Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
2 hours ago, Big girl said:

No one is discriminated against and ostracized for being straight. So, what's the point?

We can make stuff up. It’s what a race card does for people.

If an employer has to hie someone strictly because of their sexual preference, then I have been discriminated against. Of course you won’t understand that concept because you possess a race card.

Posted
38 minutes ago, baddog said:

We can make stuff up. It’s what a race card does for people.

If an employer has to hie someone strictly because of their sexual preference, then I have been discriminated against. Of course you won’t understand that concept because you possess a race card.

Or if one requires a lower test score or easier test, then I have been discriminated against.  

Posted
2 hours ago, baddog said:

We can make stuff up. It’s what a race card does for people.

If an employer has to hie someone strictly because of their sexual preference, then I have been discriminated against. Of course you won’t understand that concept because you possess a race card.

And a gender card.

Posted
3 hours ago, baddog said:

We can make stuff up. It’s what a race card does for people.

If an employer has to hie someone strictly because of their sexual preference, then I have been discriminated against. Of course you won’t understand that concept because you possess a race card.

The same can be said about the Rooney rule in the nfl. Teams MUST interview a person, for a coaching position, that is not white before they can hire anyone. How on earth is this not a racist rule?

Posted
1 hour ago, Hagar said:

And a gender card.

Gender card. That could get interesting. Does one have to stick to their classification or can they change it as often as needed per circumstance? By filling their quotas, it may get to where they eventually “have to” hire a straight, white male.

Posted
11 hours ago, Ty Cobb said:

The same can be said about the Rooney rule in the nfl. Teams MUST interview a person, for a coaching position, that is not white before they can hire anyone. How on earth is this not a racist rule?

Because they wouldn't hire a qualified black coach,  at all. It"s sad that they had to make the rule ; in order to, give qualified blacks a chance. Remember when the general consensus was that black men were not smart enough to be a NFL quaterback? Some people also thought that an all black starting 5, on a basketball team, were not smart enough to win a championship 

 

 

Posted
26 minutes ago, Big girl said:

Because they wouldn't hire a qualified black coach,  at all. It"s sad that they had to make the rule ; in order to, give qualified blacks a chance. Remember when the general consensus was that black men were not smart enough to be a NFL quaterback? Some people also thought that an all black starting 5, on a basketball team, were not smart enough to win a championship 

 

 

Yes, but you people are never satisfied. You want a black owner, entire coaching staff, scouts, trainers, agents, merchandising, concessions, players, and fans. You want it all, so don’t even come at me with that equality crap. I don’t believe it for one second.

Back on topic: I am straight and proud of it. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

Posted
43 minutes ago, Big girl said:

Who has an easier test?

I’m pretty sure the postal exam is configured so that minorities are more likely to meet the minimum required for employment, one example.  Although the test isn’t easier, but lower SAT scores will get a minority admitted strictly because of ethnicity.  But yet, you and others scream white privilege.  

Posted
58 minutes ago, BS Wildcats said:

I’m pretty sure the postal exam is configured so that minorities are more likely to meet the minimum required for employment, one example.  Although the test isn’t easier, but lower SAT scores will get a minority admitted strictly because of ethnicity.  But yet, you and others scream white privilege.  

I’m still a firm believer that the U. S. postal service is nothing more than a jobs program for minorities.  How else can you explain them losing billions and billions of dollars each year and nothing ever done about it?!

Posted
1 hour ago, baddog said:

Yes, but you people are never satisfied. You want a black owner, entire coaching staff, scouts, trainers, agents, merchandising, concessions, players, and fans. You want it all, so don’t even come at me with that equality crap. I don’t believe it for one second.

Back on topic: I am straight and proud of it. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

I never said that. Qualified blacks should be hired, period

 

Posted
8 minutes ago, Big girl said:

I never said that. Qualified blacks should be hired, period

 

“You” collectively as a people. “You” don’t have to be the one to say it, just simply believe it. If all of that were to happen, I’m sure you would be concerned about “qualified whites” not getting hired. See what I mean?

Posted
1 hour ago, Reagan said:

I’m still a firm believer that the U. S. postal service is nothing more than a jobs program for minorities.  How else can you explain them losing billions and billions of dollars each year and nothing ever done about it?!

Well that's just govt in general. And we, as shareholders, continue to pay for it. Do you ever get the wrong package from FedEx?

Posted
4 hours ago, Big girl said:

Because they wouldn't hire a qualified black coach,  at all. It"s sad that they had to make the rule ; in order to, give qualified blacks a chance. Remember when the general consensus was that black men were not smart enough to be a NFL quaterback? Some people also thought that an all black starting 5, on a basketball team, were not smart enough to win a championship 

 

 

That’s total BS. Just because you interview them doesn’t mean you have to hire them. Why are you so prejudiced? Goodness know you know about discrimination, yet you think it’s ok to discriminate against non black races. 
Do you think that they should also be required to interview Mexicans, Chinese, Indians or other people of color or are you satisfied as long as a black person gets interviewed. 
What about women? Shouldn’t they get a chance? Shouldn’t we try to give the job to a LGBR549 person that’s in the midst of a gender change?

WHERE DOES IT END????????????    

Posted
1 hour ago, WOSdrummer99 said:

Well that's just govt in general. And we, as shareholders, continue to pay for it. Do you ever get the wrong package from FedEx?

Can’t say I ever have.  For the socialist here, this is a good lesson when a company that’s in it for a profit has to watch it’s p’s and q’s.  It’s just sad that we allow agencies to lose billions of dollars each year and not a darn thing is ever done!  Plus, I think there’s a postal union.  WHY?!

Posted
1 hour ago, SmashMouth said:

That’s total BS. Just because you interview them doesn’t mean you have to hire them. Why are you so prejudiced? Goodness know you know about discrimination, yet you think it’s ok to discriminate against non black races. 
Do you think that they should also be required to interview Mexicans, Chinese, Indians or other people of color or are you satisfied as long as a black person gets interviewed. 
What about women? Shouldn’t they get a chance? Shouldn’t we try to give the job to a LGBR549 person that’s in the midst of a gender change?

WHERE DOES IT END????????????    

549…..Lmao

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    46,283
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    Malachi
    Newest Member
    Malachi
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...