You smoke? You're fired!

Tony said:
It doesn't?

So a business can force you to convert to a religion and not speak your mind? 1st amendment.

A business can force you to give up your guns? 2nd amendment.

A business can quarter it's soliders, against your will, at your house? 3rd amendment.

A business can serach your house and your property without a warrent? 4th amendment.

A business can compell you to implicate yourself in a crime? 5th amendment.

A business can delay justice and your day in court? 6th amendment.

A business can prevent you from voting?
Click to expand...

No, it can't. And this business isn't preventing people from smoking. It's only refusing to keep on people who smoke as employees.
 
Tony said:
Now you're contradicting yourself.
Click to expand...

No, I'm not. You only wish I were.

According to you, it's a voluntary arrangement, those other employees don't have to do anything.
Click to expand...

That's right; they don't. But if they don't, production suffers. One of those three things is going to happen; there's just no other option.

The thing about a psuedo-libertarian dictatorship was in response to your statement regarding congressional genocide. Keep up.
Click to expand...

I never said anything about "congressional genocide." Stop lying. I was making a parody of how Congress exempts itself from laws. But keep it up; you only show how desperate you're becoming.
 
Tony said:
I can come up with a rebuttal, all you say in response to it would be more theory and dogma. Ultimately, talking with you is as wasteful as talking to a fundie. Neither of you are prepared to think outside your self imposed box.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately I would agree here. Shanek I do like you and I don't think I have ever said an insulting word to you on these forums so please don't take my agreement here as an insult. I really do believe though that you are caught up in libertarian theory and dogma to the point that real world examples of it not working aren't taken into account.

A business can serach your house and your property without a warrent? 4th amendment.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately this is what is being argued for. Regulating private behavior and searching the employee's body to enforce the regulation. Arguing that the employee voluntarily gives up this right as if there were no coercion involved.

It is indeed a sad day to see libertarians arguing in favor of such a position. Libertarians were supposed to be the great hope of liberty lovers and it appears they have become unwitting advocates of corporate fascism under the dilusion the typical employee and employer have equal power in negotiating favorable contract terms.
 
shanek said:
No, it can't.
Click to expand...

So a business DOES have to respect the constitutional rights of their employees. Thank you.

And this business isn't preventing people from smoking. It's only refusing to keep on people who smoke as employees.
Click to expand...

Umm, they don't smoke as employees. They smoke as free people on their own time on their own property.
 
username said:
Unfortunately this is what is being argued for. Regulating private behavior and searching the employee's body to enforce the regulation. Arguing that the employee voluntarily gives up this right as if there were no coercion involved.
Click to expand...

There isn't. Either side has the right to terminate their voluntary agreement for whatever reason they choose, absent a contract stating otherwise. Nothing is being coerced.
 
Nyarlathotep said:
So in other words, in libertarian-land my employer CAN tap my phone and monitor my home e-mails.
Click to expand...

No, they can't, because that's your property.
 
shanek said:
No, I'm not. You only wish I were.
Click to expand...

Yes you are, I demonstrated how you were.

That's right; they don't. But if they don't, production suffers. One of those three things is going to happen; there's just no other option.
Click to expand...

Ok, since the employees don't have to work harder and an employee doesn't have to work on his day off, production suffers.

I never said anything about "congressional genocide." Stop lying.
Click to expand...

That's not a lie, I got you wrong. Sorry.

I was making a parody of how Congress exempts itself from laws.
Click to expand...

Got it.

But keep it up; you only show how desperate you're becoming.
Click to expand...

Believe that if it makes you feel better. Meanwhile, I'll laugh at your fundamentalism.
 
shanek said:
No, they can't, because that's your property.
Click to expand...

Okay, thanks for clarifying because your first repsonse made it sound like they could.

In that case isn't my blood every bit as much my property as my private communications from home?
 
Nyarlathotep said:
So in other words, in libertarian-land my employer CAN tap my phone and monitor my home e-mails.

Yow.
Click to expand...

It's neo-feudalism.
 
shanek said:
There isn't. Either side has the right to terminate their voluntary agreement for whatever reason they choose, absent a contract stating otherwise. Nothing is being coerced.
Click to expand...

See what I'm talking about, username. He ALWAYS reverts back to his dogma, he refuses to think.
 
'Dogma' being Tonyspeak for inconvenient facts...like the fact that Tony *did*bring up the courts in this thread, and was wrong about Shanek's quote, and unable to produce evidence that there is a legal or Constitutional right to force employers to hire smokers.


And for his next trick he will pronounce himself abused by all of these demands for evidence, and run away in a flurry of ad homs.

:rolleyes:
 
shanek said:
There isn't. Either side has the right to terminate their voluntary agreement for whatever reason they choose, absent a contract stating otherwise. Nothing is being coerced.
Click to expand...

OK,

If an employer were to tell me that my employment would be terminated unless I agreed to include unlimited sex as part of the deal would you support the *legal* right of the employer to even suggest those terms?
 
What is so hard about sticking to the facts?

This is about smoking, not sex.

I tried to get you to keep it on the level of opinions on how things ought to be ideally, but you, like Tony, wanted to to trump up this proclaimed Constitutional right, and invented legal restrictions of an employer's refusing to hire smokers.

Where are these laws and these cases that support your assertions about *smoking*?
 
Tony said:
See what I'm talking about, username. He ALWAYS reverts back to his dogma, he refuses to think.
Click to expand...

I agree, this is going back to dogma. The same dogma I used to preach until I realized the world this dogma creates isn't one anybody would actually want to live in.

Let's hold to an ideological theory and keep it pure even if it means that we can get fired for picking our nose in our car and we have to routinely submit to fingernail scrapings to determine if there is any mucus present under them.

Let's wait for a tight employment market and have to agree to give our firstborn to the CEO as a sex worker in order to retain employment. It would be a voluntary contract between 2 equals with no coercion involved right? I mean, I could just leave. No pressure.
 
shanek said:
Funny; every time I had such benefits, they always cost 2-3 times as much as I could get on my own. Of course, they covered things such as chiropractic...
Click to expand...
Well, there's proof that you live in an alternative universe. I am self-employed and my insurance is 3+ times what a group policy would cost - much as Nyarlathotep's experience. I just don't believe your assertion, shanek.
 
" I realized the world this dogma creates isn't one anybody would actually want to live in. "


Sorry, all I could hear was your 'WOO WOO WOO WOO WOO WOO WOO WOO WOO WOO WOO WOO WOO WOO WOO WOO!!!'

Did you say something useful in the middle of that?
 
username said:

Let's wait for a tight employment market and have to agree to give our firstborn to the CEO as a sex worker in order to retain employment. It would be a voluntary contract between 2 equals with no coercion involved right? I mean, I could just leave. No pressure.
Click to expand...

Wrong!

What you just described is coercion :confused:


Come again?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom