Are Christians A Protected Group Under The Bill Of Rights?
The word "Christian" is not mentioned in the Bill of Rights or the Constitution.
The phrase "protected group" came about after the passage of the Civil Rights Act, which is a socialist concept, and
U.S. federal law protects employees from discrimination or harassment based on sex, race, age, disability, color, creed, national origin or religion. It specifically relates to employment law issues.
Although it is NOT required by federal law, employer policies may also protect employees from harassment or discrimination based on marital status or sexual orientation. However, please note the Civil Rights Act of 64 is inconsistent with the Constitution. I am not going to say there was not discrimination, rather, discrimination persists(ed) due to state and local government participation which was(is) unconstitutional. I challenge anyone here to show me in the Bill of Rights where a group is a "protected class."
On this site there will be a natural dissonance when discussing "protected classes." Group think is dangerous. Any concept that pushes ideas that some group has separate rights from the individual members is pushing Force and slavery. But if one has to think that way (illogically) the only group which is acknowledged here is the smallest group: the individual.
So, if one pushes concepts that are part of a group-think, one will be likely challenged. It will be uncomfortable and there will be push back or ignoring if posts focusing on those issues begin to dominate. That goes for issues Christians are concerned with as well as those concerned with LGBT issues. But just as well for the O who is frustrated the site is not more committed to the study of Objectivism. Focusing on our similarities reduces dissonance. Those similarities should be reason and logic foremost. But all of us have to check our premises at times. Discuss
The phrase "protected group" came about after the passage of the Civil Rights Act, which is a socialist concept, and
U.S. federal law protects employees from discrimination or harassment based on sex, race, age, disability, color, creed, national origin or religion. It specifically relates to employment law issues.
Although it is NOT required by federal law, employer policies may also protect employees from harassment or discrimination based on marital status or sexual orientation. However, please note the Civil Rights Act of 64 is inconsistent with the Constitution. I am not going to say there was not discrimination, rather, discrimination persists(ed) due to state and local government participation which was(is) unconstitutional. I challenge anyone here to show me in the Bill of Rights where a group is a "protected class."
On this site there will be a natural dissonance when discussing "protected classes." Group think is dangerous. Any concept that pushes ideas that some group has separate rights from the individual members is pushing Force and slavery. But if one has to think that way (illogically) the only group which is acknowledged here is the smallest group: the individual.
So, if one pushes concepts that are part of a group-think, one will be likely challenged. It will be uncomfortable and there will be push back or ignoring if posts focusing on those issues begin to dominate. That goes for issues Christians are concerned with as well as those concerned with LGBT issues. But just as well for the O who is frustrated the site is not more committed to the study of Objectivism. Focusing on our similarities reduces dissonance. Those similarities should be reason and logic foremost. But all of us have to check our premises at times. Discuss
Previous comments... You are currently on page 6.
That group or class is collectively labeled, "Citizens".
I can hear the battle cry now, "freedom for all, but special privileges for me!"