<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <title>Open Congress : Comments on S.1584 Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2009</title>
  <link href="http://www.opencongress.org/bill?controller=comments%2Fatom&amp;id=59704" rel="self"/>
  <updated>2009-08-14T08:24:53Z</updated>
  <author>
    <name>opencongress.org</name>
  </author>
  <id>tag:opencongress.org,2007:/bill/comments/59704</id>
  <entry>
    <title>New comment by LibertarianLady</title>
    <link href="/comments/atom/bill/59704" rel="alternate"/>
    <updated>2009-08-14T08:24:53Z</updated>
    <id>tag:opencongress.org,2009-08-14:/comment/118720</id>
    <author>
      <name>LibertarianLady</name>
    </author>
    <content type="html">
When I frequent a business (Acme per se) I want to support them because Acme's company policies do not go against my moral views.I think it is morally wrong to discriminate against somebody because of LGBT issues. If Acme discriminated against gays I would not shop there. 

This bill would force Acme to adopt non-discrimination policies no matter what their administrators thought. I would then not know that Acme would discriminate against gays and might not be an informed consumer.

If I am going to shop at Acme I want to shop there because Acme feels that gays are equally deserving of fair treatment, not because Acme begrudgingly adopted non-discrimination policies after the government forced them to. 

You can't legislate kindness. Let the companies who discriminate be called out by the public and go bankrupt instead of covering their tushes and making a less informed consumer base with this legislation.    </content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>New comment by jwhite85</title>
    <link href="/comments/atom/bill/59704" rel="alternate"/>
    <updated>2010-03-04T10:36:39Z</updated>
    <id>tag:opencongress.org,2010-03-04:/comment/187851</id>
    <author>
      <name>jwhite85</name>
    </author>
    <content type="html">
LibertarianLady, I also must respectfully disagree.  Without legal protection, you will never know if ACME is discriminatory.  Before you go into Blockbuster, do you really search the news to see if anyone has been terminated because of their sexuality?  It's impractical.  If there is legal protection, you will hear about the court case and will be able to avoid the company at your pleasure.    </content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>New comment by needsleep99</title>
    <link href="/comments/atom/bill/59704" rel="alternate"/>
    <updated>2009-09-11T21:58:03Z</updated>
    <id>tag:opencongress.org,2009-09-11:/comment/125068</id>
    <author>
      <name>needsleep99</name>
    </author>
    <content type="html">
I respectfully disagree, because I think that gays should have the right to sue employers for discrimination.  This is a right that, in some states, gays don't have     </content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>New comment by Soichiro</title>
    <link href="/comments/atom/bill/59704" rel="alternate"/>
    <updated>2009-10-15T16:16:42Z</updated>
    <id>tag:opencongress.org,2009-10-15:/comment/143299</id>
    <author>
      <name>Soichiro</name>
    </author>
    <content type="html">
There are times when you can and times when you can't legislate morality. In this case, although the management at Acme or whatever company in question may still dislike homosexuals, this law would at least assure that all of Acme's employees receive equal treatment. Even if it is only because of this law, at least there's some progress being made.    </content>
  </entry>
</feed>
