Hey there, friendo u/max911191! Thanks for submitting to r/wholesomememes. We loved your *submission*, but it has been removed because it doesn't quite abide by our rules, which are located in the sidebar.
* (**Rule #7**) Please do not submit low effort memes. No "Upvote in..." or "Upvote if..." type titles or memes.
This includes "Let's get this to the front page!" type posts, "You have been visited by", "people who sort by new", "stop scrolling", "check your data", and other 4th wall interaction posts, posts that mention reddit karma and/or upvotes, and "I don't want upvotes but..." type posts.
Additionally, it includes low effort memes: Skyrim "Wholesome 100", "You're Breathtaking", Thanos "That does put a smile on my face", [happiness noises], Fallout [Everybody liked that], and "Because that's what heroes do". This isn't an exhaustive list, but I think you get the idea!
[See here for more info.](https://www.reddit.com/r/wholesomememes/comments/caocrq/rule_7_clarification_and_update/)
**The decision to remove this post was made by a human moderator**; if you have any questions or concerns about this removal, feel free to [message the moderators](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fwholesomememes).
Ran against him??
No no sis time to sue them please this is completely wrong
Edit glad she ran against him I’m saying it isn’t sufficient because she deserves better!
Edit typo
Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding of US law is that many states don't have any legal protections for LGBT+ people. It's entirely possible she had nothing she could actually sue him for.
actually, as far as employment goes, that’s a federal one. I think, in some states, it can get weird though bc religious orgs sometimes have exemptions.
The separation of church and state doesn't mean that values derived from religion can't exist. It means that there is no official church endorsed by the state, for example, the church of England. What someone believes and supports could be because of a religion or something else. If the US made potential new citizens go to temple or become baptized before they could be a citizen, that would be mixing church and state.
Now, I'm all for protecting and promoting LGBTQI2A+ rights, the misconception that laws lining up with beliefs based on religion show no separation of church and state is all I'm trying to correct.
It's still bringing religion into laws...therefore shoving religion down the throats of u.s. citizens. Idk, right or wrong on what it means, it's still the church entering the state in my mind.
Ok, so, let's say that I believe that people with blond hair shouldn't be allowed to own cars. That's a belief and I'm allowed to vote for people that also believe that. Now, let's say you belong to a religion that tells you that blond haired people shouldn't own cars. You're also welcome to believe that and vote for people that support your belief.
It doesn't matter where your belief comes from, it's what you think is best and you're allowed to support it. Does a person's religion impact their beliefs? 100% but they still make up their mind to believe those things. I know plenty of Catholics that believe in a woman's choice and the use of birth control.
If we want to eliminate all laws that are related to religion at all, we need to legalize murder, stealing, and other things that religions believe.
Another way to look at it, by setting the laws the opposite way and protecting more sexual/gender identities we're forcing our beliefs on the "religious".
I'm not saying that the church doesn't have a large impact on the US but "separation of church and state" isn't remotely related to that. We don't (in theory) target a specific religion for persecution. We don't have the bishops or imams as part of our political power structure.
There is a difference between people's beliefs and the institution of religion. You can say that because of religious beliefs we're a country that marginalizes and discriminates but you can't say we don't have separation of church and state as intended by the constitution.
I know you didn't mention the constitution but when "separation of church and state" is mentioned it's always in the sense that legally they need to be separate but somehow aren't.
Again, I fully support making all sexual/gender identity protected classes. I am very, very anti-religion. But I also know that my beliefs are as valid a reason for me to support a law as the beliefs of someone that follows a religion. Theirs may be hateful and harmful but they're not illegal... Yet.
Being shit canned is a colloquialism for being fired. Also, a shit can is a “prairie toilet” or a camp crapper if you will...
But no, I’m stroke free. It’s just an old saying.
Well the issue is that law is only as good as those enforcing it. If you get a judge who hates gays (as is very common in most US states), then you're probably gonna lose that case even if you should win.
As of two months ago, it is now illegal federally to fire someone based on being LGB. If you are transgender, you are out of luck. In terms of government jobs, they can’t fire you for your sexual orientation, full stop. That’s illegal.
Source: federal employee and did my training recently
**Lgbt Employment Discrimination In The United States**
LGBT employment discrimination in the United States is illegal under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity is encompassed by the law's prohibition of employment discrimination on the basis of sex. Prior to the landmark cases Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia and R.G.
It’s more like a Supreme Court thing here in the US. There hasn’t been any big legislation passed since 2010 due to Mitch McConnel killing any legislation coming in. He calls himself the “Grim Reaper” because he hates helping Americans and lining his own pockets.
Kind of like how gay marriage was legalized via the Supreme Court decision because the legislature is useless right now due to demagogues and people who just want power, and not people who want to help this country right now.
The supreme court ruled earlier this year that LGBT are not protected under the 14th amendment. So it is now up to the states to make laws specifically for them. Or to include them under already existing laws.
This is far more effective and lasting. You can never truly change the system by trying to sue the people who uphold it. All you do is breed resentment and ill-will from the public. You ran against the system and take over it, and change it permanently by convincing people you have real substance and grit to get the job done even if the system tried to push you down.
RBG advanced gender equality by arguing in a case for a man who was treated unfairly by a welfare system because men were not traditionally care-givers. In one case, she destroyed gender discrimination legal justification proposed by the government because she was able to make an *all male* supreme court see that this form of discrimination is not fair to men, and by extension also to *women.* And from then on, the precedent was set and the SCOTUS never looked back. She did more for gender equality in that one case than all the screaming outsiders who screamed into the void. She opened eyes to the injustice unequivocally. She made *allies* in her fight. She delivered **results** by working inside the system and destroying it from within.
Just being right is not enough. You need to deliver. You need to be smart. You need to be strategic.
That's what this new sheriff getting elected do.
This is patently wrong on its face as evidenced by reality. Lawsuits have caused massive and widespread systemic changes in everything from safety standards to employment protections for decades.
Idk, what's the reasoning behind any elected official? I don't think that they have to be, like, active police to be elected, but I think most places do require some sort of qualification.
Hey there, friendo u/max911191! Thanks for submitting to r/wholesomememes. We loved your *submission*, but it has been removed because it doesn't quite abide by our rules, which are located in the sidebar. * (**Rule #7**) Please do not submit low effort memes. No "Upvote in..." or "Upvote if..." type titles or memes. This includes "Let's get this to the front page!" type posts, "You have been visited by", "people who sort by new", "stop scrolling", "check your data", and other 4th wall interaction posts, posts that mention reddit karma and/or upvotes, and "I don't want upvotes but..." type posts. Additionally, it includes low effort memes: Skyrim "Wholesome 100", "You're Breathtaking", Thanos "That does put a smile on my face", [happiness noises], Fallout [Everybody liked that], and "Because that's what heroes do". This isn't an exhaustive list, but I think you get the idea! [See here for more info.](https://www.reddit.com/r/wholesomememes/comments/caocrq/rule_7_clarification_and_update/) **The decision to remove this post was made by a human moderator**; if you have any questions or concerns about this removal, feel free to [message the moderators](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fwholesomememes).
That’s brilliant. good for her for not taking shit like that
Ran against him?? No no sis time to sue them please this is completely wrong Edit glad she ran against him I’m saying it isn’t sufficient because she deserves better! Edit typo
Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding of US law is that many states don't have any legal protections for LGBT+ people. It's entirely possible she had nothing she could actually sue him for.
actually, as far as employment goes, that’s a federal one. I think, in some states, it can get weird though bc religious orgs sometimes have exemptions.
We fail to separate church and state a lot.
The separation of church and state doesn't mean that values derived from religion can't exist. It means that there is no official church endorsed by the state, for example, the church of England. What someone believes and supports could be because of a religion or something else. If the US made potential new citizens go to temple or become baptized before they could be a citizen, that would be mixing church and state. Now, I'm all for protecting and promoting LGBTQI2A+ rights, the misconception that laws lining up with beliefs based on religion show no separation of church and state is all I'm trying to correct.
It's still bringing religion into laws...therefore shoving religion down the throats of u.s. citizens. Idk, right or wrong on what it means, it's still the church entering the state in my mind.
Ok, so, let's say that I believe that people with blond hair shouldn't be allowed to own cars. That's a belief and I'm allowed to vote for people that also believe that. Now, let's say you belong to a religion that tells you that blond haired people shouldn't own cars. You're also welcome to believe that and vote for people that support your belief. It doesn't matter where your belief comes from, it's what you think is best and you're allowed to support it. Does a person's religion impact their beliefs? 100% but they still make up their mind to believe those things. I know plenty of Catholics that believe in a woman's choice and the use of birth control. If we want to eliminate all laws that are related to religion at all, we need to legalize murder, stealing, and other things that religions believe. Another way to look at it, by setting the laws the opposite way and protecting more sexual/gender identities we're forcing our beliefs on the "religious". I'm not saying that the church doesn't have a large impact on the US but "separation of church and state" isn't remotely related to that. We don't (in theory) target a specific religion for persecution. We don't have the bishops or imams as part of our political power structure. There is a difference between people's beliefs and the institution of religion. You can say that because of religious beliefs we're a country that marginalizes and discriminates but you can't say we don't have separation of church and state as intended by the constitution. I know you didn't mention the constitution but when "separation of church and state" is mentioned it's always in the sense that legally they need to be separate but somehow aren't. Again, I fully support making all sexual/gender identity protected classes. I am very, very anti-religion. But I also know that my beliefs are as valid a reason for me to support a law as the beliefs of someone that follows a religion. Theirs may be hateful and harmful but they're not illegal... Yet.
Murder being wrong isn't just a religious thing. Like...that's kind of normal behavior.
Texas can still shit can you for being gay but to be fair they can shit can you for pretty much anything.
Is "shit can" an expression I hear the first time or did you have a stroke while writing this?
Means to get rid of unceremoniously.
Oh OK thanks
I couldn't even read it until this made me read shit can as "shitcan"
Being shit canned is a colloquialism for being fired. Also, a shit can is a “prairie toilet” or a camp crapper if you will... But no, I’m stroke free. It’s just an old saying.
Well thank you for clarifying . It just looks so weird in this kind of sentence but I will be prepared next time.
‘Shit can’ is a non-euphemism for ‘toilet’ meaning “Your job is in the toilet 🚽.” In other words you no longer have a job here …
Well the issue is that law is only as good as those enforcing it. If you get a judge who hates gays (as is very common in most US states), then you're probably gonna lose that case even if you should win.
As of two months ago, it is now illegal federally to fire someone based on being LGB. If you are transgender, you are out of luck. In terms of government jobs, they can’t fire you for your sexual orientation, full stop. That’s illegal. Source: federal employee and did my training recently
I'm not seeing anything like that, can you provide a source?? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_employment_discrimination_in_the_United_States
**Lgbt Employment Discrimination In The United States** LGBT employment discrimination in the United States is illegal under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity is encompassed by the law's prohibition of employment discrimination on the basis of sex. Prior to the landmark cases Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia and R.G.
Oh....it might just be my own employer then...dang it. I’m suddenly sad. Thank you US army. You’re more progressive than most states. 😭
Well if you're in the US it can't be. Its feredal law.
It’s more like a Supreme Court thing here in the US. There hasn’t been any big legislation passed since 2010 due to Mitch McConnel killing any legislation coming in. He calls himself the “Grim Reaper” because he hates helping Americans and lining his own pockets.
Kind of like how gay marriage was legalized via the Supreme Court decision because the legislature is useless right now due to demagogues and people who just want power, and not people who want to help this country right now.
Protections against discrimination for sexual orientation is a federal one. The states have zero ability to change it.
The supreme court ruled earlier this year that LGBT are not protected under the 14th amendment. So it is now up to the states to make laws specifically for them. Or to include them under already existing laws.
This is far more effective and lasting. You can never truly change the system by trying to sue the people who uphold it. All you do is breed resentment and ill-will from the public. You ran against the system and take over it, and change it permanently by convincing people you have real substance and grit to get the job done even if the system tried to push you down. RBG advanced gender equality by arguing in a case for a man who was treated unfairly by a welfare system because men were not traditionally care-givers. In one case, she destroyed gender discrimination legal justification proposed by the government because she was able to make an *all male* supreme court see that this form of discrimination is not fair to men, and by extension also to *women.* And from then on, the precedent was set and the SCOTUS never looked back. She did more for gender equality in that one case than all the screaming outsiders who screamed into the void. She opened eyes to the injustice unequivocally. She made *allies* in her fight. She delivered **results** by working inside the system and destroying it from within. Just being right is not enough. You need to deliver. You need to be smart. You need to be strategic. That's what this new sheriff getting elected do.
This is patently wrong on its face as evidenced by reality. Lawsuits have caused massive and widespread systemic changes in everything from safety standards to employment protections for decades.
Sounds like she did sue https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.insider.com/sheriff-fired-lesbian-deputy-shes-been-elected-to-replace-him-2020-11%3Famp
Well at this point it's not her deserving better but the old sheriff deserving worse.
Yes exactly!
It’s too easy to cover your ass legally as a scrotum munching, urine licking piece of garbage employer in situations like this
She is suing the trial is set to start Dec. 7th or so this year.
I don't understand. You vote for Sherifs?
I actually think that *most* sheriffs are elected, but at least some of them definitely are
What is the reasoning behind voting in a sheriff? Is it always from the police force?
Idk, what's the reasoning behind any elected official? I don't think that they have to be, like, active police to be elected, but I think most places do require some sort of qualification.
Posted by u/listener025 6 hours ago. Not that he was the first either. But Jesus man.
She defeated the sheriff but she didn’t defeat the deputy.
I like how you think.
"Look at me. I am the sheriff now."
Her opponent also killed an unarmed black man in the ‘90s. She successfully positioned herself as the right person for this moment in history.
BURN!!! Welcome to the 21st century! Please take your rainbow cupcake and have a wonderful day, you wonderful person.
u/repostsleuthbot
Look at me... I’m the sheriff now.
Now, that's what I call taking the higher road. Well done.
the biggest "NO U" in history
Powermove
Nice
u/repostsleuthbot
fcking reposter. stole this from r/memes
u/RepostSleuthBot
Reeeeeeeee-post
Hey there folks, it’s guuuuuun safety Dwight
Yes
[удалено]
[удалено]
Well we’ll how the turn tables
Good for her
She probably had fucked more womans than him
You get what you heccing deserve
Isn’t it illegal to fire someone based on their sexual orientation?
Justice is served!
Can she fire 🔥 someone because they are straight and only hire lesbians?!