I do not respect discrimination based on what you chose to put in your body. That is absolute tyranny. Get a lethal injection or go work somewhere else. How can you respect that?
Unfortunately they are allowed to test for drugs that can inhibit your ability to do your job but they still are not allowed to inquire about vax status by law although I see what you are trying to illustrate with your example it is an apples to oranges comparison
To tell a business not to discriminate is not tyrannical. It has been a law for almost a century. You can still chose not to hire or keep someone employed for a myriad of reasons. What they chose to do with their body (which is none of an employers business by already existing laws) is not one of them and NEVER should be.
Fuck that. Some guy that worked for a business for 25 or 30 years, and is 5 years from retirement, shouldn’t lose his job because he won’t get shot up with a ‘vaccine’.
No. It is a violation of our constitution and against human rights. She should not be okay with this. I would expect a governor to defend a persons human rights. Freedom is acceptable unless it does harm i.e. no one has the freedom to simply shoot people cause they want to or mandate you go through a surgery
You respect her 'decision' to allow corporations to destroy the lives of private citizens who now will no longer be able to afford independence.
Maybe I'm too harsh on you - you're a Brit. I wouldn't expect you to understand what my ancestors fought and died to achieve. One day, I promise you, that you will understand when you see it.
The earth is given as a common stock for man to labor and live on. If for the encouragement of industry we allow it to be appropriated, we must take care that other employment be provided to those excluded from the appropriation. If we do not, the fundamental right to labor the earth returns to the unemployed... It is not too soon to provide by every possible means that as few as possible shall be without a little portion of land. The small landholders are the most precious part of a state. - Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 28 October, 1785.
Think carefully about the concept; the fundamental right to labor the earth. It is the fundamental right of man to work. In stripping anyone of their right to work, you impose upon them a breed of tyranny that rips away their fundamental rights. Our natural state - is for men to work.
What you're suggesting as a counter-argument is, in essence, the same thing as simply arguing that people must be vaccinated to labor - in opposition to the argument that people must be vaccinated to labor. In other words - a logical fallacy.
All men that can and will work, should and shall. Any mandate put in place to prevent them from working based on any aspect of their identity, is a violation of their fundamental rights. It really is that simple.
Businesses do not get the right to make policy that is not reflective of existing law. Noam says the legislation is a slippery slope. In other words, why make law when it has always been the right of the individual to decide for themselves. A business cannot lawfully mandate this for several reasons. It is a slippery slope. If anything, the legislation should be banning vaxxine passports.
I respect her decision.
What she is actually saying is that businesses should choose for themselves and not be told what to do by the authorities.
Isn't that what we want, freedom of choice? The same applies to business owners.
If they lose workers and their business fails, well that was their choice.
I do not respect discrimination based on what you chose to put in your body. That is absolute tyranny. Get a lethal injection or go work somewhere else. How can you respect that?
Recreational opioids are okay?
Since you want to be a smartass - inject heroin into your eyeball, or you're fucking fired.
Wow.😂
Unfortunately they are allowed to test for drugs that can inhibit your ability to do your job but they still are not allowed to inquire about vax status by law although I see what you are trying to illustrate with your example it is an apples to oranges comparison
To tell a business not to discriminate is not tyrannical. It has been a law for almost a century. You can still chose not to hire or keep someone employed for a myriad of reasons. What they chose to do with their body (which is none of an employers business by already existing laws) is not one of them and NEVER should be.
Fuck that. Some guy that worked for a business for 25 or 30 years, and is 5 years from retirement, shouldn’t lose his job because he won’t get shot up with a ‘vaccine’.
I'm done with 'libertarians.'
Our Founding Fathers would have tarred and feathered them, and sent them back to England for treason.
No. It is a violation of our constitution and against human rights. She should not be okay with this. I would expect a governor to defend a persons human rights. Freedom is acceptable unless it does harm i.e. no one has the freedom to simply shoot people cause they want to or mandate you go through a surgery
You respect her 'decision' to allow corporations to destroy the lives of private citizens who now will no longer be able to afford independence.
Maybe I'm too harsh on you - you're a Brit. I wouldn't expect you to understand what my ancestors fought and died to achieve. One day, I promise you, that you will understand when you see it.
It has nothing to do with being a Brit. If I wasn't concerned about what's going on or willing to fight for freedom, I wouldn't be on here would I?
I'm not saying it's right that a company should be allowed to discriminate. All this tyranny boils my piss as much as it does yours.
However, that is something that a court should decide based on existing discrimination laws.
What if a Governor mandated that companies were only allowed to hire trans or blacks? Is that something a Governor should do?
Do you see yet what she means with slippery slope?
Think carefully about the concept; the fundamental right to labor the earth. It is the fundamental right of man to work. In stripping anyone of their right to work, you impose upon them a breed of tyranny that rips away their fundamental rights. Our natural state - is for men to work.
What you're suggesting as a counter-argument is, in essence, the same thing as simply arguing that people must be vaccinated to labor - in opposition to the argument that people must be vaccinated to labor. In other words - a logical fallacy.
All men that can and will work, should and shall. Any mandate put in place to prevent them from working based on any aspect of their identity, is a violation of their fundamental rights. It really is that simple.
Well you can formulate an argument if you want but in essence, if you read what I wrote, we do not disagree.
I also believe it is a violation of fundamental rights.
However, business owners also have the right to employ who they want.
Hence why I say it should be addressed in a court of law.
Businesses do not get the right to make policy that is not reflective of existing law. Noam says the legislation is a slippery slope. In other words, why make law when it has always been the right of the individual to decide for themselves. A business cannot lawfully mandate this for several reasons. It is a slippery slope. If anything, the legislation should be banning vaxxine passports.