<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title><![CDATA[Homosexuals in the workplace]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p>
	<a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/supreme-court-rules-for-gay-rights-in-the-workplace-11592230310" rel="external nofollow">https://www.wsj.com/articles/supreme-court-rules-for-gay-rights-in-the-workplace-11592230310</a>
</p>

<p>
	Of course I don't know and have never had a problem with them. My complaint, and it remains, about any kind of ruling that sets aside a specific group of people gives them the ability to do a shity job without fear of being fired for it.
</p>

<p>
	I doubt that most employers care if their employees suck other men's wieners when they go home as long as they do a good job.
</p>

<p>
	I mean you know who is still employed.
</p>

<p>
	WSS
</p>]]></description><link>https://brownsboard.com/topic/57108/homosexuals-in-the-workplace</link><generator>RSS for Node</generator><lastBuildDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2026 08:14:51 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://brownsboard.com/topic/57108.rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2020 09:17:45 GMT</pubDate><ttl>60</ttl><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Homosexuals in the workplace on Wed, 17 Jun 2020 14:43:53 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<blockquote><p><a class="plugin-mentions-user plugin-mentions-a" href="/user/mld-woody" aria-label="Profile: mld-woody">@<bdi>mld-woody</bdi></a> <a href="/post/944133">said</a>:</p>
	

	
		<p>
			While I don't have a subscription to read the article, I have a sneaking suspicion that that's not what the ruling says...
		</p>
	
</blockquote>

<p>
	Well it's a pretty straightforward story and I think just about every Outlet has coverage.
</p>



<p>
	<a href="https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/surprise-supreme-court-rejects-lgbtq-workplace-discrimination-n1231072" rel="external nofollow">https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/surprise-supreme-court-rejects-lgbtq-workplace-discrimination-n1231072</a>
</p>



<p>
	Just for the record it didn't come as a surprise to me whatsoever. Just to these assholes.
</p>

<p>
	WSS
</p>]]></description><link>https://brownsboard.com/post/944145</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://brownsboard.com/post/944145</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[Westside Steve]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2020 14:43:53 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Homosexuals in the workplace on Wed, 17 Jun 2020 12:42:57 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<blockquote><p><a class="plugin-mentions-user plugin-mentions-a" href="/user/westside-steve" aria-label="Profile: westside-steve">@<bdi>westside-steve</bdi></a> <a href="/post/944124">said</a>:</p>
	

	
		<p>
			<a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/supreme-court-rules-for-gay-rights-in-the-workplace-11592230310" rel="external nofollow">https://www.wsj.com/articles/supreme-court-rules-for-gay-rights-in-the-workplace-11592230310</a>.
		</p>

		<p>
			My complaint, and it remains, about any kind of ruling that sets aside a specific group of people gives them the ability to do a shity job without fear of being fired for it.
		</p>

		<p>
			.
		</p>

		<p>
			WSS
		</p>
	
</blockquote>

<p>
	While I don't have a subscription to read the article, I have a sneaking suspicion that that's not what the ruling says...
</p>]]></description><link>https://brownsboard.com/post/944133</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://brownsboard.com/post/944133</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[MLD Woody]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2020 12:42:57 GMT</pubDate></item></channel></rss>