NBC Fires Matt Lauer

Fast-forward to the 16-second mark.

 

I don't get that, why would it not be protected? I just don't get it. I have 2 couples in my family/friend circle that are professional people in long term ,adult, human, consenting, relationships. Where in the fucking world is it correct for them not to have the same right as anyone else. I assume it does not say so in the Constitution but if anything referred to that it would have to be changed, we have evolved.
Please tell me, not your personal belief, but what would be the reasons that gays should not be married (giving them all the legal rights of others who can)
As far as the military or any other f'ing place, I don't mean to alarm them all, but the gays are already there.

 

I don't presume to speak for Dick, but I don't think he's saying that any such slights are all right. He's saying that sometimes Constiutional law continues to support statutes that, well, have advanced with the times. Plus there's the fact that there is no accounting for the deductive process of some people ... even a majority of people. This has been proven.

 

I understand it may not be his opinion, and he is saying that some might think it is constitutional to deny civil rights to a group of people because...
and that is where my question is, what reason is there to deny a group of people their civil rights? You are right, time is moving us forward, I am afraid with the idiot in the white house and his installing right wingers in the courts, we will go backward. Though sometimes I am confident that there is no turning back. Heck I would love to see sessions take on legal pot. Love to see how that is answered.

 

It’s not that they think civil rights should be denied to people. It’s that they have a narrow conception of what constitutes a civil right and/or a protected class under the Constitution.

 

I guess I get that, I can usually get why people think the way they do, but I can not wrap my brain around giving the same right to some but not others. Not even "more" as the far right would claim, just the same equal rights. My goodness, it's like women getting the vote, to me.
Unfortunately most of this is driven by their "christian" belief. We are all screwed if that is allowed to grow.

 

Well, the Supreme Court agreed with you.

Think about it this way:

The military has height and weight restrictions for things like flying a plane or manning a submarine. So the government is in essence conferring the "right" to serve upon normal-sized people that it does not confer upon very tall or very short people.

 

In 2008, candidate Barack Obama was squarely against gay marriage.

 

I get what you mean, though the analogy is imperfect. Very tall or short people are allowed to serve, but they get assigned to posts that fit their physical size/skill set.

 

Yes, and we have had that discussion here. Readers Digest version of my opinion... So was the majority of the country, I would guess. But that issue just seemed to make up enormous ground very quickly--relatively speaking. Do you know what I mean? It went from being a no-no to being accepted --relatively--quickly,
People evolve.

 

I'm sure it seemed like an eternity to the people directly involved, but the grounds made in LGBTQ rights in the last 20 years are pretty astonishing. I know there is still too much discrimination and a lot of battles to be won, but same-sex marriage wasn't even on the horizon 20 years ago, and now places that don't recognize it seem regressive as hell.

 

Yeah but that is a practical matter, if you are a giant, you probably won't fit into a cockpit. Even a giant gay person, but just being gay can not disqualify. They can certainly flunk out or have any other reason why they don't make the cut, but not gay. Remember blacks and women in the military and interracial marriages all had these same arguments. And we certainly don't want those two groups to have the right to vote..