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

[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?

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...?

[anunitu]

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

You ningaed me there Duce...

[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?

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?

So continue being mad as a wasp?

Check.

[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.

[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.

[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

[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?

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??

[Hawkfeathers]

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

I love it when they name things as the complete opposite of what they are.

Right to work.

Entitlements.

Pro-life.

I know, right? That's how they get the ignoranti to vote for it. A little marketing spin makes the world go 'round.

[thalassa]

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

Whether or not a person can be fired for using birth control or being pregnant is immaterial in a "right-to-work" or "at-will" situation, which is what all these pinheads are striving for.

I love it when they name things as the complete opposite of what they are.

Right to work.

Entitlements.

Pro-life.

[Hawkfeathers]

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

Whether or not a person can be fired for using birth control or being pregnant is immaterial in a "right-to-work" or "at-will" situation, which is what all these pinheads are striving for.

[thalassa]

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

We'll know we are getting closer when all that is left to talk about is "human" rights.

humans already have rights...the problem is that they are ignored for certain subsets of the population