LOUNGE all new asksnapzu ideasforsnapzu newtribes interesting pics videos funny technology science technews gaming health history worldnews business web research entertainment food living internet socialmedia mobile space sports photography nature animals movies culture travel television finance music celebrities gadgets environment usa crime politics law money justice psychology security cars wtf art google books lifetips bigbrother women apple kids recipes whoa military privacy education facebook medicine computing wildlife design war drugs middleeast diet toplists economy fail violence humor africa microsoft parenting dogs canada neuroscience architecture religion advertising infographics sex journalism disaster software aviation relationships energy booze life japan ukraine newmovies nsa cannabis name Name of the tribe humanrights nasa cute weather gifs discoveries cops futurism football earth dataviz pets guns entrepreneurship fitness android extremeweather fashion insects india northamerica
+39 39 0
Published 11 months ago with 4 Comments

Join the Discussion

  • Auto Tier
  • All
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Post Comment
  • NotWearingPants
    +3

    Just a little compelled and prohibited speech in the name of "social justice".

    • AdelleChattre (edited 11 months ago)
      +2

      Right. Because the big problem in society today is people getting jobs that paid more than their last one. If any. Sure, because labor protections of any kind are really curbs on the liberty of employers. The small business people of the Fortune 50 have a fundamental right to offer dangerous and lethal workplaces, to child labor, and if they can keep them from running off, slaves. That’s the kind of “freedom” this country’’s supposed to be based on, right? What’s this country coming to without the freedom to fire fags for being fags, amirite?

      • NotWearingPants
        +4

        Quite a leap from unconstitutional restrictions on 1A (and probably a 10A argument as well), to "firing fags".

        Creating exceptions to the bill of rights for social policy goals (that half the country either don't support or are actively opposed to) will inevitably turn around and bite you in the ass when the "other side" is in power.

        See: ruling by executive order vs legislation

        dangerous and lethal workplaces

        Did OSHA suddenly disappear?

        to child labor

        Pretty sure we have laws against that.

        slaves

        I know certain parties of the yellow press would like to convince their slowly crumbling viewership/readership that we became a third-world hellhole overnight last November, but their agenda has a somewhat less than passing acquaintance with the truth.

        I'm sure there will be a lawsuit, assuming one hasn't already been filed. Just as I'm sure the 9th Circus will eventually affirm. Then SCOTUS will eventually get around to slapping them down. Again.

        • AdelleChattre
          +2

          Quite a leap

          Oh, wait, so social justice is okay now? Maybe I'd been confused because of so many mixed dogwhistles.

          Did OSHA suddenly disappear?

          So we're good with government regulating commerce?

          Pretty sure we have laws against [child labor]

          Not a problem either? Go social justice, then.

          Creating exceptions to the bill of rights for social policy goals (that half the country either don't support or are actively opposed to) will inevitably turn around and bite you in the ass

          For instance, the abolition of slavery. Comes a time, you take that bite, comes a time you bite back.

          I'm sure there will be a lawsuit

          Of the seven other U.S. jurisdictions where this is already law, I think only Philadelphia's still in court. So what is that, the Third Circus?

Here are some other snaps you may like...