Politics The war on women is getting disgusting

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
SlyPokerDog

SlyPokerDog

Woof!
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
Oct 5, 2008
Messages
126,811
Likes
147,438
Points
115
Riverman doesn't think I know enough about other countries because I haven't been to them. Made a mistake and went to Peurto Vallarta against my instincts.

Won't ever go to Missouri, learned my lesson with Mexico.

What a bunch of morons.
 
If I may play devil's advocate--don't the existing anti-discrimination laws pretty much allow employers and landlords the latitude to discriminate against anyone for any reason not listed as a protected class according to the EEOC? Like, isn't it legal to only hire people without tattoos, or discriminate against left-handed people? Why should birth control usage be placed at the same level of protection as race, gender, or sexual orientation?
 
PtldPlatypus said:
If I may play devil's advocate--don't the existing anti-discrimination laws pretty much allow employers and landlords the latitude to discriminate against anyone for any reason not listed as a protected class according to the EEOC? Like, isn't it legal to only hire people without tattoos, or discriminate against left-handed people? Why should birth control usage be placed at the same level of protection as race, gender, or sexual orientation?
Click to expand...

Well perhaps I don't want to rent a place to children for what ever reason. If I then ask a woman for proof she uses birth control before I rent the place to her, might seem be rude, but I why not legal?
 
MarAzul said:
Who do you mean, them? The article seems to be sensational, but is it true?
Click to expand...
Do you think this new law in Missouri is fair? Should employers be able to fire their employees because they take birth control?
 
Fonzthecpt1 said:
Do you think this new law in Missouri is fair? Should employers be able to fire their employees because they take birth control?
Click to expand...
Should employees be able to fire their employers because they wear Nikes? If not, should there be a law on the books protecting employees' footwear choices?
 
MarAzul said:
Well perhaps I don't want to rent a place to children for what ever reason. If I then ask a woman for proof she uses birth control before I rent the place to her, might seem be rude, but I why not legal?
Click to expand...

I think you misread the article. If you didn't you contradicted yourself in less than 40 words.
 
Fonzthecpt1 said:
Do you think this new law in Missouri is fair? Should employers be able to fire their employees because they take birth control?
Click to expand...

Fair? I don't know what the intent is of the law is. I don't know how the employer is going to know, so why have the law?
 
I read news stories about women getting evicted for using birth control several times a day.
 
bodyman5000 and 1 said:
Riverman doesn't think I know enough about other countries because I haven't been to them. Made a mistake and went to Peurto Vallarta against my instincts.

Won't ever go to Missouri, learned my lesson with Mexico.

What a bunch of morons.
Click to expand...

What ever! Missouri is too far from the Sea.
 
MarAzul said:
Really! How so?
Click to expand...

You do know toddlers/babies become children right?
You don't see how you contradicted yourself?
You're a smart guy, when you want to be.
I don't really have the energy, being under the weather to draw a picture for you.
 
PtldPlatypus said:
Should employees be able to fire their employers because they wear Nikes? If not, should there be a law on the books protecting employees' footwear choices?
Click to expand...
Are you comparing taking birth control for medical reasons to plantar fasciitis?
 
Fonzthecpt1 said:
Are you comparing taking birth control for medical reasons to plantar fasciitis?
Click to expand...
I'm comparing a voluntary choice to another voluntary choice--neither of which should arguably constitute a protected class. Unless you think birth control usage should be covered by the ADA, which would be a different story altogether.
 
PtldPlatypus said:
I'm comparing a voluntary choice to another voluntary choice--neither of which should arguably constitute a protected class. Unless you think birth control usage should be covered by the ADA, which would be a different story altogether.
Click to expand...

It should be covered by privacy concerns and decency.
 
Denny Crane said:
It should be covered by privacy concerns and decency.
Click to expand...
Decency, sure, no argument there--although I fully understand a faith-based pregnancy-resource-center seeking specifically to hire pro-life employees, which the now-overturned law prevented. But that's not really the question?

The question is, "Should an employer be prohibited from making employment decisions based on information--however it may come--related to contraception and/or abortion?" And the follow-on to that is, what other voluntary choices a prospective employee might make should receive similar protection, or are contraception/abortion a special category of choices?
 
PtldPlatypus said:
The question is, "Should an employer be prohibited from making employment decisions based on information--however it may come--related to contraception and/or abortion?" And the follow-on to that is, what other voluntary choices a prospective employee might make should receive similar protection, or are contraception/abortion a special category of choices?
Click to expand...

Reverse your question and you will have your answer. Should an employer require their employees to be on birth control or require them to abort any pregnancies?
 
MarAzul said:
>>> Yes, I got that.


>>> Some days are better than others.


>>> Nope.


>>>Perhaps you made an assumption?
Click to expand...

lol, because not wanting to rent to children, and being able to evict a woman for being on BC isn't a contradiction.
giphy.gif
 
Well, maybe MarAzul is going to insist that his tenant be on birth control. Probably go into her apt. while she's at work and check the pill supply, if she didn't take it that day he'll tie her up when she gets home and force the pill down her throat.

MarAzul really hates children.

barfo
 
SlyPokerDog said:
Reverse your question and you will have your answer. Should an employer require their employees to be on birth control or require them to abort any pregnancies?
Click to expand...
No, those are completely different concepts. Should an employer be permitted to require its employees to have tattoos? No. But can employer choose not to hire someone because of tattoos? Yes, they can.

You can't conflate prohibition and compulsion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top