There was an article on Slate a few years ago that I wish I could find again. It was a fictional story about what it was like for a lesbian, with a kid and a wife, going through a day in which businesses were allowed to refuse her service. It’s a slippery slope, guys.
You’re right. I’m a huge advocate for increased political participation. But. There are a lot of people who live in very red states that can have their liberties chipped away and they won’t have much redress because they’re surrounded by so many people that agree that they shouldn’t have those rights. There are a lot of states where abortion is illegal and it’s unlikely they will pass ballot initiatives to reinstate that right they way Ohio just did.
I think more participation and more education could solve all of this though.
No. If the supreme court makes a ruling that is so unpopular that people don’t follow it, then people won’t follow it.
Not the Supreme Court, but cannabis is still a Schedule 1 controlled substance. That didn’t stop states from legalizing it because of how unpopular prohibition is. The federal government knows this, which is why we don’t see massive retaliation against states with legal weed.
Government and its enforcement is way more communal than people realize.
Just like global warming, the consequences for funneling as much money to as few people as possible will not be immediately apparent.
Aviation, military, infrastructure, medicine, agriculture, all of it is going to get worse in subtle ways before we notice how broken they’ve become. People just can’t be expected to care when they’re not being compensated accordingly. The more people who realize that ‘work’ isn’t about supporting society, it’s about serving the ruling class, the more people will slack off because they don’t actually care about the work being done.
Quality is down. Prices are up.
These problems will continue to get worse as long as the disparity in wealth continues to grow.
Actors are off strike? I’m glad they got what they were asking for. The studio’s greed will hurt the whole industry immensely as projects are pushed half a year.
Mostly. Actors will now get residuals based on performance metrics of their shows, rather than based on the subscriber counts of the service itself (which is what the guild was originally fighting for). I think that's fair and good for everyone - actors, studios/services, and customers. Actors get rewarded for successful shows, studios will not have to choose between deleting an existing show from existence or cover residuals that are more than the show is worth, and customers lose less content as a result.
Once of the reasons so many shows have disappeared lately is because a "royalties based on service subscribers" provision existed since the last strike, meaning even shows that aren't successful can cost a service a lot of money to keep around. So instead, they just remove them from existence.
Sorry, are you saying it’s ok for a 22 year old to have sex with a 14 year old? I don’t really think there’s a big different in a 31 year old doing it vs a 22 year old, so I’m not sure that’s really the issue you should have with this article.
Never said that. I said that the title is wrong. Really shows a lack of quality of writing when the title of the article contradicts the article itself
The title doesn’t mention their ages. The subtitle is awkwardly phrased because it gives the student’s age at the time and her age now, but it’s not wrong, and again, I don’t really get why you’re quibbling about that when the point that it was an adult sexually abusing a child stands regardless.
Right after the age of the boy when she did, though. It's awkwardly phrased and misleading. Just because you can justify something by saying "it's not technically wrong" doesn't change that.
Funny how "quit bombing refugee camps and 'safe' passage ways" or "end the apartheid state that encourages Hamas violence" or "stop the Palestinian genocide" or "stop stealing land and homes" are missing from your list, as is "Israel should stop funding Hamas".
Curuous that you don't seem to want to stop the causes, just the reactions to the decades of Israeli barbarity 🤔
It’s a single independent contractor performing a service considered to be bespoke skilled labor. He has no obligation to enter a work contract the same way I can’t force you to clean my gutters. A chow house on the other hand, serves the same food to everyone. There’s no contact to enter, only goods to be purchased.
Not that I personally agree, but per the Supreme Court, probably.
With that said, on what planet would a black person even want some racist bigot working on their teeth?? There’s a huge risk of him being a total piece of shit and doing a terrible or deliberately malicious job.
No one said otherwise, just pointing out why Walmart can’t deny your right to buy a redbull but I have no obligation to fix a computer with a Nazi flag stickers on it.
But our existence is not some kind of political opinion. If a wedding photographer won’t take jobs from interracial couples because he thinks that they sully the white race or some shit it is not really different from the stuff this guy did. And my example would hopefully fall under any anti-discrimnation laws.
I would say no to that because there is a big difference between refusing to work for someone that holds a discriminatory ideology and refusing to work for someone that is some category of human they hate especially if they can’t actually do something about being in that category like with skin colour or being LGBTQ+.
You can’t be tolerant of intolerance if you call yourself tolerant.
That right to refuse work based on your personal ideology has to cut both ways, otherwise those in power get to decide what is a ‘just’ reason for refusal of services and what is an ‘unjust’ reason. If the right group of racists were in power, then I could be legally compelled to perform services for those who are openly hostile towards me, which you yourself seem to intimate would be ‘unjust’
In the same way that I can choose not to take a job at Nestle because of how they treat our freshwater supply, I can also choose not to work on Jimbobs computer because he doesn’t believe the Holocaust happened.
Also ‘systems’ was just a placeholder to clarify I wasn’t selling commodites, sorry for any confusion there.
Are you paying attention? In the first comment of his you replied to, he said: “but I have no obligation to fix a computer with a Nazi flag stickers on it.”
I’m not sure I see how the product of his photography service(however bespoke) is any different from the product of the meal and a place to eat. Everyone at the chow house is arguably getting a bespoke experience as well since there’s more than one seat and presumably you not every meal is going to be prepared in the exact same way and may in fact involve customization like the rarity of a steak or thes submission or removal of ingredients(eg ‘no cheese’).
My understanding is that a business is still allowed to deny service to any singular customer for no explicit reason. It’s the matter of stating and enforcing a policy of discrimination against a protected class.
You can’t force me to clean your gutters, but you also could sue me if I refused to clean your gutters by showing you my policy that I refuse to do business with anyone belonging to whatever protected class you fall under. Because the policy of discrimination is what’s illegal and not the individual act of discrimination itself.
Also, I’m pretty sure purchasing a good still legally qualifies as a form of a contract in tort law. Ofc I am in no way a lawyer so please, anyone, correct me if ive misunderstood here.
The line seems to be based around custom services or requiring artistic impression. Just selling tacos with choice of 5 toppings, can’t discriminate. Selling tacos with custom designs on the tortillas, can discriminate.
news
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.