Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli II has not wasted time carrying out his conservative social agenda. He has sent a letter to the state’s public colleges and universities to rescind policies that ban discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation — advising them that they have no authority to ban such discrimination.
Cuccinelli (R) told the colleges and universities that only the General Assembly can extend legal protections to gay state employees, students and others. The letter states: “It is my advice that the law and public policy of the Commonwealth of Virginia prohibit a college or university from including ‘sexual orientation,’ ‘gender identity,’ ‘gender expression,’ or like classification as a protected class within its non-discrimination policy absent specific authorization from the General Assembly.”
This could result in a serious confrontation between the state and the schools.
For the full story, click here.
James
1, March 6, 2010 at 4:46 pm
Blouise predicts, “[Palin] wants to be a king-maker … far more power, not as many legal potholes, and a lot more money.”
Just what the world needs, a latter-day Anita Bryant.
The problem is, outside of her cult following who think it is THEM to whom she personally winks, no one takes her seriously, nor should they. 18-36 year olds are not interested in Sarah’s 19th century agenda no matter how many times she appears on John Stewart.
You can begin with her “real Americans” argument, and slide quickly downhill from there.
I have listened intently for months and months to the “you better watch out” argument regarding Sarah Palin, and it has yet to materialize.
The better argument seems to be, is this the BEST the GOP has to offer?!?
=============================================================
Perhaps, and hopefully, you are right.
Byron contends, ” It doesn’t say they are exclusive of gays and lesbians.”
Byron, are you intentionally daft? Please hear this:
1. There are places in this country where you can be tossed out of a job, denied housing, denied medical care, and even denied a loan if you’re in the “wrong” bank in the “wrong” county of the beloved Old Sooth, all because you might “look” LGBTI, let alone actually do it.
2. People in such positions, as a matter of state or federal law, have no legal recourse to object. In other words, they do not appear, in practice, to have the same rights as you.
3. So long as we have 1. and 2., protections are needed at the federal level.
So, what aren’t you getting? Do you actually KNOW any LGBTI people? Of those people, do you LIKE any of them? LOVE any of them? Until you can claim the last, your arguments remain exceedingly dull, and will not survive another generation.
James:
”
Byron, Old Sport, the protections have to come FIRST or there IS no redress. Remember: we began in a world where you can be tossed out of a job or apartment or loan agreement simply for going up the down staircase. In most states, most lovingly in the Old Sooth, these state laws still exist in a piecemeal fashion.
Our laws reflect the character of who we are, not *what* we are, however hard we try to hide from this seemingly very annoying fact.
I invite you extend your Cone of Self-Respect to include thems that ain’t you.”
We have the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. It doesn’t say they are exclusive of gays and lesbians. Why do certain segments of our population need “additional” rights? Don’t we all have the same rights?
I would no more discriminate against a gay or a lesbian than I would an African American or a woman or a white male or a disabled person. It isn’t right and it should not be tolerated. But I don’t think I, as a handicapped person, should have additional rights that able-bodied people don’t have. How does that jibe with the Constitution?
Blouise predicts, “[Palin] wants to be a king-maker … far more power, not as many legal potholes, and a lot more money.”
Just what the world needs, a latter-day Anita Bryant.
The problem is, outside of her cult following who think it is THEM to whom she personally winks, no one takes her seriously, nor should they. 18-36 year olds are not interested in Sarah’s 19th century agenda no matter how many times she appears on John Stewart.
You can begin with her “real Americans” argument, and slide quickly downhill from there.
I have listened intently for months and months to the “you better watch out” argument regarding Sarah Palin, and it has yet to materialize.
The better argument seems to be, is this the BEST the GOP has to offer?!?
anon nurse
Blouise – Many didn’t take GWB seriously and we know only-too-well how that turned out…
(She impressed Jon Stewart? Really?)
=============================================================
Yeah … last week on the Daily, he ran clips of her stand-up routine on The Tonight Show and said he had to admit it was good for a first timer. I didn’t mean to imply he was impressed with her politics but from his tone and delivery (he complimented her “smarts”) one came away with the impression that even Stewart was beginning to understand her appeal. He ran additional clips of Romney appearing, at the same time as Palin, on Letterman and then contrasted the styles clearing showing Romney as the loser. Getting even tacit approval from Stewart is a clear way into the 18-36 year old demographic.
Everyone keeps saying she can’t win but I’m not sure winning an elected office is what she’s after … in my humble opinion, she wants to be a king-maker … far more power, not as many legal potholes, and a lot more money.
“This could result in a serious confrontation between the state and the schools.”
This ‘WILL” set off a serious confrontation. In our area, Virginia tech has already said its rules will remain in place and the any changes to University rules are controlled by the Board of Governors. Radford University has no plans to change their protections, but says they will look into it.
Cucinelli could have just left this alone but he has a serious social agenda. Practically on day one he said he would challenge in court a “Pro Choice” vanity plate, matching the “Pro Life” vanity plate approved by the legislature last year. An incredibly he said he thought he could win in a suit to prohibit a corresponding plate.
The governor is speaking out of at least both sides of his mouth, saying he wont tolerate discrimination, but making no comment on the Cucinelli letter.
These radical righties are just looking for a fight and to continue to extend and impose their views in the ‘culture wars’. Of course McDonnell went to Liberty law school, so WTF would you expect.
Of course, on the budget pain front, which McDonnell says will make “real Virginians” suffer, education and health services are being slashed.
Blouise – Many didn’t take GWB seriously and we know only-too-well how that turned out…
(She impressed Jon Stewart? Really?)
By failing to take the crazies seriously we allowed Sarah Palin a wide and brightly lit stage. She has honed her skills even to the point of impressing a guy like Jon Stewart. Initially she was viewed as an oddity but now, based on the number of supporters she has amassed, she is a real force with which to be reckoned.
Anyone who doesn’t take that seriously dismisses it at their own peril.
You mean he can clean sweep our asses out of town. That’s bull. He probably is a Massia or Asburn. The closeted are always the worst. Lets all gang up and do him.
You know why Hoover was in office so long? He sucked the best.
Rich, the ER Proviso is among the more sick responses to our health care problems. Once it is determined you have a chronic disease, including everything from diabetes to cancer to any one of thousand disorders requiring ongoing care, the ER cannot help you. And, once this determination is made, you cannot be insured.
I frankly do not understand the mindset of people like this AG who clearly see profit in tearing down those with whom they disagree. In his capacity, one is a predator by choice.
FTR, this AG would be a BIG hit among those he derides. Maybe someone made a pass at him at a formative age and no adults were present to tell him to grow up? (shake head)
I could be wrong but here is how I read this case.
The Attorney General seems to be saying that he could institute
legal action against public universities if they continue to list LGBT people as a protected class. That part seemed pretty straight forward. But what if his opinion means that universities can’t pursue a de facto nondiscrimination policy, that is they can leave them out as a protected class on their official policy statement but still continue to not discriminate against LGBT people. If that was true and then that would mean that is essentially illegal NOT to discriminate against LGBT people (I think). In which case that would set off a firestorm of litigation in probably state and federal court, which I would hope would result in rulings against the Attorney General.
Byron’s thinking is a bit like the “anyone can go to an ER” response to health care, forgetting that ERs cost money and many hospitals have closed them.
taking people’s rights awy is largely unprecedented outside of the Jim Crow laws.
Byron, Old Sport, the protections have to come FIRST or there IS no redress. Remember: we began in a world where you can be tossed out of a job or apartment or loan agreement simply for going up the down staircase. In most states, most lovingly in the Old Sooth, these state laws still exist in a piecemeal fashion.
Our laws reflect the character of who we are, not *what* we are, however hard we try to hide from this seemingly very annoying fact.
I invite you extend your Cone of Self-Respect to include thems that ain’t you.
Did I hear someone say Cone of Silence?
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqcSWI6Ppks&hl=en_US&fs=1&]
Byron,
Some people need splaining to in plain english. Like Scalia. If it ain’t written it don’t apply.
This should provide a rallying point for passing ENDA, which is more popular and more broadly beneficial than gay marriage.
AY:
can you explain for the layman?
After I posted I saw that Mespo had posted a Virginia Statute about discrimination which was my point. Aren’t we all covered anyway without additional considerations given?
Byron,
The easiest way to deny you access to the courts or any place else is to take away the curb cuts, not provide accessible parking, nail your door shut, glue your drawers shut, put nails in your windows so that they may not be raised. Then how could you complain? You do have the right to sue somebody, don’t you?
Elaine M – Thanks for the clarification. I realized that you had put your own spin on the Niemoller quote and then, in haste, (and because I’m a little too serious at times, these days, often for good reason), I mispoke in my comment. Ah, carelessness, in times of great trouble. (I like your twist to the original.) I need to lighten up a bit — get out and soak up a little of the rather rare, winter sunshine.
rcampbell:
Well said. I think of Karl Rove and his (and other’s) desire for a “permanent conservative majority”.
Hopefully, good people and common sense will “win the day” but, from my vantage point, there are many who are quite ruthless and, truly, will do almost anything to prevail. And they’re working hard to accomplish their goal/s. In an interview, Gail Collins recently said that Democrats are oftentimes “too nice”. Let’s hope it isn’t our undoing.