# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Friday's Supreme Court decision on same-sex marriage was a major victory for LGBT couples. But they can still legally be discriminated against in much of the country.

In most states their employers can fire them.

Their landlords can evict them.

They can also be denied service by hotels, restaurants and other businesses. They can even be denied credit and excluded from juries.

"Today's decision is historic, no doubt about it. But it does not end discrimination against many LGBT people," said Adam Talbot, spokesman for the Human Rights Campaign, an LGBT rights group.

Related: Marriage equality: Not so fast

About 10% of 662 lesbian, gay and bisexual workers who were randomly surveyed said they have been fired within the last five years due to their sexual preference, according to Laura Durso, director of LGBT Progress campaign at the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank. And 26% of 6,450 transgender workers who participated in a non-random survey say they've been fired.

"In many states today it is legal for same sex couples to get married but to then be fired for getting married," she said.

Only 21 states have laws banning companies from discriminating against employees based on sexual preference. And two of those states still allow a transgender worker to be fired or denied a job.

Related: Same-sex marriage is legal. Here's what it means for couples

"If there has not been a wave of firings or evictions in those states, it's partly because people are staying in the closet in those parts of the country," said Stephen Clark, a professor at Albany Law School. "You can't do that if you get married. It's a public act that creates a public record. Even if you don't publish a notice in the paper or invite people, you are running a risk."

Advocates for gay rights say Friday's court decision makes it more necessary than ever to pass federal protections against LGBT discrimination. But such legislation remains stalled in Congress.

Related: Corporate America celebrates gay marriage decision

Many employers, especially large employers, have protections against discrimination for their workers. But without those company policies, or a labor contract, there is little legal recourse for an LGBT worker who has been fired or denied a job. In fact, an LGBT worker can still be fired by a company that's based in a state with non-discrimination laws, if that individual works in a state without those legal protections.

"Is discrimination as frequent as was racial discrimination in the Jim Crow era? I don't think so. But it's not difficult to find victims of LBGT discrimination today," said Sam Marcosson, law professor at the University of Louisville.

CNNMoney (New York) First published June 26, 2015: 2:39 PM ET

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How businesses can still discriminate against LGBT people

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In most states their employers can fire them. Their landlords can evict them. They can also be denied service by hotels, restaurants and other businesses. They can even be denied credit and excluded from juries. "Today's decision is historic, no doubt about it.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The US Department of Labor has filed a lawsuit against Oracle America, saying the software giant systemically pays Caucasian male workers more than their counterparts with the same job title. The lawsuit also says Oracle favors Asians in hiring for certain roles, which results in discrimination against non-Asian employees.

The lawsuit is the result of an investigation that began in 2014. In a statement issued on the lawsuit, the Dept. of Labor's Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) says that Oracle wouldn't comply with "routine requests for employment data and records" during the investigation. OFCCP tried for "almost a year" to resolve the matter before filing suit.

Federal contracting rules prohibit Oracle from employment discrimination. If Oracle doesn't stop the discrimination alleged in the lawsuit, OFCCP has requested that all of company's government contracts be canceled and that it be prevented from entering into future federal contracts.

The government's sparse nine-page complaint (PDF) outlines only the basics of the allegations. It claims that Oracle discriminated against female employees in its information technology, product development, and support jobs at its Redwood Shores headquarters, "paying them less than comparable males in comparable roles." Similarly, the complaint states that African-Americans and Asians in product development were paid less than comparable white employees.

In another job role, OFCCP accuses Oracle of discriminating against white, African-American, and Hispanic workers. The company is alleged to have favored Asians, and particularly Indians, for positions in the "Professional Technical 1" job group and product development line.

The Department of Labor is asking for Oracle to provide "complete relief to the affected classes," including lost compensation.

"The complaint is politically motivated, based on false allegations, and wholly without merit," an Oracle spokesperson said in a statement e-mailed to Ars. "Oracle values diversity and inclusion and is a responsible equal opportunity and affirmative action employer. Our hiring and pay decisions are non-discriminatory and made based on legitimate business factors including experience and merit."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Labor Department sues Oracle for racial discrimination

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The US Department of Labor has filed a lawsuit against Oracle America, saying the software giant systemically pays Caucasian male workers more than their counterparts with the same job title. The lawsuit also says Oracle favors Asians in hiring for certain roles, which results in discrimination against non-Asian employees.

# data[].attributes.body
discrimination

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In just 100 days in 1994, about 800,000 people were slaughtered in Rwanda by ethnic Hutu extremists. They were targeting members of the minority Tutsi community, as well as their political opponents, irrespective of their ethnic origin.

Warning: Contains graphic images.

How did the genocide start?

About 85% of Rwandans are Hutus but the Tutsi minority has long dominated the country. In 1959, the Hutus overthrew the Tutsi monarchy and tens of thousands of Tutsis fled to neighbouring countries, including Uganda.

A group of Tutsi exiles formed a rebel group, the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF), which invaded Rwanda in 1990 and fighting continued until a 1993 peace deal was agreed.

On the night of 6 April 1994 a plane carrying then-President Juvenal Habyarimana, and his counterpart Cyprien Ntaryamira of Burundi - both Hutus - was shot down, killing everyone on board.

Hutu extremists blamed the RPF and immediately started a well-organised campaign of slaughter. The RPF said the plane had been shot down by Hutus to provide an excuse for the genocide.

With meticulous organisation. Lists of government opponents were handed out to militias who went and killed them, along with all of their families.

Neighbours killed neighbours and some husbands even killed their Tutsi wives, saying they would be killed if they refused.

At the time, ID cards had people's ethnic group on them, so militias set up roadblocks where Tutsis were slaughtered, often with machetes which most Rwandans kept around the house.

Thousands of Tutsi women were taken away and kept as sex slaves.

Why was it so vicious?

Rwanda has always been a tightly controlled society, organised like a pyramid from each district up to the top of government. The then-governing party, MRND, had a youth wing called the Interahamwe, which was turned into a militia to carry out the slaughter.

Weapons and hit-lists were handed out to local groups, who knew exactly where to find their targets.

The Hutu extremists set up a radio station, RTLM, and newspapers which circulated hate propaganda, urging people to "weed out the cockroaches" meaning kill the Tutsis. The names of prominent people to be killed were read out on radio.

Even priests and nuns have been convicted of killing people, including some who sought shelter in churches.

By the end of the 100-day killing spree, around 800,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus had been killed.

The UN and Belgium had forces in Rwanda but the UN mission was not given a mandate to stop the killing.

A year after US troops were killed in Somalia, the US was determined not to get involved in another African conflict. The Belgians and most UN peacekeepers pulled out after 10 Belgian soldiers were killed.

The French, who were allies of the Hutu government, sent a special force to evacuate their citizens and later set up a supposedly safe zone but were accused of not doing enough to stop the slaughter in that area.

Paul Kagame, Rwanda's current president, has accused France of backing those who carried out the massacres - a charge denied by Paris.

How did it end?

The well-organised RPF, backed by Uganda's army, gradually seized more territory, until 4 July 1994, when its forces marched into the capital, Kigali.

Some two million Hutus - both civilians and some of those involved in the genocide - then fled across the border into the Democratic Republic of Congo, at the time called Zaire, fearing revenge attacks. Others went to neighbouring Tanzania and Burundi.

Human rights groups say RPF fighters killed thousands of Hutu civilians as they took power - and more after they went into DR Congo to pursue the Interahamwe. The RPF denies this.

In DR Congo, thousands died from cholera, while aid groups were accused of letting much of their assistance fall into the hands of the Hutu militias.

What happened in DR Congo?

The RPF, now in power in Rwanda, embraced militias fighting both the Hutu militias and the Congolese army, which was aligned with the Hutus.

The Rwanda-backed rebel groups eventually marched on DR Congo's capital, Kinshasa, and overthrew the government of Mobutu Sese Seko, installing Laurent Kabila as president.

But the new president's reluctance to tackle Hutu militias led to a new war that dragged in six countries and led to the creation of numerous armed groups fighting for control of this mineral-rich country.

An estimated five million people died as a result of the conflict which lasted until 2003, with some armed groups active until now in the areas near Rwanda's border.

Has anyone faced justice?

Instead, the UN Security Council established the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda in the Tanzanian town of Arusha to prosecute the ringleaders.

A total of 93 people were indicted and after lengthy and expensive trials, dozens of senior officials in the former regime were convicted of genocide - all of them Hutus.

Within Rwanda, community courts, known as gacaca, were created to speed up the prosecution of hundreds of thousands of genocide suspects awaiting trial.

Correspondents say up to 10,000 people died in prison before they could be brought to justice.

For a decade until 2012, 12,000 gacaca courts met once a week in villages across the country, often outdoors in a marketplace or under a tree, trying more than 1.2 million cases.

Their aim was to achieve truth, justice and reconciliation among Rwandans as "gacaca" means to sit down and discuss an issue.

What is Rwanda like now?

President Kagame has been hailed for transforming the tiny, devastated country he took over through policies which encouraged rapid economic growth. He has also tried to turn Rwanda into a technological hub and is very active on Twitter.

But his critics say he does not tolerate dissent and several opponents have met unexplained deaths, both in the country and abroad.

The genocide is obviously still a hugely sensitive issue in Rwanda, and it is illegal to talk about ethnicity.

The government says this is to prevent hate speech and more bloodshed but some say it prevents true reconciliation.

Charges of stirring up ethnic hatred have been levelled against some of Mr Kagame's critics, which they say is a way of sidelining them.

He won a third term in office in the most recent election in 2017 with 98.63% of the vote.

All photographs belong to the copyright holders as marked

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In just 100 days in 1994, some 800,000 people were slaughtered in Rwanda by ethnic Hutu extremists - how did the genocide happen?