Page 8 of 21 FirstFirst ... 67891018 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 204

Thread: Fischer: God ‘designed’ women to be secretaries so it’s OK to discriminate on gender

  1. #71
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    US, California - federalist
    Last Seen
    11-12-16 @ 10:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,485

    Re: Religious Objection to Minimum Wage

    Quote Originally Posted by BobbyO View Post
    The are not imposing their morals on anyone.
    It seems like a denial and disparagement of secular and temporal, privileges and immunities, merely on the basis of the Owners privately held beliefs and subjective value of morals.

  2. #72
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Colorado mountains
    Last Seen
    01-03-15 @ 08:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,729

    Re: Religious Objection to Minimum Wage

    Quote Originally Posted by BobbyO View Post
    The are not imposing their morals on anyone.
    You do not present any compelling arguments ... you merely offer your unexplained opinions.
    You gotta do better than that here pal.

  3. #73
    Student
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    05-15-16 @ 11:22 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    279

    Re: Religious Objection to Minimum Wage

    Quote Originally Posted by danielpalos View Post
    It seems like a denial and disparagement of secular and temporal, privileges and immunities, merely on the basis of the Owners privately held beliefs and subjective value of morals.
    "merely"?

  4. #74
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Colorado mountains
    Last Seen
    01-03-15 @ 08:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,729

    Re: Religious Objection to Minimum Wage

    Quote Originally Posted by BobbyO View Post
    "merely"?
    Merely.

  5. #75
    Student
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    05-15-16 @ 11:22 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    279

    Re: Religious Objection to Minimum Wage

    Quote Originally Posted by Buck Ewer View Post
    You do not present any compelling arguments ... you merely offer your unexplained opinions.
    You gotta do better than that here pal.
    I have. "Congress shall make no law.. nor prohibiting the free exercise.." of religion.

  6. #76
    Student
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    05-15-16 @ 11:22 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    279

    Re: Religious Objection to Minimum Wage

    Quote Originally Posted by Buck Ewer View Post
    Merely.
    Not very compelling. Seems like "denial and disparagement" based merely upon the "owners" "secular and temporal" "privately held beliefs and subjective value of morals"

  7. #77
    Dorset Patriot
    Wessexman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Sydney, Australia(but my heart is back in Dorset.)
    Last Seen
    10-17-17 @ 04:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    8,468

    Re: Religious Objection to Minimum Wage

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    Fischer: God ‘designed’ women to be secretaries so it’s OK to discriminate on gender | The Raw Story

    This is not actually the main point of the article but I bring it up, as well as the discrimination also mentioned in the article, about the potential Hobby Lobby decision. So I throw out the question, can someone use their "religious objection" to discrimination laws and minimum wage laws to excuse themselves from having to comply with these laws? Similar to how Hobby Lobby is arguing that its religious objections should be grounds to excuse them from following the part of the ACA which defines what minimum coverage is.
    I agree you cannot have an indefinite amount of individuals all claiming rights based on diverse metaphysical positions that may conflict with each other.

    Where I disagree is the singling out of religion and the idea there is such a thing as a neutral secularism. In the end all questions of truth, morals, rights, duties, values, and the like must be based on a worldview, a metaphysic; and I can't see why non-religious worldviews are less controversial or more neutral.

    A Danish minister recently claimed that animal rights come before religion, for example. But I can't understand why the animal rights doctrine being proclaimed is in any sense less contentious and, ultimately, metaphysical, than religious ethics.

    It is my understanding that in recent decades in US first amendment interpretation it has become standard to differentiate religious beliefs, on say ethics, and secular ones that are equally contentious (for example, humanistic accounts of human morality). I can't understand how this distinction can be made to make sense. It seems to me just an obscurantist attempt to evade the point I have been making in this post.
    Last edited by Wessexman; 03-29-14 at 02:09 AM.
    "It is written in the eternal constitution that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters." - Edmund Burke

  8. #78
    Anti political parties
    FreedomFromAll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    New Mexico USA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 03:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,040

    Re: Religious Objection to Minimum Wage

    Quote Originally Posted by maquiscat View Post
    Except that you believe that employees should provide things to employees that are against the employers beliefs. Therefore you are forcing your beliefs upon them. No you aren't forcing them to believe what you believe, just to practice it.
    I did nothing of the sorts. Please quot where I said anything remotely like that?

    I specifically laid out my argument for secular government. I included atheism as person 3 (which includes other beliefs not just the lack of a belief, like atheism)


    When a employer hires a employee they have in fact hired a member of the American public. The employer doesnt get to pick and chose what rights a member of the public has just because they are paying them money to do some work. If the employer offers benefits to their employees they offer it to all of their employees.
    When the employer dictates what insurance coverage the employee is getting they are trying to tell another business what to do. Their problem should be with the insurance company. They have the ability to shop around for different insurance companies. If they all are offering what turns out to religiously taboo to the employer then tough titty. Perhaps the employer should not be in business if they cant go against their religion in such circumstances? I mean they want the world to bend to their religious beliefs, talk about forcing they want to force their employees to follow the employers beliefs exclusively or get a different job. I bet such companies dont last long with such business plans.

  9. #79
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Colorado mountains
    Last Seen
    01-03-15 @ 08:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,729

    Re: Religious Objection to Minimum Wage

    Quote Originally Posted by BobbyO View Post
    I have. "Congress shall make no law.. nor prohibiting the free exercise.." of religion.
    Leaving out the first clause of the amendment does not a compelling argument make.
    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
    Exempting the law to accommodate one groups dogmatic conviction over the dogmatic convictions of all others is tantamount to the establishment of a state condoned religious dogma and applying said dogma to those who do not hold those convictions.
    Unconstitutional.
    Allow me to put this in another context you may understand;
    Let's say My religion states that no medical intervention should ever be applied to the treatment of cancer because cancer is really demonic possession and all cancers should only be treated with prayer and exorcism. I firmly believe that if I contribute to any medical care for cancer that I would burn in hell and it would be against my religious freedom to be asked to do so.
    Should I as the owner of a corporation be granted an exemption for paying for any medical coverage for the treatment of any cancer with all of my employees, based solely on my personal dogmatic convictions about the manner in which this specific disease should be treated within MY religion?
    Last edited by Buck Ewer; 03-29-14 at 02:53 AM.

  10. #80
    Dorset Patriot
    Wessexman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Sydney, Australia(but my heart is back in Dorset.)
    Last Seen
    10-17-17 @ 04:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    8,468

    Re: Religious Objection to Minimum Wage

    Quote Originally Posted by Buck Ewer View Post
    Leaving out the first clause of the amendment does not a compelling argument make.

    Exempting the law to accommodate one groups dogmatic conviction over the dogmatic convictions of all others is tantamount to the establishment of a state condoned religious dogma and applying said dogma to those who do not hold those convictions.
    Unconstitutional.
    Allow me to put this in another context you may understand;
    Let's say My religion states that no medical intervention should ever be applied to the treatment of cancer because cancer is really demonic possession and all cancers should only be treated with prayer and exorcism. I firmly believe that if I contribute to any medical care for cancer that I would burn in hell and it would be against my religious freedom to do so.
    Should I as the owner of a corporation be granted an exemption for paying for any medical coverage for the treatment of any cancer with all of my employees, based solely on my personal dogmatic convictions about the manner in which this specific disease should be treated within MY religion?
    Call these views dogmatic, normative, metaphysical, philosophical, religious, or whatever, but, even if we leave out extreme sceptical beliefs and the like (which one cannot consistently hold and live what we take to be a normal, functioning human existence), I just can't see how there can be a neutral position that isn't shot through with the views you call dogmatic.

    I touched on this above. One dogma will always be preferred by state action. All talk of rights is, in your parlance, dogmatic and cannot see how it could be otherwise.
    Last edited by Wessexman; 03-29-14 at 02:56 AM.
    "It is written in the eternal constitution that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters." - Edmund Burke

Page 8 of 21 FirstFirst ... 67891018 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •