Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
We tried that one guys and guess what happened?
It is very hard to run a country with large segments of the population is refused any decent means of providing for themselves.
Go study the history of the afrimative action.
Go study a little black history.
You will see the unfairness that was there and you will realize why these laws have to exsist.
Your society will rend its self from the inside out if you leave a segment of your population out of the economic loop.
Absolutely.
The owner of a business should be able to hire or not hire or fire or not fire anyone he wants.
Period.
I agree. Even if the reasons are unfair to begin with.
Living in a free society pretty much means that someone else can live by their own moral beliefs. Thats why I am a "liberal" and think that these fair hiring laws should be removed.
Look if anyone wants to hire people that are not the best candidate for any reason it's fine by me.
If some dyed in the wool racist refuses to hire a Black guy who cares? It leaves a good candidate for someone else to hire or not.
The only person a business owner like that is hurting is himself. If he's OK with it, why shouldn't I be.
Next thing you know is that the government will mandate that we all have a specific quota of friends from every racial group.
Look if anyone wants to hire people that are not the best candidate for any reason it's fine by me.
If some dyed in the wool racist refuses to hire a Black guy who cares? It leaves a good candidate for someone else to hire or not.
Like I said.. feel free to take your case to the supreme court. don't mind me betting against your chances..
The way things are and the way things should be never coexist.
We tried that one guys and guess what happened?
It is very hard to run a country with large segments of the population is refused any decent means of providing for themselves.
Go study the history of the afrimative action.
Go study a little black history.
You will see the unfairness that was there and you will realize why these laws have to exsist.
Your society will rend its self from the inside out if you leave a segment of your population out of the economic loop.
Let me paraphrase what you just said. People choosing freely for themselves didn't yield the results you wanted so you decided to remove that freedom from them so now people are obeying what you think they should be doing.
The question I have is who said we have to live by your standard of behavior?
Sure. By law, within the bounds of the law. Why not?Is it an Employer's Right to Discriminate?
"PC Police?"It is often been said that conservatives are sexest because they believe in the traditional family of mom stay at home and father go to work. I don't really agree with that but, for argument sake, lets assume this is true. Isn't it someone's right to believe as they do and isn't it someone's personal choice as to what they think is right for their own life without having the PC police telling them otherwise. The next statement liberals make is that this violates someone's rights but how is this true when most conservatives who believe in this "lifestyle choice" usually do not seek laws mandating that to happen which allows a person to execute their personal choice as they see fit over their own lives regardless if that choice is deemed morally right or wrong by others.
The claim that someone's choice of how they want to live their life somehow violates your own choice to live your life differently such as not believing a woman's place is in her home is absurd because it is impossible for someone's independent will to violate your own will of how you should live your own life.
Now I suppose it can be argued that an employer who will not hire a woman because he believes women should stay home and raise kids violates a person's own belief that they shouldn't so the remedy is a law that forces the employers to hire that woman which violates his rights to conduct his life as he wishes.
I ask, at this point, who's rights are being violated by the law? Is it the woman's or is it the employers right to decide how they want to live their life (albeit for reasons most people don't agree with). It can be argued that, without the law, that the woman's rights are being violated but were her rights being violated by any action of the law?
This is where the real root of freedom exists and that is in the absence of law and if you think that the employers has to give up his freedom to be evil then every evil thing that people can do, such as adultry, has to be made illegal. It can be done for the same reason that the woman says it is her right to be treated fairly by an employer and that is it is her right to have a non-cheating husband so now adultry is a crime just like every other evil is which is another loss of freedom because someone believed they had a right over the behaviors of others.
Bullshit manifold.
IH, the elected government of this country
It is often been said that conservatives are sexest because they believe in the traditional family of mom stay at home and father go to work. I don't really agree with that but, for argument sake, lets assume this is true. Isn't it someone's right to believe as they do and isn't it someone's personal choice as to what they think is right for their own life without having the PC police telling them otherwise. The next statement liberals make is that this violates someone's rights but how is this true when most conservatives who believe in this "lifestyle choice" usually do not seek laws mandating that to happen which allows a person to execute their personal choice as they see fit over their own lives regardless if that choice is deemed morally right or wrong by others.
The claim that someone's choice of how they want to live their life somehow violates your own choice to live your life differently such as not believing a woman's place is in her home is absurd because it is impossible for someone's independent will to violate your own will of how you should live your own life.
Now I suppose it can be argued that an employer who will not hire a woman because he believes women should stay home and raise kids violates a person's own belief that they shouldn't so the remedy is a law that forces the employers to hire that woman which violates his rights to conduct his life as he wishes.
I ask, at this point, who's rights are being violated by the law? Is it the woman's or is it the employers right to decide how they want to live their life (albeit for reasons most people don't agree with). It can be argued that, without the law, that the woman's rights are being violated but were her rights being violated by any action of the law?
This is where the real root of freedom exists and that is in the absence of law and if you think that the employers has to give up his freedom to be evil then every evil thing that people can do, such as adultry, has to be made illegal. It can be done for the same reason that the woman says it is her right to be treated fairly by an employer and that is it is her right to have a non-cheating husband so now adultry is a crime just like every other evil is which is another loss of freedom because someone believed they had a right over the behaviors of others.
We tried that one guys and guess what happened?
It is very hard to run a country with large segments of the population is refused any decent means of providing for themselves.
Go study the history of the afrimative action.
Go study a little black history.
You will see the unfairness that was there and you will realize why these laws have to exsist.
Your society will rend its self from the inside out if you leave a segment of your population out of the economic loop.
Let me paraphrase what you just said. People choosing freely for themselves didn't yield the results you wanted so you decided to remove that freedom from them so now people are obeying what you think they should be doing.
The question I have is who said we have to live by your standard of behavior?
well, currently the Federal Government. I guess it's time to enlist in that militia....
Let me paraphrase what you just said. People choosing freely for themselves didn't yield the results you wanted so you decided to remove that freedom from them so now people are obeying what you think they should be doing.
The question I have is who said we have to live by your standard of behavior?
well, currently the Federal Government. I guess it's time to enlist in that militia....
That is a very strange roll that you have assigned to government. You seem to believe that government decides the standard of behavior. What if my own religion told me otherwise or my own moral standard said it was OK. Am I not free to choose how I should live my own life?
Let me paraphrase what you just said. People choosing freely for themselves didn't yield the results you wanted so you decided to remove that freedom from them so now people are obeying what you think they should be doing.
The question I have is who said we have to live by your standard of behavior?
well, currently the Federal Government. I guess it's time to enlist in that militia....
That is a very strange roll that you have assigned to government. You seem to believe that government decides the standard of behavior. What if my own religion told me otherwise or my own moral standard said it was OK. Am I not free to choose how I should live my own life?
well, currently the Federal Government. I guess it's time to enlist in that militia....
That is a very strange roll that you have assigned to government. You seem to believe that government decides the standard of behavior. What if my own religion told me otherwise or my own moral standard said it was OK. Am I not free to choose how I should live my own life?
No
The government and it's gaggle of corrupt politicians knows better than you how you should live your life.
well, currently the Federal Government. I guess it's time to enlist in that militia....
That is a very strange roll that you have assigned to government. You seem to believe that government decides the standard of behavior. What if my own religion told me otherwise or my own moral standard said it was OK. Am I not free to choose how I should live my own life?
No
The government and it's gaggle of corrupt politicians knows better than you how you should live your life.
That is a very strange roll that you have assigned to government. You seem to believe that government decides the standard of behavior. What if my own religion told me otherwise or my own moral standard said it was OK. Am I not free to choose how I should live my own life?
No
The government and it's gaggle of corrupt politicians knows better than you how you should live your life.
oh the irony.. so rich.. so SAVORY.
No
The government and it's gaggle of corrupt politicians knows better than you how you should live your life.
oh the irony.. so rich.. so SAVORY.
and little bitches like you love that way
Bullshit manifold.
IH, the elected government of this country
What happens if we flipped that on you and a bunch of racist got elected and decided that non-racist employers, who want to hire non-whites, could no longer hire any non-whites. You would then ask "Why do we have to live by your standard?" Their response "the elected government of this country".
Does that make it morally correct and does that justify someone removal of their freedom in order to get achieve some social goal of the people in power?
oh the irony.. so rich.. so SAVORY.
and little bitches like you love that way
stomping your foot like a tantrum throwing child in a toy store won't overturn these laws.
Maybe you can be a little less ironic when supporting government bans on personal behavour during this upcoming election season. Until then... there is always the militia option.
well, currently the Federal Government. I guess it's time to enlist in that militia....
That is a very strange roll that you have assigned to government. You seem to believe that government decides the standard of behavior. What if my own religion told me otherwise or my own moral standard said it was OK. Am I not free to choose how I should live my own life?
nope. sorry. go ask a rastafarian all about the absolute freedom to abide by illegal religious tenets. If my faith is based on killing conservatives I'm sure you'll be glad that I'm not given free reign to practice my faith. In this case, the fed has protected status's that you may not agree with, and that is your right, but you will abide by them until you figure out a way to remove these standards.
Bullshit manifold.
IH, the elected government of this country
What happens if we flipped that on you and a bunch of racist got elected and decided that non-racist employers, who want to hire non-whites, could no longer hire any non-whites. You would then ask "Why do we have to live by your standard?" Their response "the elected government of this country".
Does that make it morally correct and does that justify someone removal of their freedom in order to get achieve some social goal of the people in power?
There is nothing binding anyone to this country. If you feel your rights are being trampled on, then you are free to leave and go to another country of your choice, where your freedoms can be better exercised. Try Iraq, or maybe Afghanistan first. Yemen is coming.