Find other sites about
-
From the page: "ackson said the action puts "sexual orientation" in a specially protected class under federal law. "Based on history, it really isn't something that needs to be protected," he said. "There's a problem that this is going to mark the first... more
Reviewed by bygracenotmerit Apr 30 2009, 07:25pm ( 4 reviews ) • worldnetdaily.com
-
presleysl
presleysl
1,237 Favs
-
Cobug89
Cobug89
6,987 Favs
Recently online -
kewlsites
kewlsites
4,721 Favs
-
willka34
willka34
644 Favs
-
Normn8or
Normn8or
2,994 Favs
-
ASLANSPRIDE
ASLANSP...
1,593 Favs
-
bygracenotmerit
bygrace...
5,198 Favs
-
Cowboy77
Cowboy77
8,873 Favs
-
elowwole
elowwole
193 Favs
- 3 reviews
- Reviews of the site
-
Join StumbleUpon or login to add a review!
-
Rated by bygracenotmerit on Apr 30 2009, 7:25pm
From the page: "ackson said the action puts "sexual orientation" in a specially protected class under federal law. "Based on history, it really isn't something that needs to be protected," he said. "There's a problem that this is going to mark the first time that a protected class status is given to whatever sexual orientation one has." " My thoughts: Protecting one class over another - isn't that discrimination? If this goes through and our government muzzles pastors, this will be the beginning of the end for America. All freedom will be as a vapor....
-
Rated by Cowboy77 on Apr 30 2009, 6:46pm
SU rating this as conservative politics is quite revealing
-
Rated by presleysl on Apr 30 2009, 7:06am
A sin is a sin and a crime is a crime, and, at least for a while longer, free speech for all is a constitutional right, not a crime. Isn't setting specific classes, races or orientations above another to distinguish whether or not something is a crime unconstitutional and a crime in itself.
