Bush Allows Gays to Be Fired for Being Gay

[gldstwmn]

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

http://www.misleader.org/daily_misle...f03202004.html

[strandinthewind]

In order to do this, W would have to rescind Clinton's Executive Order specifically disallowing this. To my knowledge W has not rescinded this EO. So, I am unsure what this is. Is there anymore information?

[Alison]

If this is true, which is totaly unbelievable if Bush can get away with this. I believe this is totaly wrong. You all know my thoughts on this, but everyone should be treated with full respect in the work place.

[Johnny Stew]

I was told that I wasn't giving this administration enough credit for the good it was doing... but reading something like this, leads me to believe I was actually giving them too much credit, as it was. This is even worse than working towards banning gay marriages... this is an absolutely heinous, despicable act of discrimination.
I can't believe that anyone would stoop this low.

This message is for everyone and anyone considering voting for George W. Bush in November:
Please seriously consider this type of action when casting your vote. If you believe that gays & lesbians deserve equal rights... if you have friends or loved ones who are gay, and you don't wish to see them discriminated against... or if you just think it's unfair to discriminate against anyone, regardless of sexual orientation... please don't allow this administration another four years in office.

I'm not asking you to vote for John Kerry, or anyone else... I'm just asking that you seriously consider not voting for George W. Bush.

[DrummerDeanna]

This is intolerable!!! I hope, sincerely, in my heart of hearts that he does not come back for another four years....

[dissention]

Someone sent me an email with this article and I was aghast, but then I considered the source. It is ChimpCo, after all.

It's almost as comical as ChimpCo's damage control over Clarke's book.

[gldstwmn]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
In order to do this, W would have to rescind Clinton's Executive Order specifically disallowing this. To my knowledge W has not rescinded this EO. So, I am unsure what this is. Is there anymore information?

http://federaltimes.com/index.php?S=2727185
OSC to study whether bias law covers gays

By TIM KAUFFMAN

A gay employee who is fired or demoted for attending a gay pride rally would receive protection from the Office of Special Counsel. But the same employee would have no recourse at OSC if he was fired or demoted simply for being gay.
This is new Special Counsel Scott Bloch’s initial reading of a 1978 law intended to protect employees and job applicants from adverse personnel actions taken against them for reasons unrelated to their job performance. In his interpretation, Bloch is making a distinction between one’s conduct as a gay or lesbian and one’s status as a gay or lesbian.

“People confuse conduct and sexual orientation as the same thing, and I don’t think they are,� Bloch said in a March 10 interview with Federal Times.

Bloch, who began a five-year term as special counsel in January, said he does not believe the list of prohibited personnel actions outlined in the 1978 Civil Service Reform Act covers discrimination based on sexual orientation.

(snip)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...&notFound=true

Gay Rights Information Taken Off Site
New GOP Head of Agency Says He Is Reviewing Material
By Stephen Barr
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, February 18, 2004; Page A17


A newly arrived Republican appointee has pulled references to sexual orientation discrimination off an agency Internet site where government employees can learn about their rights in the workplace.



The Web pages at the Office of Special Counsel, an independent agency whose mission is to protect whistleblowers and other federal employees from retribution, has removed references to sexual orientation from a discrimination complaint form, training slides, a brochure titled "Your Rights as a Federal Employee" and other documents.

Scott J. Bloch, the agency head, said he ordered the material removed because of uncertainty over whether a provision of civil service law applies to federal workers who claim unfair treatment because they are gay, bisexual or heterosexual.

(snip)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...&notFound=true

Special Counsel Under Scrutiny
Senators Concerned He Removed Agency's References to Sexual Orientation Bias
By Stephen Barr
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, February 23, 2004; Page A19


Four senators have expressed concern that the actions of a new Republican appointee, who pulled references to discrimination based on sexual orientation off an agency's Internet site, are at odds with statements he made as part of his confirmation hearing.



Scott J. Bloch, the head of the Office of Special Counsel, recently removed references about sexual orientation discrimination from a complaint form and an educational pamphlet for federal employees that were posted on the agency's Web pages. The independent agency's mission is to protect federal whistleblowers and government workers from retributions in the workplace, and Bloch's action brought protests from gay rights groups.

The senators, in a letter to Bloch, said the removal of the reference "appears inconsistent" with assurances that Bloch, as a presidential nominee, gave the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee.

(snip)

[strandinthewind]

Hmmm - his interpretation clearly flies in the face of Clinton's Executive Order. For those who do not know it, Clinton's Executive Order 13087 added the term "sexual
orientation" to an existing executive order that bars
discrimination against federal civilian workers based on race,
color, religion, sex, national origin, disabilities, and age. The GOP lead by that a$$hole Jesse Helms tried first to overturn the EO and then to block its funding. Both attempts failed.

I think this new action by the Special Counsel will fail unless Clinton's EO is overturned.

In any event, like the handsome and talented Johnny Stew said earlier, this is just one more reason not to vote for W and his crooked and bigoted friends.

[strandinthewind]

It seems I was right (AND I LOVE THAT!!! )

Employees are protected from bias for sexual orientation, White House says

from

http://federaltimes.com/index.php?S=2782665

Note: The Special Counsel is still an idiot and W should be shunned for appointing such a person.

[CarneVaca]

Another missed opportunity by the rubber-spine Democrats. They should be making hay out of this opinion.

[darklinensuit]

Originally posted by CarneVaca
Another missed opportunity by the rubber-spine Democrats. They should be making hay out of this opinion.

My thoughts exactly.
Fairness is a concept that can reach any voter. This is the kind of thing that the Democrats should be shouting through bullhorns.

- Jake