Trump removes rules - allows organizations that refuse to help LGBT to receive millions in grants now.

[Guest hungandmean]

Any thoughts on this, since there appears to be lots of Trump supporters here.

As of today - without any warning - HHS can give grants out (they give billions a year) to organizations that discriminate against LGBT people. Previously grants could only go towards organizations that agreed they would help the gays. This affects housing, welfare, emergency funds, adoptions, HIV/AIDs medication, and all kinds of other shit. 

I could open a food bank tomorrow called, "ILL FEED YOU UNLESS YOU'RE A FAGGOT," and be eligible for a multi million dollar grant... where as yesterday I couldn't.

 

[Pozlover1]

As I understand it this only applies to faith-based adoption agencies, who can now receive Federal funding. This is known as Freedom Of Religion. This change still allows a “Gay Only” adoption agency to receive funding. 

[Guest hungandmean]

Then you understand wrong. This applies to every single organization under the HHS umbrella. 

That means any government contractor seeking funding. Homeless shelters, HIV/AIDS outreach programs, Food banks, 

Literally anything that falls under the HHS umbrella (Which is a TON of stuff - billions of dollars of stuff)

 

This isn't just gay people either. They can deny gays, the wrong types of Christians, muslims, Jewish people, basically anyone... and still get government money. TAXPAYER (YOUR) Money.

I could open an adoption agency tomorrow, and say i'd only allow muslims to apply, and only if they werent gay, and only if they were a man and woman and married -- and your tax dollars are gonna pay for it.

 

[Pozlover1]

You are correct, sir. They are merely stressing the adoption part.

The entire system is reverting to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which as we know does not include sexual orientation or the requirement to provide interpreters for languages other than English. 
 

 

Edited November 2, 2019 by Pozlover1

[Pozlover1]

14 minutes ago, Pozlover1 said:

You are correct, sir. They are merely stressing the adoption part.

The entire system is reverting to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which as we know does not include sexual orientation or the requirement to provide interpreters for languages other than English. 
 

 

They still provide interpreters (for now...) but they don’t mail out the paper flyers informing clients that they do.

[Twochipigs]

3 hours ago, Pozlover1 said:

As I understand it this only applies to faith-based adoption agencies, who can now receive Federal funding. This is known as Freedom Of Religion. This change still allows a “Gay Only” adoption agency to receive funding. 

Using my tax dollars to support someone’s religious bigotry is not “Freedom of Religion”, it is an establishment of government religion prohibited by the Constitution.

The state of Virginia claimed in 1967 that its anti-miscegenation law was just the majority expressing their freedom of religion.  Religion is largely sanctimonious delusions applied as a cudgel to those outside the cult.

[Guest hungandmean]

28 minutes ago, Pozlover1 said:

You are correct, sir. They are merely stressing the adoption part.

The entire system is reverting to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which as we know does not include sexual orientation or the requirement to provide interpreters for languages other than English. 
 

 

You... dont see an issue with... I dont know... the fact that gay people could be barred from: emergency housing, medical care, food banks, adoptions, and almost any other service?

Or the wide stretching repercussions this could have. These kinds of laws are literally the, "Sharia Law," people fearmonger about.

A homeless shelter could choose to refuse women who've had premartial sex for religious reasons - or women who've been raped because they had premarital sex (technically) -- they could refuse to feed the children of gay parents who adopted out of state. 

A free clinic, offering services to the poor, could be denied funding if its mandate said it had to help gay people. 

What part of sending civil rights back 50 years seems like a good idea for our people???? Come on now. 

[beanna]

Their is a bog std.mental health test with 10 items of criteria,the purpose of which is to determine how psychotic a individual is

D.Trump score 9/10

A.Hitler  score 10/10

the similarities are scary 

[Guest]

47 minutes ago, Pozlover1 said:

They still provide interpreters (for now...) but they don’t mail out the paper flyers informing clients that they do.

i really wish people would read  instead of listening to ops The rule grants federal nondiscrimination protection to health care ... that have been used to deny services, including health care, to LGBT people. ... This new rule does not do that.”

[Twochipigs]

14 minutes ago, bbboffer said:

i really wish people would read  instead of listening to ops The rule grants federal nondiscrimination protection to health care ... that have been used to deny services, including health care, to LGBT people. ... This new rule does not do that.”

Right...  That's why the Liberty Counsel and Tony Perkins are celebrating the new rule.

[Guest hungandmean]

1 minute ago, Twochipigs said:

Right...  That's why the Liberty Counsel and Tony Perkins are celebrating the new rule.

US Evangelicals getting Uganda all set to make it legal to murder gay people - and this time around theres no sanctions or shit to stop them.

Focus on the Family, Liberty Counsel, Etc... This isn't about religious freedom - those organizations want us dead. 

[Pozlover1]

1 hour ago, bbboffer said:

i really wish people would read  instead of listening to ops The rule grants federal nondiscrimination protection to health care ... that have been used to deny services, including health care, to LGBT people. ... This new rule does not do that.”

This whole subject only applies to HHS grants to private charities. My information comes from the official HHS website. The decision was made on May 2 and has been tied up in courts. HHS has decided, correctly, that Obama’s dogmatic change will be found unconstitutional and implemented  the changes as of yesterday. There are other separate issues that, as you suggest, I have not researched. 
 

As I have written before here and elsewhere, I do not believe ANY nondiscrimination laws regarding private business are Constitutional, but if they are to exist, Gays should be included.

I believe it is the spectre of Trans equality that has kept Congress from including Gays in the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Not only do average people with a limited perception of reality take gender very seriously, the practical, financial concerns of third bathrooms and mandated hormones and operations are genuine. There are already legal procedures that change your sex on your drivers license without any cutting, anything you make up in your head is on you. 

  A better option IN MY OPINION, which follows the Constitution’s intent of limited Government, is to forbid Government from tracking, or even asking about our sex, gender, race, ethnicity, etc. NOTHING. NADA.  There is literally zero advantage to us for them to do this, and myriad reasons they will use it for nefarious societal manipulation a la Nazi Germany.
   “Are you breathing? Check yes or no.”

[evilqueerpig]

To paraphrase Capt. Renault form Casablanca: I'm shocked!  Shocked that there's homophobia in this administration!  It became obvious when Pence "all gays should be executed!" was chosen to be his running mate.  While there's plenty of ammunition, I won't denigrate the Trumpettes here.  Given the opportunity, Evangelicals would've publicly crucified Clinton for his philandering, but because he supports their agenda, Trump gets a pass.

[Pozlover1]

 There was a lawsuit filed by several “faith based” organizations that felt it was unfair to withhold Federal funding until they doled it out to LBGT people, which is against their beliefs. Imagine them forcing you to pay taxes to make land mines and overthrow governments... no, wait, that’s not a good analogy.

 I agree these charities are morally wrong to exclude LBGT people, but, the arbitrary inclusion  of “LBGT” to the HHS nondiscrimination list by Obama was de facto illegal and was an attempt to circumvent existing law. Without Congress adding us to the existing list, the HHS had no choice but to return to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Disabilities Act of 1990. Trump had no direct say in the matter. Of course the Judges he appoints would be a factor in a court case, but it looks to me like the law is pretty clear on this. 

Take heart that any executive order signed by Trump can be abolished easily by subsequent administrations. Here’s hoping they will be Constitutional Libertarians and not like the current choices which I consider like Nazis in the other direction. 

 
 

[evilqueerpig]

The US is NOT a christian nation, nor is it a theocracy.  Why should the Religious Right get special treatment?  As a QUEER man, I certainly wouldn't go to their organizations for needed services.