Post from freewill (see below). When I asked for the source of this information, he responded saying he did not cut-and-paste, just his own words. I think his take on it is a very subjective one and much of the detail was not revealed. I spent time this afternoon, finding much more information, citing my sources. His conclusion is one which many people would certainly not have drawn:
"So hardly reasons to discriminate against gay people getting married." These cases are just illustrative and likely to be replicated many times over. When you read of the working who was demoted and lost $40,000 pa, went to court and even the judge said the damages awarded against him of one hundred pounds was inadequate. (I have already posted these details). Freewill's response?
"So the law is fine, just an aggressive employer - have always been plenty of those aroun..." So it seems freewill believes something that the judge himself doesn't???? I am suggesting that the standard of posting here is often quite dishonest and people putting their own spin on cases, then maintaining nothing is wrong is very poor form indeed.
The National Trust in Britain only reversed its decision due to the volunteers threatening to withdraw their membership, thus no work and no fees going to the Trust, and the uproar elsewhere in Britain forced the Trust to reverse its decision to make the wearing of rainbow badges not compulsory afterall. The Trust's decision was forced upon it because of the extreme loss of free labour and income - not because of anything else. Without that bargaining chip, the result would not have been changed. Freewill's response - just downplayed that as well.
It is less than honest to put up posts which are spinning the issues at hand to suit the agenda of the Poster. Dishonest.
Freewill's biased and skewed post is below:
"Interestingly, researching the three cases on the web:
1. The guy who was demoted by the housing trust won his legal case. So the law is fine, just an aggressive employer - have always been plenty of those around
2. The National Trust changed its decision after feedback and the rainbow badges became voluntary.
3. The potential foster family said they would not be supportive of any child placed with them who was homosexual. So effectively the poor kid would be placed in a totally inappropriate position where his foster parents would criticise his sexuality causing emotional problems for the child. This was the right decision.
So hardly reasons to discriminate against gay people getting married."
