are fired or demoted simply for being gay." 2 While the Bush Administration says it is legally prohibited from firing a person for their conduct, they have the legal right to fire or demote someone based on their sexual orientation. To carry out the directive, the White House has begun removing information from government websites about sexual orientation discrimination in the workplace. 3

Not only does the new directive contradict the president's own promise to treat homosexuals as equals under the law, but it also contradicts what the Administration told Congress. As noted in a bipartisan letter from four Senators to the Administration, "During the confirmation process [of the president's appointee], you assured us that you were committed to protecting federal employees against unlawful discrimination related to their sexual orientation." 4

Sources:

1. Debates, 10/11/2000.
2. "OSC to study whether bias law covers gays", Federal Times, 03/15/2004.
3. "Gay Rights Information Taken Off Site", Washington Post, 02/18/2004.
4. "Special Counsel Under Scrutiny", Washington Post, 02/23/2004.

Post by **Gandalf** » 2004-03-23 06:53pm

Fucking hell.

How does being gay affect someone's ability to do any of this work? It's not like they have to have sex as part of the job.

Heil Bush, and his glorious new pure regime!

Captain tycho · Post by **Captain tycho** » 2004-03-23 06:58pm

Ah, America, land of tolerance.

And the sad thing is, the only other presidential cantidate that was a chance of winning screams out "IM A WAR HERO! VOTE KERRY!".

Then there's nader...*shudders*. Democracy my ass.

Shinova · Post by **Shinova** » 2004-03-23 08:19pm

They need to add a little stipend to the ten bill of rights: No discrimination based on sexual orientation.

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2004-03-23 08:47pm

Huzzah, such a great administration.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2004-03-23 09:09pm

That's total bullshit. I can't wait to see that one overturned, preferably as soon as possible.

Xenophobe3691 · Post by **Xenophobe3691** » 2004-03-23 09:54pm

Anyone else reminded of Woodrow Wilson's administration when faced with these stories? I bet we're gonna find a gay colonel in our Army and Bush is gonna personally dismiss him cuz he's gay...

Fire Fly · Post by **Fire Fly** » 2004-03-23 10:07pm

And, why do people still support Bush?

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-03-23 10:08pm

Fire Fly wrote:And, why do people still support Bush?

Because there are certain people who are born Republican and will die that way. It might as well be genetic.

Post by **RogueIce** » 2004-03-23 10:52pm

When it says they can't fire someone based on conduct, but they can fire on sexual orientation...is that homosexual conduct or disciplinary conduct?

Because if you can't fire someone for goofing off and being a shitty worker, but can fire 'em for being gay... That's fucked up.

And Xenophobe, if some gay Army Colonel came out and said publicly that they are gay, commit homosexual acts, or even "joke" about being gay (not the exact wording, and I can't recall it offhand, but it's like that IIRC), they can be discharged (administratively, IIRC).

consequences · Post by **consequences** » 2004-03-23 10:55pm

RogueIce wrote:When it says they can't fire someone based on conduct, but they can fire on sexual orientation...is that homosexual conduct or disciplinary conduct?

Because if you can't fire someone for goofing off and being a shitty worker, but can fire 'em for being gay... That's fucked up.

And Xenophobe, if some gay Army Colonel came out and said publicly that they are gay, commit homosexual acts, or even "joke" about being gay (not the exact wording, and I can't recall it offhand, but it's like that IIRC), they can be discharged (administratively, IIRC).

Its actually supposed to be an Honorable Discharge, failure to adjust to military life or some-such.

Xenophobe3691 · Post by **Xenophobe3691** » 2004-03-23 11:26pm

Fire Fly wrote:And, why do people still support Bush?

Because they can't think for themselves, and unfortunately, some of us will benefit from Bush's grandiose plans (Aerospace Engineers will benefit from NASA's overhaul and Bush's plans to head to the Moon then Mars...)

Post by **RogueIce** » 2004-03-23 11:29pm

consequences wrote:Its actually supposed to be an Honorable Discharge, failure to adjust to military life or some-such.

Really? I'll have to try and find that little paper I got from MEPs then.

The Albino Raven · Post by **The Albino Raven** » 2004-03-23 11:37pm

Captain tycho wrote:Ah, America, land of tolerance. And the sad thing is, the only other presidential cantidate that was a chance of winning screams out "IM A WAR HERO! VOTE KERRY!". Then there's nader...*shudders*. Democracy my ass.

Did you say two sides to the same coin? I think this is totally the truth. Want to see multi party government in action, look at europe, where no group can ever get the true majority without coalition.

Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi · Post by **Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi** » 2004-03-23 11:44pm

So, he's supporting discrimination and flip-flopping on an earlier position, or as it's called in politics, "killing two birds with one stone".

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2004-03-23 11:51pm

The story Hamel posted leaves out a few key facts. First, the Special Counsel acted on his own initiative, without clearing it with the White House first. Second, he didn't actually change anything, technically--what he's doing is very narrowly interpreting a late 70's Federal law that gives him the power to protect Federal employees from discrimination in the first place. Under a very narrow reading of that law, it's possible to conclude that though the law prevents you from firing someone for out of work activities (like attending a gay pride rally or going to a gay bar), the actual condition of being gay isn't protected.

All that being said, what we've got on our hands here is a fundie who's managed to wriggle through a very narrow loophole--if indeed that loophole even exists. The Administration had to know he was a fundie, considering he worked on the Faith Based Initiative program, a pet project of Bush's, and hasn't yet come to crack skulls in Office of the Special Counsel. This is not the first step in Bushitler's evil plan to personally fire every gay Federal employee, but it is a rather damning insight into the mentality of the Bush administration's mid and low level apointees (the ones hardly anyone ever hears about but who, for all intents and purposes, run the Federal government).

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2004-03-24 12:15am

What's most shocking about this and similar steps the Bush Administration is taking is that these actions MUST be paying off with voters or else they wouldn't be doing them. That means that ~50% of America is actually in favor or ambivalent towards this shit. Sickening.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2004-03-24 12:15am

Xenophobe3691 wrote:Anyone else reminded of Woodrow Wilson's administration when faced with these stories? I bet we're gonna find a gay colonel in our Army and Bush is gonna personally dismiss him cuz he's gay...

We have various openly gay generals.

Crown · Post by **Crown** » 2004-03-24 12:17am

Can this actually be enforced? Has the administration changed the discrimination laws, such that it makes federal instatutions exempt?

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2004-03-24 12:33am

Crown wrote:Can this actually be enforced? Has the administration changed the discrimination laws, such that it makes federal instatutions exempt?

What's happening is that the Counsel General is very, very narrowly interpreting the law that gives his office the power to assist Federal employees who've been the target of discirmination in the first place. The Executive branch doesn't have the power to arbitrarily change the law.

Crown · Post by **Crown** » 2004-03-24 12:55am

RedImperator wrote:
Crown wrote:Can this actually be enforced? Has the administration changed the discrimination laws, such that it makes federal instatutions exempt?
What's happening is that the Counsel General is very, very narrowly interpreting the law that gives his office the power to assist Federal employees who've been the target of discirmination in the first place. The Executive branch doesn't have the power to arbitrarily change the law.

You know that is just fucked up; he/she is interpreting discrimination laws, such that it allows them to discriminate. Surely if someone is actually fired because of this there will be a massive legal battle in the works, right?

Mayabird · Post by **Mayabird** » 2004-03-24 12:57am

Xenophobe3691 wrote:
Fire Fly wrote:And, why do people still support Bush?
Because they can't think for themselves, and unfortunately, some of us will benefit from Bush's grandiose plans (Aerospace Engineers will benefit from NASA's overhaul and Bush's plans to head to the Moon then Mars...)

I don't really see us aerospace engineers benefiting from Bush's 'space initiative,' and neither do many of my friends. We're all quit aware that for all he talked about it (and I might note, it apparently wasn't important enough to go in the State of the Union; it's more important to prevent gay couples from getting married

) he's a fundie who frankly doesn't know jack shit about science or technology. It's all just Gee-Whiz magical science doing cool stuff, except when it's bordering on "Playing God" which makes it evil. Just look at his stances on creationism and cloning. In the second term, he could easily say, "Look! Terrorists!" and keep everyone busy looking one way while he guts NASA's budget and then rounds up atheists, gays, and other "anti-Americans".

I'm not voting for him in November, and from the talk over the band header neither will a lot of my classmates and other people in my major.

Bush is just like all those other fundies who claim they love everyone just like Jesus commanded...and then in their vast love will 'save' all the sinners from themselves in every way they can. Fucking hypocrites, the lot of them.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-03-24 12:59am

Crown wrote:You know that is just fucked up; he/she is interpreting discrimination laws, such that it allows them to discriminate. Surely if someone is actually fired because of this there will be a massive legal battle in the works, right?

Which is why they won't actually enforce this law. Instead, they would like to keep the statement on the books, unchallenged, in order to create a pervasive atmosphere of intolerance that makes gays reluctant to admit their orientation.

Crown · Post by **Crown** » 2004-03-24 01:04am

Darth Wong wrote:
Crown wrote:You know that is just fucked up; he/she is interpreting discrimination laws, such that it allows them to discriminate. Surely if someone is actually fired because of this there will be a massive legal battle in the works, right?
Which is why they won't actually enforce this law. Instead, they would like to keep the statement on the books, unchallenged, in order to create a pervasive atmosphere of intolerance that makes gays reluctant to admit their orientation.

Clever little fuckers, wouldn't you say?

Although I suspect some politician somewhere, would use it to denounce Bush and his ilk (or just the Councel General) if they like to try and get them out of office... or is the Christian right that strong, that no one will actually do it?

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2004-03-24 01:08am

Crown wrote:
RedImperator wrote:
Crown wrote:Can this actually be enforced? Has the administration changed the discrimination laws, such that it makes federal instatutions exempt?
What's happening is that the Counsel General is very, very narrowly interpreting the law that gives his office the power to assist Federal employees who've been the target of discirmination in the first place. The Executive branch doesn't have the power to arbitrarily change the law.
You know that is just fucked up; he/she is interpreting discrimination laws, such that it allows them to discriminate. Surely if someone is actually fired because of this there will be a massive legal battle in the works, right?

Enormous, considering there are other laws on the books that could very well close this loophole, not to mention that if the law is interpreted based on its creators' intentions, the loophole doesn't exist either. It's an effective exercise in intimidation, though, because how many people do you know would come out of the closet if it meant there was even a possibility of having to chose between losing their job or taking on the UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT in court?