Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[wierd]

Health related is murky territory.
(disclosure, works at a nursing home on weekends)

If a patient/resident desires a specific gender or orientation of staff member to provide service, it is the duty of the staff to accomodate this desire, however the care is always strictly of a non-sexual nature.  EG, a female resident is perfectly within her rights to request only female staff assist her with toileting and bathing.

On the other hand, there ARE issues with patients/residents being disgusting perverts. A female aid has every right to refuse to give toiletry and bathing assistance to a letcherous and grabby male patient/resident. (typically, a male staff member will provide these services instead. The services are still given, just not the gender the perverted resident/patient wants to grab)

[Dozebôm Lolumzalìs]

Yeah... some folks just kinda' never turn the TV off. Some of those default to fox, and so...

I have an idea: in high school, BNW should be required reading.

The problem is that they think BNW, 1984, Fahrenheit 451, etc. only apply to the other side.

They're doing it wrong. If you can read the great dystopian novels, and yet feel completely unchanged and more staunch in your belief that you are DEFINITELY ENTIRELY RIGHT and the enemy is VERY BAD PEOPLE... then you didn't actually read them.

[wierd]

Doze:

Doubleplusungood if you read them and go "Huh, all that dystopian control sounds like a good thing! Let's implement it immediately!"

[Rolan7]

I'd be fine with letting businesses exclude people if the business makes that clear to all customers.  Like a health inspection plaque, except intolerance

Seriously, though.  If a gas station owner doesn't serve openly gay people, how would I as a customer have any idea?  (I don't broadcast, maaaybe because I grew up in the South ).  It'd be particularly stealthy for a gas station along the interstate.

It's the same reason canned food has to have nutritional details right on it, and restaurants clearly post their health inspection results for all to see.  Even if the information is technically available somewhere, like online, the consumer has a reasonable right to have it *conveniently* available.

Honestly?  It'd be kinda nice to know which places specifically aren't looking to exclude me.  I have a cool rainbow-flag shirt that I've worn exactly once, in a liberal university town, at a protest.  With this law, at least I'd stop worrying about the gas station I usually shop at.  Maybe I'd be a little less anxious about appearing gay in public, as long as I stay in gay-friendly areas my entire life...  I feel like I'm trying to find a silver lining here, and it's actually just awful.

[Reelya]

Food inspectors are an affront to freedom. If food makes you sick, just don't eat there. Or better yet, start a lawsuit about it.

It's amazing how complex they manage to make a simple thing like making a sandwich, with all the rules and regulations, health inspections etc.

[Dozebôm Lolumzalìs]

Food inspectors are an affront to freedom. If food makes you sick, just don't eat there. Or better yet, start a lawsuit about it.

you missed the /s

[wierd]

People have this really gross and dirty habit of NOT WASHING THEIR HANDS after taking a big deuse in the bathroom.

That is why there are health inspectors.

[Max™]

So they can wash your hands for you!

Nutritional information, btw, is similar to what I was going for with the *generic fake news story*^[unverified] idea.

Does anybody even know what the hell niacin is? I sure don't, but I'm sure you've all seen it at some point on the side of a cereal box some morning as a kid. If it's there you'll be more likely to at least glance over it, so if there's an easy link to show whether something is completely lacking in any sources or has a wide selection of verifiable information related to it, more people will wind up looking at it, right?

[Dozebôm Lolumzalìs]

So they can wash your hands for you!

Nutritional information, btw, is similar to what I was going for with the *generic fake news story*^[unverified] idea.

Does anybody even know what the hell niacin is? I sure don't, but I'm sure you've all seen it at some point on the side of a cereal box some morning as a kid. If it's there you'll be more likely to at least glance over it, so if there's an easy link to show whether something is completely lacking in any sources or has a wide selection of verifiable information related to it, more people will wind up looking at it, right?

Niacin is one of the B vitamins. B2? B3? It's a precursor to NAD, which is necessary for the cellular metabolism. (NAD⁺ and NADH are the oxidized and reduced forms, although I might have accidentally swapped them. This allows protons and electrons to be ferried between reactions, or in other words, NAD⁺ and NADH is a reducer/oxidizer.)

Isn't this common knowledge?

[TheDarkStar]

...and Dozebôm beat me to it.

[Max™]

I vaguely knew that but it was stored in my Jeopardy gland, which doesn't do anything unless I guess at something and it releases a jet of pure trivia. It's a weird feeling, having no confidence in the correctness of an answer which is nonetheless correct.

[scriver]

The more succinct argument is that private businesses aren't allowed to discriminate for the exact same reason the government is not allowed to discriminate: because they provide public service. For better or worse this country is basically capitalist, and as a result our services are derived primarily from private businesses.

Nobody but the most mercury-loving Randroid would suggest that a restaurant has a right to serve rotting meat to its customers because it's a private business, even though a person deciding to eat rotting meat is not illegal. In the exact same way, a person's expectation of equal protection under the law means they cannot be turned away for who they are.

Imagine if, purely for example, an orange Republican who shall remain unnamed privatized the DMV in the name of cutting government spending. The DMV is now a private corporation that takes a government contract to provide transportation administration services. Does this mean that if a very religious person working for DMV LLC holds an honest and convicted belief that God's wrath will be brought against him should he permit women to drive, that his DMV office doesn't have to issue drivers licenses to women and can even put up a sign calling on them to repent and turn in their existing licenses? The only office in twenty miles?

Nobody is being force to provide anything, either. If you don't offer a service, you cannot be compelled to offer that service. But what people need to get through their heads is that the service and the recipients of that service are different things. Offering "traditional wedding cakes" doesn't mean you can opt to say traditional means only opposite-sex couples can have them.

Random thought that hit me when I came to the last sentence - would you day it would be okay to only make "traditional wedding cakes" with a bride and a groom on top?

[Shadowlord]

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ohio-man-charged-threatening-trump-s-life-twitter-n685656

Yeah, that's not the smartest thing to tweet.

Oh man, this means Scott Adams will need to get off Twitter to coordinate his promised Trump assassination plot a couple years from now.

... Wait, I thought he was pro-Trump.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

The more succinct argument is that private businesses aren't allowed to discriminate for the exact same reason the government is not allowed to discriminate: because they provide public service. For better or worse this country is basically capitalist, and as a result our services are derived primarily from private businesses.

Nobody but the most mercury-loving Randroid would suggest that a restaurant has a right to serve rotting meat to its customers because it's a private business, even though a person deciding to eat rotting meat is not illegal. In the exact same way, a person's expectation of equal protection under the law means they cannot be turned away for who they are.

Imagine if, purely for example, an orange Republican who shall remain unnamed privatized the DMV in the name of cutting government spending. The DMV is now a private corporation that takes a government contract to provide transportation administration services. Does this mean that if a very religious person working for DMV LLC holds an honest and convicted belief that God's wrath will be brought against him should he permit women to drive, that his DMV office doesn't have to issue drivers licenses to women and can even put up a sign calling on them to repent and turn in their existing licenses? The only office in twenty miles?

Nobody is being force to provide anything, either. If you don't offer a service, you cannot be compelled to offer that service. But what people need to get through their heads is that the service and the recipients of that service are different things. Offering "traditional wedding cakes" doesn't mean you can opt to say traditional means only opposite-sex couples can have them.

Random thought that hit me when I came to the last sentence - would you day it would be okay to only make "traditional wedding cakes" with a bride and a groom on top?

People who think like you are the reason we need to legalize Deathmatch Courts.

[scriver]

I... I unfortunately don't think I get the reference?