Welcome to CHFWeb.com  The Christian Homeschool Fellowship on the WEB
Quick Start
[Support our Advertisers!] Getting Started on the Homeschooling BUS!
SheLaughed.com
CHFWeb Forum Area Articles of Significance on CHFWeb.com CHFWeb Mall --For all your resource needs! Library Area on CHFWeb.com Advertise Contact Us
CHFWeb Help!
[Support our Advertisers!] Contributions from our Members:   "Without Christ, we ALL are bad!" ... Barbara posted this reply in a thread titled, "Teenagers are always bad????". Barbara writes, "The worst moments in my life have been hearing my children say 'stuff' they learned from me!" [Support our Advertisers!]
Home » CHFWeb Forum » HotTopics » HROs
HROs [message #819547] Thu, 16 February 2017 18:30 Go to next message
Jamie
Messages: 3930
Registered: April 2005
Senior Member
In particular, I'm interested in those who live in a metropolis but will still be interested in hearing about smaller towns.

What is the state of HROs in your town?

Ours passed the, I think, third time around and the LGBTQ community and their supporters are angry rather than fully celebrating, because there is a "problematic" religious exemption made. There was a 30-day in jail and/or $500 fine for violators, but was edited on behalf of the religious exemption. There are churches who are posting "love wins" though. Our city's mayor, who earlier maintained that additional legislation was unnecessary, did some crafty footwork so that he came out unstained on either side (think: race for re-election). The 30 day in jail clause would, I imagine, cost most people their job security. Another edit clarifies that along with churches and religious schools some religious non-profits will also be exempt. To be sure, they'll be tried in the public arena. Our expansion includes sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression to the list of protected categories under the ordinance, which ensures that people aren’t discriminated against in the workplace, the housing market, or public accommodations (restrooms, locker rooms, and so on). One counselmember gave a brief nod to understanding that ultimately people would loose freedom of speech. Another noted that some small companies would certainly suffer. Overall, the reply is that the city seems to be losing business opportunities w/o the suggested HRO over other large cities in our state. I don't really find that true - we have the abilities but have a horrid city government and low taxes. A proposed amendment to let he public vote on this was turned down. Another amendment would be to remove transgender as part of the bill. This was also turned down.

Editing to add: the Washington State case regarding the florist inspired me to write about my own city's recent steps.

[Updated on: Thu, 16 February 2017 18:32]


Peace
Re: HROs [message #819548 is a reply to message #819547 ] Thu, 16 February 2017 19:08 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Sherry in NH is currently online Sherry in NH
Messages: 9539
Registered: April 2005
Location: Small Town New Hampshire
Senior Member
uh.....I don't know what an HRO is. Smile


In Jesus

Sherry from NH
Re: HROs [message #819549 is a reply to message #819548 ] Fri, 17 February 2017 00:13 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Jamie
Messages: 3930
Registered: April 2005
Senior Member
Sherry in NH wrote on Thu, 16 February 2017 19:08

uh.....I don't know what an HRO is. Smile

Sorry, Sherry.

Human Rights Ordinances. Perhaps the terminology is one just for our state? Depending upon whom one asks, for our city, we're expanding the definition as an LGBTQ preference law or an anti-discrimination law aimed at individuals in public and private business. The laws already in effect would already protect/defend a person under that law, so this is an extra level.

[Updated on: Fri, 17 February 2017 00:16]


Peace
Re: HROs [message #819550 is a reply to message #819547 ] Fri, 17 February 2017 03:55 Go to previous messageGo to next message
carolinec
Messages: 620
Registered: April 2005
Senior Member
Jamie wrote on Thu, 16 February 2017 17:30

One counselmember gave a brief nod to understanding that ultimately people would loose freedom of speech. .


How is that? Is there a law against people saying what they believe/want? The HRO could be blocked as unconstitutional if it does this.
Re: HROs [message #819551 is a reply to message #819547 ] Fri, 17 February 2017 08:57 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Lisa R.  is currently offline Lisa R.
Messages: 14871
Registered: April 2005
Location: Georgia
Senior Member

Quote:

Human Rights Ordinances.


Thanks...I had no idea, either.

Quote:

One counselmember gave a brief nod to understanding that ultimately people would loose freedom of speech.


Does your ordinance call for fines and jail time for speech? If the ordinance causes people to lose (opposite of "find"--"loose" is opposite of "tight") freedom of speech or be jailed and fined for speech, there's going to ---or should be--serious problems with it.

The biggest problem I see with all of these new laws and trends is that these issues run right up against God's laws in a way that makes it really hard to balance civil protections for those who don't follow God with religious protections for those who do.

As a Christian (or a person), I should not be allowed to be hateful to those who believe different from me, but I should absolutely still be allowed to hold my beliefs and speak of them in a kind and loving way.

And people who choose counter-cultural lifestyles need to learn to be strong in their stand. For instance, homeschooling has required me to face some ridicule over the years, to have to "fight" for some rights, including college admissions and so forth, and sometimes it has meant I have to do without (high school sports and band, for instance) in order to keep my freedom to do what God has led me to do.

In fact, the issues of sports and band is a good example...I really couldn't both homeschool and have my kids in public school sports/band UNLESS I was willing to give up a good bit of my freedom to self-govern my own homeschool program. There really are some issues where you simply cannot have it both ways. But as I mentioned in the other thread...I don't have all the answers for my own conscience just yet, much less answers for society as a whole.

But in terms of local ordinances, I have no idea of any new ones popping up. I should probably google that. Smile


Blessings,
Lisa R.
Re: HROs [message #819552 is a reply to message #819547 ] Fri, 17 February 2017 12:54 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Jamie
Messages: 3930
Registered: April 2005
Senior Member
Of course "loose" was a typo. The *potential* loss of freedom of speech is what the counsel person was giving a nod to(who voted against, seeing a difference between a civil right and an HRO expansion).

Yes, the original language this week would have have imposed a $500 fine and/or a 30-day jail time for violators of anti-discrimination laws aimed to protect the LGBTQ community (I'll have to admit to ignorance at this time of what the punishment is for other protected groups). Fortunately this portion was struck down. However, here in our city among pro HRO expansionists, losing that portion is seen as a huge loss. I have since heard rumblings of readdressing this in the future.

Acknowledged somewhat by both sides, is that people of faith who still believe in strict, traditional gender roles will be seen as anti-gay and, further, will be (and have been) politically and socially ostracized. As to the councilman giving nod to it, I included the word (as I think they did) "ultimately" which means "not as it stands now, but the potentiality is there." I interpret his statement to hint at the same Pandora's box of acceptance and law making for hate speech as has happened to supporters of the euthanasia argument some twenty years ago. Twenty years ago we were assured that legally assisted suicide would never ever end up with forced euthanasia. But in our 2017 world, this has taken place in the Netherlands. But I digress.

I'm sure the counsel member was acknowledging the hate speech vs free speech conundrum outside legal parameters. As to the people appealing for a no vote, I'm sure that they were giving voice to the potential legal evolution of what a yes vote would bring. I think the two were talking past one another without realizing?

I have no compunction about the protections afforded to citizens as they stood a week ago. There's no conflict there for me with my God. In our city, there were already protections put in place - protections that when brought to defend in the courts, afforded those members of the LGBTQ community victories. However, I have also seen small businesses and just man-on-the-street deluged with misrepresentations, labeling of hate speech and attacks and financial fall outs for false or wrong accusations within social rather than legal matters. I suppose that is where my interest lies in what will happen with the advent of special laws put into place for one group over another. I'm probably naive, but I see the social slams and how they shut down speech and freedoms in those arenas as far more debilitating for either mindset. While there are definitely voices and philosophies out there that I strongly abhor, do not agree with and yes, may make me feel not just offended but scared, I'm also of the mind that I really need to know who is who and who thinks what. I find that incredibly helpful and really do not want that squashed either.

But to the topic at hand, I'm curious to know how these things are being played out in states that have long had supportive anti-discrimination laws and for those who are just coming into them...and for those states without them, if your county or town are adopting them...and how your people are adapting to them.


Peace
Re: HROs [message #819553 is a reply to message #819551 ] Fri, 17 February 2017 13:14 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Jamie
Messages: 3930
Registered: April 2005
Senior Member
Quote:

As a Christian (or a person), I should not be allowed to be hateful to those who believe different from me, but I should absolutely still be allowed to hold my beliefs and speak of them in a kind and loving way.


I have come right up to being told I am unloving simply by given positions I hold. No doubt there's a difference of belief, but there's also the presumptive baggage I'm accused of bringing with. It's increasingly becoming difficult to just talk with one another fresh from either side, I imagine. Though, even so, respect should not be difficult to give.



Quote:

But as I mentioned in the other thread...I don't have all the answers for my own conscience just yet, much less answers for society as a whole.

What post would that be, Lisa?

*Edited to make the quote boxes and one sentence less nonsensical.

[Updated on: Fri, 17 February 2017 13:18]


Peace
Re: HROs [message #819555 is a reply to message #819553 ] Fri, 17 February 2017 21:48 Go to previous message
Lisa R.  is currently offline Lisa R.
Messages: 14871
Registered: April 2005
Location: Georgia
Senior Member

Quote:

What post would that be, Lisa?



The one below this one (as I type) entitled "Boy Scouts"


Blessings,
Lisa R.
Previous Topic:Boy Scouts
Next Topic:Christmas Day Services .... Thoughts?
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Thu Feb 23 20:19:24 EST 2017

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02573 seconds
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

"Left Behind -- No More" ... The following commentary is not in the usual style of the Quotes to Ponder section. As a matter of fact, I originally titled this, "Quotes NOT to Ponder". This commentary is about how I changed my opinion about the "Left Behind" series by Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins.

CHFWeb.com Interactive is Powered by: FUDforum 2.6.12.
Copyright ©2001-2004 FUD Forum Bulletin Board Software