snopes.com Post new topic  Post a reply
search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hello snopes.com » Archived Forums » Legal Affairs Archive » "Sex" Added to Civil Rights Act To Keep It from Passing

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: "Sex" Added to Civil Rights Act To Keep It from Passing
Crono
Deck the Malls


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Crono   Author's Homepage   E-mail Crono   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
As anyone familiar with employment law knows, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination against five protected classes: race, color, religion, national origin, and sex. I have heard that some of the original drafts of this act did not include sex. It was added later on by lawmakers who did not want it to pass. Apparently, they thought that no one would vote for a bill that would prohibit discrimination against sex. Of course, the bill passed anyway, causing these lawmakers to inadvertantly create a law that prohibited discrimination based on sex as well as race.

I don't have any evidence to place doubt this story, but it sounds a little to faciful to me. In other words, it sounds like something people would come up with just because it makes for an ironic story and may not be completely based on facts. On the other hand, I have heard it from two professors, both of whom have Ph.D.s in Industrial/Organizational Psychology and are experts in employment law, and I've read it in at least one textbook. Is there any other evidence that this story is true? Do we still have any of the previous drafts of the Civil Rights Act to check for this?

--------------------
Disclaimer: I might know something about everything, but I don't know much about anything.

Posts: 293 | From: Nashville, TN | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
BlackForge
We Three Blings


Icon 1 posted      Profile for BlackForge     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
I'm sure one side has added text to a Bill just make the other side look bad by not wanting to pass it and make themselves look good. I'm pertty sure this type of stuff happens all the time and more so the closer to election time it gets.

Being poloticions I have no problem believing at least one of them would believe that prohibiting descrimination against sex would cause the Bill fail.

Was this think applied to the Civil Rights Act of 1964. I do not know, but have no problem thinking it could have happend. The problem with proving it is that most of the law righting and think takes place behind closed doors. We only get to see what came out and was passed by Congress and the President.

Posts: 1152 | From: Somewere | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
AnglsWeHvHrdOnHiRdr
Happy Xmas (Warranty Is Over)


Icon 1 posted      Profile for AnglsWeHvHrdOnHiRdr     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
According to this account
quote:
Smith voiced his approval, stating that "if this iniquitous piece of legislation is to be adopted, we certainly ought to try to do whatever good with it that we can"


--------------------
"When a stupid man is doing something he is ashamed of, he always declares that it is his duty."--George Bernard Shaw

Posts: 19266 | From: Nashville, TN | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post new topic  Post a reply Close topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Urban Legends Reference Pages

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2