Rand Paul tells same-sex married couples: Keep your relationships out of the workplace

[timosman]

http://www.rawstory.com/2015/10/ran...keep-your-relationships-out-of-the-workplace/

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) suggested on Wednesday that same-sex married couples should not openly mention their relationships at work, The Hill reported.

“I think really, the things you do in your house, if you leave them in your house, they wouldn’t have to be part of the workplace,” he said during an appearance at Drake University in Des Moines, Iowa.

Paul was responding to a question on whether employers should be legally allowed to fire LGBT employees because of their sexuality.

The Republican presidential candidate, who voted against a bill in July that would protect LGBT workers from discriminatory hiring practices, also argued that anti-discrimination laws are not necessary because they would create “a whole industry” of people looking to pursue lawsuits.

“Society is rapidly changing, and if you are gay, there are plenty of places that will hire you,” he said. “I would say the vast majority of corporations already privately have manuals or work manuals that say don’t discriminate in any way, and I think that to be the fact. So I’m really for the government not to be more involved in this situation.”

Paul was immediately criticized by the Human Rights Campaign. The LGBT advocacy group noted in a statement that 31 states do not include sexual orientation or gender identity in their workplace discrimination laws.

“Rand Paul appears to be living in a different era,” the statement read. “People should not be required to live in the closet or hide who they are in order to be treated equally and fairly under the law.”

Watch footage of Paul’s remarks, as posted online on Wednesday, below.

 

[dannno]

Most of his answer was pretty good, probably could have kept the part about keeping LGBT at home - people often have pictures of their wives and families and talk about them at work so it isn't that unreasonable.

 

[hells_unicorn]

This is more of Rand's triangulation approach to politics, and while it may bother some of his younger constituents, I think this stuff needs to be said. If you want people to stay out of your bedroom, don't bring your bedroom to work. And to anyone who objects over people having pictures of their families, so-called LGBT people can not create families. Moot point, end of story.

 

[CPUd]

 

[dannno]

This is more of Rand's triangulation approach to politics, and while it may bother some of his younger constituents, I think this stuff needs to be said. If you want people to stay out of your bedroom, don't bring your bedroom to work. And to anyone who objects over people having pictures of their families, so-called LGBT people can not create families. Moot point, end of story.

I'm debating this issue right now with one of my friends who is gay. He had a very close loving relationship for nearly 20 years until his partner passed a couple years ago. They loved each other more than most straight couples love each other - I mean look at the divorce rate. To boil down his relationship to sex is ridiculous, in fact they never had sex in the 20 years they were together because his partner was HIV positive. So what do people like him do at work when people ask if they live alone or have a girlfriend? They have had a life partner for 20 years and they are just supposed to keep it to themselves? That's retarded.

If a straight couple or woman wants to adopt their child to a gay couple because that is the best option they think they have, then they should do it. It may not be an optimal environment, I agree it is best to have a mother and father - but having gay parents can be better than some other foster and adoptive environments especially if there is abuse. So gay people can in fact have families, they could have a brother or sister living with them or who knows.

---

But here is will I will give you some ammo, and this is what I'm discussing with my friend right now because it relates to what Rand was saying and expands on it a little bit - lgbt employment laws give gay people a license to act inappropriately at work. There were some South Park episodes a few years ago where Mr. Garrison, the gay teacher, decides he wants to get fired for being gay so he can sue the school. So what he does is act really gay during class. Due to the policy, the school wouldn't fire him.. So he had to step up his game - he brought in a guy named "Mr. Slave" and put a gerbil up his ass and the school still wouldn't fire him because they were afraid of getting sued.

Now, the thing is I'm pretty sure one or both of the South Park creators are bi or gay - but they are also libertarian and they are against lgbt employment laws and they made a very good point in that episode about how these laws make it so that gay people can act inappropriately and not have to worry about getting fired, because if they act inappropriately the incidents that come out of that can be used as ammo in a lawsuit if some of the employees felt uncomfortable, etc..

 

[Feeding the Abscess]

I'm debating this issue right now with one of my friends who is gay. He had a very close loving relationship for nearly 20 years until his partner passed a couple years ago. They loved each other more than most straight couples love each other - I mean look at the divorce rate. To boil down his relationship to sex is ridiculous, in fact they never had sex in the 20 years they were together because his partner was HIV positive. So what do people like him do at work when people ask if they live alone or have a girlfriend? They have had a life partner for 20 years and they are just supposed to keep it to themselves? That's retarded.

If a straight couple or woman wants to adopt their child to a gay couple because that is the best option they think they have, then they should do it. It may not be an optimal environment, I agree it is best to have a mother and father - but having gay parents can be better than some other foster and adoptive environments especially if there is abuse. So gay people can in fact have families, they could have a brother or sister living with them or who knows.

---

But here is will I will give you some ammo, and this is what I'm discussing with my friend right now because it relates to what Rand was saying and expands on it a little bit - lgbt employment laws give gay people a license to act inappropriately at work. There were some South Park episodes a few years ago where Mr. Garrison, the gay teacher, decides he wants to get fired for being gay so he can sue the school. So what he does is act really gay during class. Due to the policy, the school wouldn't fire him.. So he had to step up his game - he brought in a guy named "Mr. Slave" and put a gerbil up his ass and the school still wouldn't fire him because they were afraid of getting sued.

Now, the thing is I'm pretty sure one or both of the South Park creators are bi or gay - but they are also libertarian and they are against lgbt employment laws and they made a very good point in that episode about how these laws make it so that gay people can act inappropriately and not have to worry about getting fired, because if they act inappropriately the incidents that come out of that can be used as ammo in a lawsuit if some of the employees felt uncomfortable, etc..

Matt Stone is married, and Trey Parker was previously married and currently living with his girlfriend.

 

[nikcers]

 

[dannno]

Matt Stone is married, and Trey Parker was previously married and currently living with his girlfriend.

They could still be bi, in fact gay guys can get married to women too - but usually that is done as a cover or to try and live normally so that doesn't make much sense for these guys.

 

[JK/SEA]

good advice either way.

 

[dannno]

good advice either way.

Huh? Some people HAVE relationships at the workplace, how do you avoid bringing up your significant other at work when everybody else is involved in small talk about the personal lives from time to time?

Watch the Key and Peele episode above - make sure and watch the end. There are appropriate and inappropriate ways for both straight and gay people to talk about their lives outside of work.

 

[timosman]

dup - http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...loppy-reporting-takes-a-bite-out-of-Rand-Paul

 

[helmuth_hubener]

This is an excellent answer by Rand. He said Yes, employers should be legally allowed to fire LGBT employees because of their sexuality.

And that is clearly the correct answer.

And he explained it well, in a reasonable and non-inflammatory way.

Of course, non-inflammatory to normal people. It was extremely inflammatory to the militant gay movement. But everything is inflammatory to them. You can't please them. They are on a mission. Celebrate! ---- or else.

 

[fr33]

If you want people to stay out of your bedroom, don't bring your bedroom to work.

Most people have a life with their spouse or partner that is not limited to the bedroom.

And to anyone who objects over people having pictures of their families, so-called LGBT people can not create families. Moot point, end of story.

A married couple is a family. Many straight couples can not have children either. LGBT people do adopt. They have families. The point isn't moot.

 

[jmdrake]

LOL. You can't please anyone. Here's the real answer. The pro-gay lobby is so powerful in America today that any employer that fired someone for being gay would face such a major backlash that the company would be forced out of business or fold. The only exception is overtly religious organizations like churches and schools. So should religious institutions be forced to turn their back on their beliefs? That's the real question. Seriously folks Chick-freakin-fil-a was forced to apologize for an executive merely financially supporting focus on the family and vocalizing his belief that marriage was between a man and a woman. He didn't say "And the policy of Chick-Fil-A will now be to fire all openly gay people." The CEO of the non profit Mozilla foundation had to resign as well for donating to the California traditional marriage ballot initiative. The intolerance is currently going more against Christians than it is against gays.

 

[fr33]

LOL. You can't please anyone. Here's the real answer. The pro-gay lobby is so powerful in America today that any employer that fired someone for being gay would face such a major backlash that the company would be forced out of business or fold. The only exception is overtly religious organizations like churches and schools. So should religious institutions be forced to turn their back on their beliefs? That's the real question. Seriously folks Chick-freakin-fil-a was forced to apologize for an executive merely financially supporting focus on the family and vocalizing his belief that marriage was between a man and a woman. He didn't say "And the policy of Chick-Fil-A will now be to fire all openly gay people." The CEO of the non profit Mozilla foundation had to resign as well for donating to the California traditional marriage ballot initiative. The intolerance is currently going more against Christians than it is against gays.

I don't disagree with you at all. That's why Rand shouldn't have made that one statement. It's not the end of the world that he did. It's just not going to help him.

 

[timosman]

The HR policies in most places are such that sex is a taboo subject. Nobody is allowed to talk about sex at work. Well, maybe if you work for Digital Playground, but I am sure there are limits there as well.

 

[Danke]

As my 4 year old nephew would say, that's biscusting.

 

[fr33]

The HR policies in most places are such that sex is a taboo subject. Nobody is allowed to talk about sex at work. Well, maybe if you work for Digital Playground, but I am sure there are limits there as well.

What kind of weirdos talk about their married sex lives with their coworkers? The weirdest of course.

There's a reason why people on this topic brought up family pictures on the desk. That's normal. Rand shouldn't discourage people from being normal.

 

[Danke]

What kind of weirdos talk about their married sex lives with their coworkers? The weirdest of course.

There's a reason why people on this topic brought up family pictures on the desk. That's normal. Rand shouldn't discourage people from being normal.

I get to ride on a van/bus with gay male flight attendants to the hotel sometimes. I bite my lip so as to not get in trouble, you'd be amazed at the shit they loudly talk about, encouraged even by the straight female flight attendants. I would be brought up on charges if I spoke that way about my encounters in front of females.

 

[Anti Federalist]

It's not called the Queer Mafia for nuthin...

LOL. You can't please anyone. Here's the real answer. The pro-gay lobby is so powerful in America today that any employer that fired someone for being gay would face such a major backlash that the company would be forced out of business or fold. The only exception is overtly religious organizations like churches and schools. So should religious institutions be forced to turn their back on their beliefs? That's the real question. Seriously folks Chick-freakin-fil-a was forced to apologize for an executive merely financially supporting focus on the family and vocalizing his belief that marriage was between a man and a woman. He didn't say "And the policy of Chick-Fil-A will now be to fire all openly gay people." The CEO of the non profit Mozilla foundation had to resign as well for donating to the California traditional marriage ballot initiative. The intolerance is currently going more against Christians than it is against gays.