Monday, July 19, 2010
Event City Council to Discuss Non-Discrimination Ordinance
Posted by Bianca Phillips on Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 3:46 PM
Finally! Over a year after the Shelby County Commission voted to extend protections to LGBT county employees, the Memphis City Council is scheduled to discuss a similar ordinance aimed at city workers.
The Personnel, Intergovernmental, and Annexation committee will discuss the proposed ordinance Tuesday morning at 8:30 a.m. The meeting (on the fifth floor) is open to the public, but keep in mind that committee meetings have limited seating space.
Expect an update on this blog after the meeting.
Comments (6)
Showing 1-6 of 6
All workers should be able to make a living, provide for their families and contribute to their communities. Contact the Memphis City Council today to tell them you support inclusive workplace protections for the City of Memphis that prohibits employment discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity or expression at
http://tnep.org/email
like
dislike
This ordinance violates the right of association in the US Constitution. A private company should not be under the private jurisdiction of the state. Most companies are extensions of families and groups of private investors. What if the law required you to allow unwanted guests into your yard or home any time they wanted to? The same argument could be applied; 'we just want to provide our families with friends and other places to hang out...'.
Packrat, Why don't you explain why it 'isn't even close' to us. Property rights extend to one's business and so do rights of association; so long as the foolish company hasn't become bed-fellows with the state by signing away their rights in LLC clauses, etc.
IF you are talking about a business in which the owners deal with the public, and not merely a completely private association (like a club), then of course, CHG, there are limits. THe courts have consistently ruled as such. Or else the entire Civil Rights Act would not be enforceable. Which I'm sure you would think is entirely proper.....Dr. Rand Paul. Like it or not, there are limits on the rights of property, it is not a completely unfettered right, nor is the almost any right. Ben Franklin believed property is a creation of society, not a natural right. I tend to agree.
THIS WEEK'S ISSUE
SPECIAL ISSUES
