Jun. 23, 2021
CHICAGO, Ill. (KFVS) - On June 23, Attorney General Kwame Raoul led a coalition of 25 attorneys general calling on the U.S. Senate to pass legislation that protects individuals from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity
We have already witnessed the devastating consequences of “protected class legislation” being forced upon the American people, [The Americans with Disabilities Act] without their approval via a constitutional amendment granting the necessary power to Congress to adopt “appropriate legislation” over a subject matter in question.
Like the unconstitutional Americans with Disabilities Act, which usurped legislative power over a subject matter not entrusted to Congress, the Equality Act, if forced upon the people, will once again swing open the door for countless lawsuits from opportunists and fringe element activists, and would allow our bottom feeding scum sucking shyster lawyers to have a field day with the law, just as they did with the unconstitutional American’s with Disabilities Act.
And especially see:
“The notion that the ADA would not “lead endlessly to litigation” was also wrong. (See “The ADA Shakedown Racket,” Winter 2004.) ADA claims against employers filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), now numbering more than 26,000 per year, have become as common as sex-discrimination claims. And the volume keeps rising, as does the number of ADA lawsuits against employers filed in federal court yearly.”
The Equality Act is intentionally designed to put the muscle of government in the hands of a “protected class” [those participating in abnormal sexual behavior] who may then use that muscle to force the unwilling to engage in contracts and unwanted associations with them.
Keep in mind, the Equality Act is an attempt to subvert the American People’s inalienable right to be free to mutually agree in their contracts and associations, including their social and commercial activities.
How each person uses that freedom is a different discussion, and even though the choices made by some may appear to be grounded in absurd and repulsive beliefs and prejudices, and their choices reject an across the board inclusiveness based upon wrongheaded thinking, under what authority can one claim to refuse to defend their right to freedom of choice, while demanding their own freedom to choose shall be protected by the force of government? To do so indicates a bigoted belief . . . “inclusiveness for me but not for thee”.
The bottom line is, the Equality Act attempts to exercise legislative power proposed under the “Equal Rights Amendment” which was wisely rejected by the American people in the 1980s. It reads:
'Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.
'Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
‘Section 3. This article shall take effect 2 years after the date of ratification.’
The American people, having rejected the above mentioned “Equal Rights Amendment”, makes it crystal clear that the “Equality Act” is an attempt by our federal government to exercise legislative power not granted, and wisely rejected by the American people.