• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should employers have the freedom to hire/fire for any reason they wish[W:126]

should employers have the freedom to hire/fire for any reason

  • yes

    Votes: 59 48.0%

  • no

    Votes: 64 52.0%
  • Total voters
    123
Re: Should employers have the freedom to hire/fire for any reason they wish

What public interest is served through any form of attainder for civil Persons in our republic regarding their natural rights.
 
Re: Should employers have the freedom to hire/fire for any reason they wish

danielpalos said:
What public interest is served through any form of attainder for civil Persons in our republic regarding their natural rights.
Click to expand...

What?
 
Re: Should employers have the freedom to hire/fire for any reason they wish

AGENT J said:
1.) failed deflection 1
2.) failed deflection 2
3.) failed deflection 3
4.) failed deflection 4
5.) 100% false as already proven

let me know when you have any facts to support your failed position that facts, laws and court cases already prove wrong thanks!
Click to expand...


LOL, you haven't proven anything. When you come up with the proof that my experience is a lie, contact me again.
 
Re: Should employers have the freedom to hire/fire for any reason they wish

Tetelestai said:
1.)LOL, you haven't proven anything.
2.)When you come up with the proof that my experience is a lie, contact me again.
Click to expand...


1.) correct "I" havent but facts, laws, rights and court cases do
2.) dont have to prove your experience is a lie, nor did i say it was, again another failed deflection
let me know when this changes, so far you got nothing
 
Re: Should employers have the freedom to hire/fire for any reason they wish

AGENT J said:
1.) correct "I" havent but facts, laws, rights and court cases do
2.) dont have to prove your experience is a lie, nor did i say it was, again another failed deflection
let me know when this changes, so far you got nothing
Click to expand...

Wrong answer. Bye hahahaha
 
Re: Should employers have the freedom to hire/fire for any reason they wish

Fletch said:
FYI, in the future, don't waste your time.
Click to expand...

Yea, I figured that out. I noticed that almost nobody responds to him. But thank you for the heads up.
 
Re: Should employers have the freedom to hire/fire for any reason they wish

Tetelestai said:
Wrong answer. Bye hahahaha
Click to expand...

I accept your concession :shrug:
Facts win again
 
Re: Should employers have the freedom to hire/fire for any reason they wish

Tetelestai said:
:lamo
Click to expand...

thats what i thought, you got nothing

let me know when the laws, rights and facts changes and support you, we' d love to hear it
 
Re: Should employers have the freedom to hire/fire for any reason they wish

Fletch said:
FYI, in the future, don't waste your time.
Click to expand...

awesome one of my fans

do you have any facts that support his claims and prove the facts, laws, rights, and court cases wrong? Id love to hear them
 
Re: Should employers have the freedom to hire/fire for any reason they wish

AGENT J said:
I accept your concession :shrug:
Facts win again
Click to expand...
Facts can be misinterpreted though.

:fueltofir
 
Re: Should employers have the freedom to hire/fire for any reason they wish

:
The Mark said:
Facts can be misinterpreted though.

:fueltofir
Click to expand...
lol ;)

they sure can and i agree:flames
 
Re: Should employers have the freedom to hire/fire for any reason they wish

AGENT J said:
thats what i thought, you got nothing

let me know when the laws, rights and facts changes and support you, we' d love to hear it
Click to expand...

:beatdeadhorse
 
Re: Should employers have the freedom to hire/fire for any reason they wish

Tetelestai said:
:beatdeadhorse
Click to expand...

nothing yet huh?, let me know when you do, we'll be here
 
Re: Should employers have the freedom to hire/fire for any reason they wish

They should be allowed to draft any kind of employment contract they want with any criteria for termination they want. An employer should be free to use their money as they want and an employee should be free to have a contract presented to them to agree too listing reasons for termination. So in essence, yes. However, it should be limited to a mutually agreed upon contract.
 
Re: Should employers have the freedom to hire/fire for any reason they wish

digsbe said:
They should be allowed to draft any kind of employment contract they want with any criteria for termination they want. An employer should be free to use their money as they want and an employee should be free to have a contract presented to them to agree too listing reasons for termination. So in essence, yes. However, it should be limited to a mutually agreed upon contract.
Click to expand...

not sure i understand

this already happens and i support it 100%

Im totally fine with contracts that have moral clauses and conduct clauses etc etc if people sign that then so be it a contract is a contract

but the difference is they still cant illegally discriminante who they offer the job too based on religion, gender, race etc
 
Re: Should employers have the freedom to hire/fire for any reason they wish

AGENT J said:
not sure i understand

this already happens and i support it 100%
Click to expand...

No, it doesn't.

A contract between two parties as described by digsbe would be completely dependent upon the preferences of the actors themselves, and only themselves. As contract law currently stands, regardless of willingness by the parties involved, certain things may not be legally contracted. For example, no matter how much I desired to do so, I could not hire out my labor for less than the minimum wage. The government acts as an interested third party even in cases where the two actors which are physically involved in the contract itself do not want the government involved.

In other words, contracts between two consenting adults must be approved by Uncle Sam before it becomes enforceable. Thus, grey and black market contracts abound.
 
Re: Should employers have the freedom to hire/fire for any reason they wish

TNAR said:
No, it doesn't.

A contract between two parties as described by digsbe would be completely dependent upon the preferences of the actors themselves, and only themselves. As contract law currently stands, regardless of willingness by the parties involved, certain things may not be legally contracted. For example, no matter how much I desired to do so, I could not hire out my labor for less than the minimum wage. The government acts as an interested third party even in cases where the two actors which are physically involved in the contract itself do not want the government involved.

In other words, contracts between two consenting adults must be approved by Uncle Sam before it becomes enforceable. Thus, grey and black market contracts abound.
Click to expand...

weird i believe i said that in my post, the part you left out, but thanks for repeating it and IF thats what digs mean hence my question to him lol

but to address what you said, yes certain things should have to be minimally contracted or protected
 
Re: Should employers have the freedom to hire/fire for any reason they wish

digsbe said:
They should be allowed to draft any kind of employment contract they want with any criteria for termination they want.
Click to expand...

AGENT J said:
but the difference is they still cant illegally discriminante who they offer the job too based on religion, gender, race etc
Click to expand...

These stances are not mutually compatible. If a contract does not specify allowable reasons for termination, then any reason is acceptable. This includes religion, race, gender, odor, appearance, or any other complaint. Illegality is only an issue when the government intrudes as a third party; the argument is to remove government as a third party and make labor contracts a solely immediate agent issue.
 
Re: Should employers have the freedom to hire/fire for any reason they wish

TNAR said:
These stances are not mutually compatible. If a contract does not specify allowable reasons for termination, then any reason is acceptable. This includes religion, race, gender, odor, appearance, or any other complaint. Illegality is only an issue when the government intrudes as a third party; the argument is to remove government as a third party and make labor contracts a solely immediate agent issue.
Click to expand...

hence my question to him and hence me saying what i would support and wouldn't.

also I still support termination clauses based on things but i dont support illegal discrimination on hiring purposes.
WHat do i mean?

I mean if a non-chrisitian wanted to get a job at a christian school, that should ALWAYS be allowed and no discrimination should take place.

But im ok if the working contract says the employee must conduct themselves within chrsitians ways

on a closing note I would NEVER completely remove government, its job is to protect rights and thats what it does

not to mention with no government involved the contract becomes pretty meaningless and worthless how does one protect and enforce the contract without them. No thanks
 
Re: Should employers have the freedom to hire/fire for any reason they wish

I am fairly certain that everyone knows your stance; you have made it very clear. I am not so certain that you have taken even a moment's pause to consider other people's positions.
 
Re: Should employers have the freedom to hire/fire for any reason they wish

TNAR said:
I am fairly certain that everyone knows your stance; you have made it very clear. I am not so certain that you have taken even a moment's pause to consider other people's positions.
Click to expand...

of course i have considered them and nothing has changed for me
i have stated what i dont support, i dont support illegal discrimination or bigotry

I have stated what i do support, i support equal rights and government protecting equal rights

I also asked you a question that you didnt answer, how does one protect and enforce the contract without government 3rd party.

How else would you like me to address your ideas, seems youll only be satisfied if i agree with them, i do not, i like rights
 
Last edited:
Re: Should employers have the freedom to hire/fire for any reason they wish

AGENT J said:
How else would you like me to address your ideas, seems youll only be satisfied if i agree with them, i do not, i like rights
Click to expand...

Your style of debate seems to be one where you ignore the opposition side and simply restate your own position. In this case, it is the position of the status quo. There is no inherent problem with holding your position, but this thread is centered around the pros and cons of being able to hire/fire for any reason whatsoever. By pushing the claim that it is currently illegal makes no meaningful addition to the debate because the illegality itself is central to this issue.

AGENT J said:
I also asked you a question that you didnt answer, how does one protect and enforce the contract without government 3rd party.
Click to expand...

I did not see your question. Apologies.

I mentioned previously in this thread that international trade is a multi-trillion dollar per day industry. There is more at stake in this industry on a daily basis than many industries see in an entire year. That said, the vast majority of conflicts arising within this industry are resolved in private arbitration settlements. Most companies avoid international and national court systems because they are slower, more biased, and more costly than the private alternative. There is absolutely no reason why this should not be the case for individual contract as well.
 
Re: Should employers have the freedom to hire/fire for any reason they wish

TNAR said:
1.)Your style of debate seems to be one where you ignore the opposition side and simply restate your own position. In this case, it is the position of the status quo.
2.) There is no inherent problem with holding your position, but this thread is centered around the pros and cons of being able to hire/fire for any reason whatsoever.
3.)By pushing the claim that it is currently illegal makes no meaningful addition to the debate because the illegality itself is central to this issue.

4.)I did not see your question. Apologies.

5.)I mentioned previously in this thread that international trade is a multi-trillion dollar per day industry. There is more at stake in this industry on a daily basis than many industries see in an entire year. That said, the vast majority of conflicts arising within this industry are resolved in private arbitration settlements. Most companies avoid international and national court systems because they are slower, more biased, and more costly than the private alternative. There is absolutely no reason why this should not be the case for individual contract as well.
Click to expand...

1.) this is another deflection, NOTHING was ignored i simply dont agree and im going with facts and how the law is currently set up, I have no interest in not supporting equal rights. You want me to, i will not. Its REALLY simple actually :shrug:

2.) i see zero pros in illegal discrimination and violating rights

3.) didnt push it, simply said i agree with it and i think its good as is since it protects rights, again the issues seems to be yours. It simply seems since i just dont agree with your position some how thats me not listening or ignoring you. its pretty funny actually, i dont get the logic behind it.

WOuld you like me to say, "oh i see what you want, but i still dont agree" would that make it better? and NO i honestly am not being a smart ass i just dont see a solution to the issue you have

4.) apology accepted and no bigger ive miss my share of questions im sure

5.) again thats nice IF it resolves the issues and the people HAPPEN to agree but what happens when they dont and there is still lawyers there using law for arbitration

anyway im just not sure what you want.

I like the current system and see no benefit of infringing on rights or empowering bigotry and or discrimination. Dont know what you want me to say besides be honest.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom