US court rules fags and traps protected from being fired under (((1964 Civil Rights Act)))

KIKERY INTENSIFIES

tl;dr: You can't fire fags and traps for being annoying or Kikes and SJWs from the government will come at you.

Civil War when?

Sauce: *https*://www.rt.com/usa/383532-lgbtq-civil-rights-act/
Archive: archive.fo/CTR2e

When the pedos try to use this to justify pedophilia, that's it. That's my line. I don't care who the fuck joins me or not, it'll be a goddamn one man Day of the fucking Rope.

...

...

All you'd have to do is never hire anyone that fucks men. That solves two problems at once, no fags and no women.

Well, no straight women. Still an improvement.

You say that as if anything other than straight women should be allowed to live.

No, I say that as if straight women shouldn't have jobs so they can go be a mother to white children. It'd be an improvement, not the end of all of our problems.

...

I've been using this exact formatting since before Reddit existed and I'll be using it after it no longer does.

Gays have no rights.
Let's be honest; any faggot or tranny is going to have their neurological problems express themselves in ANOTHER way that WILL impede their ability to work. They will always be fireable.

Can you really get away with it? Judging by Peter Thiel's experience on (((discrimination))) against Asians, the activist judges will come after you the moment they smell any kind of disbalance of employee identities.

Fuck this meme, get back to the subject at hand.

Fag hate thread? Fag hate thread!

It's easy enough to do a faground check on your applicants such that you can see which are queers and which aren't. Then just don't hire them. There will always be a better or equivalent straight applicant; you're not going to run into any lawsuits you can't win (and spin for your own profit).

You probably can't, I just meant that would have been my probably defeated argument against what the kikess in the OP is saying.

Thiel got screwed over for not hiring Asians, see

This is perfect, now all you have to do is just not hire them in the first place.

...

see

Isn't that also classed as a form of discrimination?

...

...

One that they would have to prove, as religion and ideology is are still the only legal ways of discrimination left. Fag? Commie. Tranny? Commie. Muslim trying to get a babysitting job at a christian day care? Religious incompatibility. Ask for birth control? Religious incompatibility. That's where they're taking things and if they try to play on that line that's when activist judges and politicos get hanged.

...

This.
The employers just won't hire them in the first place. And they're not exactly hard to spot. So as usual, government regulations hurt their pets more than it would help them.


That's way harder to prove than the firing one.

...

Not hiring someone because they had piercings, politically charged twitter posts, colored hair, tattoos, terrible quality of work or the famous "over-qualified" can easily be used as arguments without the need to call out religion, sexual orientation or race.

This follows the letter of the law, but remember that Talmudic twisting of the letter of the law is only allowed for them, not for us.

TLDR: perversion medicalized into pathology, pathology normalized into identity

...

Yup.

...

...

Don't forget fags are massively over represented among pedos.

There's a good chance they will be doing a shit job anyway, so there will be no need to fire them just because of what they are. The overlooked symptoms of mental disability for these 'classes' of people already serves as a selection factor.