House committee votes to upend first D.C. law in 23 years

Conservatives say they arent coming for your birth control. Looks like that was just another big lie they like to tell. Why Cant you guys just leave other people alone to determine their own reproductive needs and courses? I just baffles my mind that they would actually vote this through. I have very little doubt that it will pass, and even if it does, Obama would veto it im sure, but honestly, just attempting to do this is pretty disgusting.




http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/...ada_story.html



House committee votes to upend first D.C. law in 23 years


A House committee voted to overturn a new D.C. law on Tuesday night that would ban discrimination on the basis of employees’ reproductive decisions.

The rare congressional effort to turn back a local law pleased social conservatives who view the measure as a threat to religious organizations that operate in the nation’s capital. But it signaled a potentially perilous new chapter in partisan relations between the liberal city and its Republican overseers.

Over outbursts from activists for D.C. statehood, the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee voted 20-16, and along party lines, to block the law. To succeed, the repeal would still have to pass a vote of the full House and Senate, and President Obama would have to sign it within the next two weeks.


Facing so many hurdles, no House committee has initiated the process to upend a D.C. law in 23 years, and only three have ever passed. But with the District’s decision to proceed with legalizing marijuana in February, and conservatives last month threatening to undo D.C. gun laws, both sides agreed the committee vote marked an early low point since Republicans took control of Congress that could portend more conflict ahead.

Republicans have urged House budget leaders to block funding for D.C. to enforce the reproductive discrimination law if a congressional repeal does not succeed before a May 2 deadline. Sen. Bernie Sanders, the ranking member on the Senate Budget Committee, also scheduled what may be a first on Wednesday night: a town hall meeting with residents in D.C. to discuss how the next Republican-led congressional budget could adversely impact the city.

And in an interview with The Washington Post on Tuesday night, Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), chairman of the powerful Oversight Committee, said he was inclined to support proposals to roll back D.C. gun laws.

“I come from a belief that the Second Amendment should be equally implemented here in the District of Columbia. I should be able to carry if I so choose. I feel safer doing so.”

 

Funny how Repub men like this bago(*)(*)(*)(*) wants to have a CHOICE for HIMSELF but firmly believes women should have no choice..

 

Employers should have the right to fire anyone for any reason. Let the market sort it out.

 

Some businesses refuse to hire people for putting tobacco in their bodies. When we celebrated and allowed this "for our health" we allowed the current OP, and whatever comes next. Good luck ladies.

 

Total B.S.

 

I work in an open carry state, but my second amendment rights end as soon as I step on my company's property. It's still my choice to work for them or not. And how does an employer know the "women's reproductive health" status unless someone shoots their mouth off? The more people want us out of their bedroom the more they bring their bedroom out into the middle of the street.

 

Completely misleading title for this thread.

The DC law in question is being overturned because it would mandate employers to provide abortion coverage to employees. Its being spun - as in this threads very misleading title - for political purposes to make people think the repeal will allow an employer to fire an employee if the employee gets an abortion or uses birth control.

 

sad but true, when we allows them to go after their freedoms, don't complain when they come after ours, and republicans will come after your freedoms next, freedom of religion is one of the things many republicans want to destroy in this country

- - - Updated - - -

with company healthcare the business can look at their health care bills and see, but you would think acting on that would put them in violation of medical privacy laws

- - - Updated - - -

mom of 8... well I got fired today... for what? using birth control.... it's against the Christian religion now

 

From the Bill:

You think they would have learned after Hobby Lobby.

 

I figured as much.

 

Actually they can't, you sir need third grade education on civil rights.

 

Emphasis on "should".

 

My apologies, I misread. I still strongly disagree with your assertion I believe civil rights trump beliefs, I have no desire to imitate fundamentalist ran states.

 

Then there's that At Will thing. An employer can fire some one because it's Saturday, and an employee can quit for the same reason.

 

As long as it doesn't violate the employees civil rights******

 

When a conservative says that the first amendment is being violated because someone was fired/censured, progressives always say that the first amendment protects people from the government, and that freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences (they are right). Why should that apply to freedom of speech but not to freedom to take birth control?

 

Birth control is a medical treatment that most agree should be a social standard. If you like it or not society is what pushed progress, you can try to finger-point and group people but it always the majority that stand up against ignorance and bigotry. The first amendment means exactly what society interprets it as not a minority group of radicals.

 

An employer doesn't need to give a reason.

 

I assumed you would reply with no substance. So I will educate you...

Even if you are an at-will employee, you still cannot be fired for reasons that are illegal under state and federal law. In these situations, the government has decided to make an exception to the general rule of at-will employment.
For example, if your employer is subject to federal and state laws prohibiting job discrimination (as all but the smallest employers are), you cannot be fired because of certain characteristics, such as your race, religion, or gender. (For more information on discrimination, see Your Rights Against Discrimination and Harassment.) Similarly, you cannot be fired because you have complained about illegal activity, about discrimination or harassment, or about health and safety violations in the workplace (see Nolo's article Assert Your Safety Rights Without Fear of Retaliation). And you cannot be fired for exercising a variety of legal rights, including the right to take family and medical leave, to take leave to serve in the military, or to take time off work to vote or serve on a jury.

I assumed on Comic Sans font, I hope it's to your liking.

 

Surely, all employers are so stupid that if they're going to fire you based on race, gender, etc, they're going to tell you. And nothing you've said so far proves anything I've said in this thread is wrong.

 

Which is why we should let the market sort it out. If people genuinely oppose it, let them force the business's hand.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

What part of that is up for interpretation?

 

Why the hell is GOP doing such incredibly polarizing right wing stuff in DC. That's clearly not at all what the people of DC would vote for. There is a growing movement to give DC it's own local state like government. And I think this is a pretty good example of why they need it.

 

a lot obviously, it seems society is not ok with the freedom of religion discriminating against people. We're seeing that right now people are on the side of gay marriage regardless of religions that oppose it. The people have spoken in the past and are currently shouting civil rights trumps religion and only people in denial hear anything else. Society shapes our constitution it always has.

 

Good. Let them handle it.

If you want to change the constitution, amend it. The constitution does not change depending on what the majority believe.

 

This has nothing to do with changing the constitution this has to do with people choosing human rights over religious rights. It's society if you don't like it move but your bellyaching won't change anything. Society is turning it's back on bigoted zealots and so is the law. It is what it is and always has been, whining that it isn't what you think the constitution says changes nothing.