women's rights... what's that?

[anunitu]

Re: women's rights... what's that?

It is always spinning round and round,and most of the public just scratch their heads and go "What?"...enmy menny mini moe,I will pick this one cause I have to pick something,right??

[iris]

Re: women's rights... what's that?

Anu... try being outside of the US. I have no clue what's going on over there at all even more head scratching involved... your politics works so differently from ours! It's confusing... which is why I asked if the story is true ^^

[anunitu]

Re: women's rights... what's that?

In I think Texas two kids were busted for selling Lemon aid outside their house to earn money to buy their Father a Fathers day present...THAT is America these days,go figger.

http://www.people.com/article/texas-...without-permit

[Munin-Hugin]

Re: women's rights... what's that?

While I haven't really been following all this because, to be honest, this sort of crap just irritates me, doesn't it really just come down to a situation of a variant of "separation of church and state"? Of course, it reeks of another issue that has been circulating for who knows how long, and that it how much of a role government should be able to play in the operating of someone's personal life. How hard is it to agree upon a basic rule that states "Hey, don't treat anyone else like shit, and we won't have a problem. If you do, we'll have to take you out back to the wood shed"?

Still, there remains the fact that businesses are technically privately owned properties, with those who are chosen as management acting as the custodians of said property. Thus, those custodians can refuse entry/service/continued occupation of individuals of their property if there is a feeling that the presence of said individuals will cause harm to the business or those inside the business. In the past, as a retail manager, I have thrown folks out of my store or have had to call security to remove folks who I simply did not want on the premises for one reason or another. (One of which was just because he was an asshat, and he disgusted me. He was listening to something on his ipod and laughing, and when he was asked what it was, he replied that it was the recorded phone calls from some kids during a school shooting. It took all my will to simply throw him out, rather than beat him then throw him out.)

While I am totally AGAINST all kinds of discrimination, when it comes to businesses and the properties of individuals, they are considered private with the willingness to open their doors to the public, and as stated above they can refuse/remove individuals for various reasons. It creates a sort of cyclical argument with this sort of thing. Christian Company A wants to fire unwed employees who get pregnant, and the government says that's discrimination. But then Christian Company A turns around and accuses the government for discriminating against and belittling THEIR beliefs by making them go against their tenants.

Perhaps the best solution is to make a statement such as "The government does NOT discriminate against individuals for any reason, and therefore will not pass any sort of blanket legislation to support such. Yet, it does not hold utmost authority over what a business owner or individual does within his or her property. To those ends, any business who feels that there are certain actions that would violate it's company's core system of beliefs MUST provide in writing, up front for the immediate perusal of any and all current and future employees, a documented code of conduct and behavior for it's employees as well as the penalties for the violation of such." This sort of thing should be applied across the board, as well, for men and women. If a woman can be fired for being unwed and pregnant, an unwed man should also be fired for impregnating a woman. Of course, this could get extremely sticky, and return us all back to the whole segregation issue.

I don't know. Overall, people are stupid. From a personal level, I don't understand how having different skin color, or eye color, or differently shaped eyes, or having lady parts, makes any difference with how one can perform any duty.

[thalassa]

Re: women's rights... what's that?

Employees have the right not to have their private life determined by their employer...there is a reason in this country for labor laws.

[Medusa]

Re: women's rights... what's that?

So continue being mad as a wasp?

Check.

[anunitu]

Re: women's rights... what's that?

A lot of blood ,sweat,and tears went into bringing about our present labor laws..People died trying to change things...really read up on the labor movement in this country and strike breakers with clubs hired by the company's being struck.

History of Labor movements.
http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1678.html

[Medusa]

Re: women's rights... what's that?

I sometimes am suspicious that the people making these laws and the people who just sorta let these laws slide without getting upset, have no concept of history. Like..I'm not old. But I know how horrible things have been for us. It's like when women fight for the free the nipple. And I'm like this? This is what you are fighting for? It's not like once it's free you are going to run around doing errands at Walmart with your teet hanging out. How about we fight for important things, like this?

[anunitu]

Re: women's rights... what's that?

You ningaed me there Duce...

[B. de Corbin]

Re: women's rights... what's that?

Employees have the right not to have their private life determined by their employer...there is a reason in this country for labor laws.

You'd have a sole proprietorship follow the same rules as a corporation?

If Walmart refuses to make a cake for a Nazi party party, that could be called discrimination under no-discrimination laws because the Nazi party is completely legal in the U.S.

But if, say, my wife (who, we'll pretend, makes cakes on the side) refuses because she does not want to support an ideology she disagrees with...?

[Hawkfeathers]

Re: women's rights... what's that?

You'd have a sole proprietorship follow the same rules as a corporation?

YES. There are far, far too many "small businesses" - we do NOT need 10000000000 brands of crappy shampoo and everything else, taking up shelf space in stores, causing the stores to have to be bigger and costlier, and far too many charlatans making or importing cheap products to "compete" in a so-called capitalist marketplace. Back when the phone company was THE phone company, everyone had service, it was all fine, and you didn't have all these decisions to make about every little thing. There's so much "free enterprise" now, so many better mousetraps, and no more mice. And the vast majority of these small businesses keep multiple sets of books, and cheat their employees every way they can. They are not looking to grow into the future, but rather to make a quick buck for the owner today.

People keep saying "take America back" - OK, take it back to a handful of GOOD products, companies with strong upward mobility structured in, lifetime employment with security, and a retirement package with a nice gold watch, a farewell dinner, and a REAL pension.

[B. de Corbin]

Re: women's rights... what's that?

Is that a fact?

That's too bad. Try to make my hands do what my heart tells me is wrong and watch how quickly we come to blows.

[thalassa]

Re: women's rights... what's that?

You'd have a sole proprietorship follow the same rules as a corporation?

If Walmart refuses to make a cake for a Nazi party party, that could be called discrimination under no-discrimination laws because the Nazi party is completely legal in the U.S.

But if, say, my wife (who, we'll pretend, makes cakes on the side) refuses because she does not want to support an ideology she disagrees with...?

Walmart can refuse to make a cake for a Nazi part party because the Nazi party (though legal) is not a protected class. Gender, sexual identity, religion (and legally, that includes the lack of it), age, race, etc, on the other hand, are (federally and in most states) legally protected groups of people, against whom one cannot discriminate. Speech is only protected from the government. I can discriminate against your speech all I want (particularly if it itself is discriminatory), I can't discriminate against the Nazi party party cake because they are white or Protestant.

But what I said, was something completely different. I'm talking about an employee and their employer, not a business and its customer. An employee is dependent on an employer in a way that a customer (ordinarily) is not dependent on a business.

And yes, I absolutely believe that when it comes to employee rights, a sole proprietor should have to follow the same rules when it comes to treating a human being like a human being. An employer should not have the right to tell an employee whether or not (either directly or indirectly by firing them) they can cohabitate, get married, have sex, have a child, not have a child, drink soda, drink coffee, drink alcohol (provided its done legally), go surfing, drive a Prius, drive a Hummer, smoke, etc, on their own free time outside of working hours. The exception (and there is always an exception) being if 1) the person's outside activity is directly causing them to be unable to adequately do their job with reasonable accommodations (being an alcoholic that can't get to work on time isn't something that ought to be protected--although I think employers should encourage the person to get treatment and (should they do so) not fire them if they are going to treatment and showing good faith in doing their job, taking too many smoke breaks isn't something that ought to be protected, being pregnant and needing to temporarily be on desk duty on the other hand is--in the same way that breaking your leg surfing on vacation is (and if it isn't, your state sucks).

Besides, we all know that if you (as an employer) don't like someone for some bigotry reason, everyone makes mistakes. If you go to the work of creating a paper trail, you can have grounds to fire even your best worker.

[B. de Corbin]

Re: women's rights... what's that?

I like your answer much better than Hawkfeather's, but now I have to wonder...

Why is one minority protected, but not another?

And, what if that Nazi party party was Christian White Supremacists, who could then claim religious prejudice?

[Munin-Hugin]

Re: women's rights... what's that?

Employees have the right not to have their private life determined by their employer...there is a reason in this country for labor laws.

Yes, they very much do have a right to that. But in the example I made earlier where it would be law to proclaim the policies up front, the employee has the option to NOT work for such a company in the first place. If it's not your cup of tea, don't support it, don't work there, but in theory it is equally discriminatory to tell someone that their belief system isn't valid and that they have to run their business in a way that makes them uncomfortable and feel that their morals are being compromised.

YES. There are far, far too many "small businesses" - we do NOT need 10000000000 brands of crappy shampoo and everything else, taking up shelf space in stores, causing the stores to have to be bigger and costlier, and far too many charlatans making or importing cheap products to "compete" in a so-called capitalist marketplace. Back when the phone company was THE phone company, everyone had service, it was all fine, and you didn't have all these decisions to make about every little thing. There's so much "free enterprise" now, so many better mousetraps, and no more mice. And the vast majority of these small businesses keep multiple sets of books, and cheat their employees every way they can. They are not looking to grow into the future, but rather to make a quick buck for the owner today.

People keep saying "take America back" - OK, take it back to a handful of GOOD products, companies with strong upward mobility structured in, lifetime employment with security, and a retirement package with a nice gold watch, a farewell dinner, and a REAL pension.

The thing it, it's entirely up to the store on whether they want to sell Bob's, Jimmy's Sally's, Kyle's Fred's, AND Sarah's shampoos. The manufacturers present a product to the buyer of the shop, and then they go into negotiations as to price, shelf space, visibility, selling price, length of carrying the product, etc. While you may only use Bob's stuff, there's going to be someone else who HATES Bob's stuff, and is extremely happy that he has all these other options. Now, think of it on a larger scale, such as you only use 1 out of 100 similar items. Again, that means you don't like 99 of them, and there will still be other people who in their 99 dislikes has included yours.

Plus, limiting anyone's ability to create an enterprising business, or to simply open up a small shop of their own because they think they'd be good at it, flies right into the face of the concept of the "American Dream", where you can do what you want and become what you want. By choosing only a handful of products, you will be creating a vast pool of now unemployed people, not just unhappy consumers. Shipping, manufacturing, design, management, the list goes on and on.

I honestly think that labeling this as a "Womens' rights" violation is a bit misleading. Yes, that is definitely a huge part of it in the eyes of folks that do not follow the same beliefs as the businesses in question, but in the end it's really a question of religion's place in business and whether or not the controlling company's worship views should be allowed to effect their workplaces.

I'm sure that there would be just as much of an uproar if a Muslim group opened up a store and declared that all female employees had to wear a hijab.

Also, while it's not QUITE the same thing, the fact that male Disney employees were required to be clean shaven up until a few years ago, and could not have any tattoos or piercings, not can their hair grow past their ears along the sides or the collars of their shirts in the back. While that has been changed slightly to allow beards as long as they are close cropped, full, and do not cover the person's lips or neck (with the exception of those who work in Epcot Canada. They can grow beards like crazy), it can still be seen in the same light, as discriminatory. Yet, no one says a thing about it.