Adelaide (09-18-2017),Green Arrow (09-19-2017)
Green Arrow (09-19-2017)
Last edited by DGUtley; 09-18-2017 at 03:26 PM.
Any time you give a man something he doesn't earn, you cheapen him. Our kids earn what they get, and that includes respect. -- Woody Hayes
Green Arrow (09-19-2017),Nicole (09-18-2017)
So women should put their job before having children? Or quit to have children and stay home once they are pregnant or having delivered?
Should employers be permitted not to hire women unless they commit to not getting pregnant?
My last question to cletus, to you as well. Also, should women be excluded from taking those jobs?
Why would you assume that?
Look at it this way... an employer hires a woman in a critical position. She gets pregnant and suddenly he finds himself without her. He can't replace her because he has to hold the position for her. That means hiring a temporary replacement, who will eventually be fired through no fault of his or her own or he tries to get by without the slot being filled. Then, when she does come back, there are all the issues of dealing with a newborn the EMPLOYER has to deal with. Increased absenteeism, juggling schedules... It places an unfair burden on the employer.
If he wants to do that in order to retain the employee, that is fine. It is his choice, but to FORCE him to do so is plain wrong.
Well, they don't exactly have the greatest track record when it comes to doing the right thing, do they?The legislative branch has decided differently.
“Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue.” - Barry Goldwater
Cthulhu (09-18-2017),MisterVeritis (09-19-2017)
That is between them and their employer. If he wants them back and is willing to work around their schedule, more power to them. However, if he is not willing to do so, he shouldn't be required to do so.
If that is a something the employer wants as a condition of employment, he should be able to make it one. If the woman doesn't like it, she can look for a different job and a different employer.Should employers be permitted not to hire women unless they commit to not getting pregnant?
Since when did people start believing they have a RIGHT to a particular job?
What jobs?My last question to cletus, to you as well. Also, should women be excluded from taking those jobs?
The employer starts a business for HIS benefit. If the employee is of no benefit to him, he shouldn't have to retain her or him if a male creates a similar situation.
Last edited by Cletus; 09-18-2017 at 04:11 PM.
“Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue.” - Barry Goldwater
Cthulhu (09-18-2017),MisterVeritis (09-19-2017)
Except that a police department is a public institution, not a business. The PD sees fit to make allowances for people with illnesses, but discriminates against female officers with a specific physical need to pump the milk that is naturally being produced, and if it's not pumped results in excruciating pain and potential health problems. Not accommodating such physical conditions should be and is against public policy as it would otherwise lead to some women choosing not to have children. With inverse population growth, discouraging working women from having children is incompatible with the national goal of sustainable population levels.
In quoting my post, you affirm and agree that you have not been goaded, provoked, emotionally manipulated or otherwise coerced into responding.
"The difference between what we do and what we are capable of doing would suffice to solve most of the world’s problems.”
Mahatma Gandhi
Green Arrow (09-19-2017),Nicole (09-18-2017)
“Conscientiously believing that the proper condition of the negro is slavery, or a complete subjection to the white man, and entertaining the belief that the day is not distant when the old Union will be restored with slavery nationally declared to be the proper condition of all of African descent, and in view of the future harmony and progress of all the States of America, I have been induced to issue this address, so that there may be no misunderstanding in the future”
- Jefferson Davis