|
Attn: VivianC | by Ravenlock | 2006-11-19 12:55:59 |
|
Close Enough | by VivianC | 2005-10-06 09:58:54 |
|
unrelated. please discuss the topic at hand. | by unjust | 2005-10-06 10:27:23 |
| I have no idea of the parameters anymore |
by VivianC |
2005-10-06 11:28:39 |
Can someone please tell me what I am supposed to be discussing? I made a comment yesterday that despite what Planned Parenthood said on their website that a pro-lifer walking into an abortion clinic asking about a job would get about the same welcome as John Wayne Gacy would get if he walked into the YMCA and asked for a job as a camp counselor. Sure, you might smile and give him an application but there was no way he would get the job. BloodyViking then said there was no way PP would violate their policy and told me to prove it. So I found a case where PP not only violated their policy but also the law. They even paid the victim to go away. That was what I was responding to and I feel that I met my goal.
I know Raven asked several questions and I did not respond to all of them. Others are talking about them and if I feel the need to add (or subtract) anything, I will.
Back to the original discussion, I still believe that an organization has the right to hire whoever they want. If you are a religious organization, you are free to limit your membership to religious people, however you define that. Block grants should not exclude groups based on their faith.
Freedom is messy. Either everyone gets it or no one does. If I am told I am free to have my faith as long as I act like everyone else, where is the freedom? |
|
[ Reply ] |
|
Well, you clearly have some idea... | by Ravenlock | 2005-10-06 12:56:36 |
|
I really more for freedom of association. | by VivianC | 2005-10-06 14:46:03 |
|
Now, that's just snarky. | by Ravenlock | 2005-10-06 15:17:48 |
|
Wrong. | by BloodyViking | 2005-10-06 13:05:44 |
|
You have to acknowledge, though... | by esbita | 2005-10-06 13:11:17 |
|
nor any repuatable news agency | by unjust | 2005-10-06 13:20:38 |
|
Internal HR decision, huh? | by esbita | 2005-10-06 13:27:07 |
|
policy != decision on one person. | by unjust | 2005-10-06 13:50:20 |
|
So if they do that to 100 pro-lifers it would be | by bara | 2005-10-06 14:23:08 |
|
they don't that has been shown | by unjust | 2005-10-06 14:30:20 |
|
Trolling? | by bara | 2005-10-06 14:53:13 |
|
No. Making it policy makes it policy. | by BloodyViking | 2005-10-06 14:31:46 |
|
Under that assumption | by bara | 2005-10-06 14:46:33 |
|
no. | by unjust | 2005-10-06 14:51:45 |
|
Way to avoid the subject at hand | by bara | 2005-10-06 14:57:30 |
|
??? what kind of crack???? | by unjust | 2005-10-06 15:01:56 |
|
No. The policy is the policy. The Behavior | by BloodyViking | 2005-10-06 15:06:25 |
|
That kind of depends on | by BloodyViking | 2005-10-06 13:39:21 |
