|
|
Post by bertokhadafi on Feb 3, 2009 0:17:06 GMT -5
Was this even a problem that would require more legislation? I've heard people say to me that women make less then men but I've always observed that there were less women aggressively seeking raises from their employers. Anytime I've gotten more money was because I asked. If you don't demand more pay you don't get it. Plus every person since the abolishion of slavery has had the right to quit a job that they didn't feel treated them fairly. Will this lead to a more subservient working class when future generations are taught that the way to get what they want in fair treatment is to petition the government instead of the boycotts and strikes of the past. Will a nanny state rob the men and women of the future of the realization of their own potential power the way an overprotective parent robs that of a sheltered child?
This as all discrimination based laws are a discouragement for indavidual thought and action, As I pointed out in the other thread the Smoking bans limits from the indavidual the ability to make his/her own choice in whether or not to go to a resturarnt/bar that they feel is bad for their health because of the cigarette smoke. We are breeding a new type of human that will be less and less able to make decisions for themselves and to act on their own behalf. We are moving towards total dependance on the state. Every gun law will move us towards dependance on government for defence.
|
|
|
|
Post by Flashy Ross on Feb 3, 2009 9:54:39 GMT -5
I just downloaded the new Lily Allen.
|
|
Razberry
HOT DOGS??!
Let's go Pens! :)
Posts: 968
|
Post by Razberry on Feb 3, 2009 12:52:33 GMT -5
I just downloaded the new Lily Allen. There's a new one!? I hate to love her. |
|
AJ_
Newbie
Posts: 78
|
Post by AJ_ on Feb 3, 2009 16:55:51 GMT -5
Hey look the little baby wants attention again
|
|
|
|
Post by eskimusic on Feb 3, 2009 17:26:00 GMT -5
Berto you are absolutely right
|
|
|
|
Post by bertokhadafi on Feb 3, 2009 19:24:12 GMT -5
Hey look the little baby wants attention again I started a topic on a message board. What about that do you find objectionable? Idiot. |
|
|
|
Post by bertokhadafi on Feb 3, 2009 19:39:45 GMT -5
Hey look the little baby wants attention again And do you actually disagree with what I said. I seriously doubt you have the intelligence to have formed an opinion on the subject. |
|
|
|
Post by Flashy Ross on Feb 3, 2009 21:03:55 GMT -5
Hey look the little baby wants attention again And do you actually disagree with what I said. I seriously doubt you have the intelligence to have formed an opinion on the subject. You're the last person on earth who should question someone's intelligence. |
|
|
|
Post by bertokhadafi on Feb 3, 2009 21:27:37 GMT -5
Nobody else here has a real opinion on this? I am amongst the last thinkers in this city.
|
|
|
|
Post by bingosherlock on Feb 4, 2009 11:43:48 GMT -5
I am very cautious about any legislation which makes it the government's job to determine what constitutes something as murky as discriminatory wages. It doesn't seem like the sort of thing that I would trust a bunch of lackwits like congress with.
However, this act doesn't do anything to change anything other than change the statute of limitations for seeking damages from discrimination. That's really a pretty benign act of congress as it does nothing to redefine discrimination nor the damages owed to those discriminated against.
To liken this to football, it's like doing away with the rule that says that challenges must be presented before play resumes. Only instead of having an effect on a sporting event, it has an effect on the the paychecks of everybody that has ever been victim of workforce discrimination.
|
|
|
|
Post by bertokhadafi on Feb 4, 2009 12:04:05 GMT -5
should no employment lays be legislated by the govt? should people be allowed to discriminate based on race when hiring? your argument makes no sense, other than including a nice, sexist generalization at the beginning ("but I've always observed that there were less women aggressively seeking raises from their employers"). Of course you should be allowed to discriminate on race when hiring. It's your money you can spend it however you want to. Thats what freedom is. And others have the right to boycott your business if the practices offend them. Thats how a free country works. Now please tell me how my statement was sexist. In my understanding something is sexist if it implies some sort of inborn inequality between one sex and another. Observing actions which may be influenced by culture is not sexist. Or have you never noticed that more women tend to engage in certian behavior and more men engaging in other behaviour. I've also observed more blacks saying "yo Nigga" and more people from India speaking Hindu . Does that make me racist? If your someone who doesn't speak up for themselves at work man or woman than you don't deserve a fucking raise and should not complain about not getting one. One would be better off to stay the fuck home and bake cookies! |
|
|
|
Post by bertokhadafi on Feb 4, 2009 12:49:39 GMT -5
I'm glad that you demonstrated the true fascistic tendncies of modern liberalism. Completely opposed to even the most basic freedoms like the right to spend your money the way you want. Should people be allowed to even think un P.C. thoughts? If you really can't see the difference between hiring who you want with your own money which violates nobody elses rights and harms none and denying someone the right to be alive than you are a true fucking idiot. There was no generalization. I specifically said many women not all women. And since it is likely cultural that any women act less aggressively than it doesn't strike at the core of womanhood at all. people tend to act the way they are raised . Many don't. Go observe people and tell me that men and women don't act differently in many ways. You would probably only notice the many ways that they do because you have your head so far up your ass but its true. What was sexist about it? It was directed at men AND women who would not speak up for themselves at work. |
|
|
|
Post by bertokhadafi on Feb 4, 2009 14:32:39 GMT -5
I'm glad that you demonstrated the true fascistic tendncies of modern liberalism. Completely opposed to even the most basic freedoms like the right to spend your money the way you want. Should people be allowed to even think un P.C. thoughts? If you really can't see the difference between hiring who you want with your own money which violates nobody elses rights and harms none and denying someone the right to be alive than you are a true fucking idiot. please explain to me how not hiring someone based solely on their race does not violate their "rights". also, please let me know exactly what you consider to be "rights". finally, simply question: do you find racism socially acceptable? Depends on what your idea of "Rights is". I've always learned that one's rights ends where another begins. You don't have the right to be given a job because the money that is being spent on employing you belongs to another person or organization. How can one have a right that interferes with the right of another to spend their money as they see fit. Nobody owes another a job. Your labor is a product that you sell and the price is between the seller and the buyer. The idea that you can buy the things including someone's labor from wherever you want for whatever reason floats your boat without intervention from the state is pretty essential for a nation that seeks to define itself as free. Race is an illusion. If someone makes a racist comment I might find it funny if its understood to be poking fun at the illusion or a cultural reality which has nothing to do with race. If someone is really racist that is really their own problem. |
|
AJ_
Newbie
Posts: 78
|
Post by AJ_ on Feb 4, 2009 18:09:34 GMT -5
melba stop giving him what he wants
he is a fucking troll
|
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 5, 2009 11:38:11 GMT -5
melba stop giving him what he wants he is a fucking troll he actually puts together arguments and thoughts. while they may be batshit crazy 98% of the time, he at least expresses a point and tries to support it. |
|
