H.R.3017 - Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2009

To prohibit employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. view all titles (2)

All Bill Titles

  • Official: To prohibit employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. as introduced.
  • Short: Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2009 as introduced.

This Bill currently has no wiki content. If you would like to create a wiki entry for this bill, please Login, and then select the wiki tab to create it.

Comments Feed

  • kbthiede 10/02/2009 11:49am

    Why would you oppose this.

    “…all men are created equal…”
    -The Constitution

    Discrimination more or less means inequality.

    This legislation protects equality.

    Is anymore discussion needed?


  • Comm_reply
    zoL 10/09/2009 6:02am

    People would oppose the bill because they believed that the day they took office, they put their hand on the Constitution and swore to uphold the Bible.

  • MatrixFrog 10/13/2009 7:16am

    What’s the difference between this and H.R. 2981? As far as I can tell, this one has more support even though the bill texts are almost identical. So I assume I should support this one, but I’m curious why there are two.

  • Amonite 11/24/2009 11:41am

    OPPOSE. All men are created equal, but nowhere in the constitution does it say that I have to treat all men’s choices (or percevied choices) equally the same. If someone is a slob, vs. someone who is well-organized, who am I going to hire?

    People are always going to hire/fire based on ‘prejudices’ – who they think will be the best for the job. (Some of these will be the good kind of prejudice, like judging life skills, some may be bad, some may just be ‘I don’get along with that personality type’. Many employers make you take personality tests before you get hired to check compatilibity anymore!)

    As far as gender identity/sexual orientation, it’s a laughable bill at best. If a company has a strict dress code and a potential hiree that looks like a man insists on wearing the girl’s uniform every day, that’s not going to be good for most businesses. (We face this ourselves as a multiple.)

  • Comm_reply
    krystaltgirl 11/24/2009 2:16pm
    Link Reply
    + -1

    There are countless businesses that have embraced transgendered people already and most of them are top notch companies. Secondly, you imply the gender identity people switch back and forth between a gender and dress… shows how little you know about the subject. People should be judged on their abilities and not on your fear of a transgendered person. Besides this bill only applies to companies that employ 15 or more, so it will have little impact on your backwoods redneck mom and pop company. Most of my trans friends hold advanced degrees like myself and wouldn’t be applying at Uncle Bucks old world Garage in Eastern Kentucky.

    Even if they do, it doesn’t change the fact that fair employment laws benefit all of us as a whole… they might even protect an ignorant redneck from getting the Ax for being an inbreeder!!!

  • Amonite 11/24/2009 11:52am

    Businesses and individuals, operating in their own persuit of happiness, should be able to hire/fire whom they will. Our rights protect us from interference from the government in key areas, not give government permission to infringe upon our liberties.

    Sexual orientation can also be problematic. While the bill defines it very narrowly (only bisexuality, homosexuality, and heterosexuality) and so escapes the messiness of having to include other types of orientation, one still has to face the situations where a company might hire only one gender or only serve one gender, and so appearances are important for customer comfort.
    (For multiples, with men and women sharing one body, it gets even more problematic as for some orientation is different or habits are different). I think a boss should be able to have concerns about who they hire, and be able to fire someone if they break company policy or outright lie in their initial assessment which can lead to trouble for the company later.

  • krystaltgirl 11/24/2009 2:30pm
    Link Reply
    + -1

    Reality is most transgendered potential employees are overlooked not because of a lack of ability, but simply because of ignorance and prejudice. I have seen and heard many argue over the restroom issue, which is quite honestly one of the dumbest I have ever heard. Do you really think I Had my male parts chopped off just so I could gain entrance to the female restroom… are you really that stupid??? Secondly, womens restrooms have doors on the stalls… It’s an ignorant cover arguement that is simply used to sheild ones lack of brain power!!!

  • herewego24 04/07/2010 9:24am
    Link Reply
    + -1

    I am for this bill because lgbt people are fired or not considered for employment because of who they are. Not their job abilities, but because of who they sleep with or they changed their parts. We’ve had employment non discrimination acts for african-americans. We’ve had womens rights improved in the workplace. It is now time for gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgenders to have the same equal rights while they work.
    Also, looking at this from an economic standpoint, our unemployment rate is well over 10%, do you want it to go higher because some bigot at some big corporation decided to fire a gay guy just because he’s gay? The government could collect more federal payroll taxes if lgbt peoples weren’t fired based on their orientation

  • Winghunter 06/05/2010 5:55am

    The Homosexual Bill of Special Rights (H.R. 3017) would force employers to hire radical homosexuals or face a federal lawsuit or jail time.

    Churches, daycares, nurseries, private schools and businesses would all be forced to adhere to the new law, no matter how inconvenient or detrimental to the business the employee might be.

    Employers would be unable to fire troublesome homosexual employees for fear of prosecution.

Vote on This Bill

62% Users Support Bill

72 in favor / 45 opposed

Send Your Rep a Letter

about this bill Support Oppose Tracking
Track with MyOC

Top-Rated Comments