Lao Tse
Verified User
What policy of ron paul's are you against, darla? Can you name one?
Ron Paul to have full-page ad in USA Today
- Thread starter ironhead
- Start date
What policy of ron paul's are you against, darla? Can you name one?
Socrtease
Verified User
And this is where he and I have a HUGE disagreement. The Ninth Amendment of the Constitution says "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." This says there are other rights retained and protected by the Constitution that belong to the people. The Right to privacy is absolutely one of these. The Right to Contract, be it for services or marriage is also one. My problem with righties like Paul is they purposely ignore the 9th amendment so much so that it has almost become a truism.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
There is no right of contract. No one has the "right" to give you a contract that says you're their slave for life or else you're fired and blackballed for life. Such contract would, rightfully so, be rendered null and void by any court.
"Right to contract" is just a way conservatives wanted to get around the minimum wage.
Socrtease
Verified User
Sure they have the right to give you a contract that says that. And you have a right to reject it. I don't know if you know what a contract is but its legal definition is offer, acceptance and consideration. If I offer you a job at 12 dollars and hour and you accept it and start to work and I don't pay you according to that contract you have the right to sue me for breach. So if I don't pay you or I pay you 7 dollars an hour you have a cause of action. You and I have a RIGHT TO CONTRACT that no one can interfere in unless our agreement is for something that violates public policy like sex for hire or contract murder. But to say that there is no right to contract is crazy talk. And it is NOT just used to get around minimum wage.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
Yeah. All the workers will now "voluntarily" give up their right to minimum wage. Otherwise, there's no jobs for you! Corporate profits galore! Gosh, it makes me blush, just thinking about it.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
Involuntary servitude. Someone can't just sneak a provision in there that forces you to work for them for life. EULA that basically take away all consumer rights and are given on a take-it-or-leave it way with little ethical sense are also basically null and void. That's a good thing. The state can render certain contracts null and void, and that prevents exploitation.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
I mean, most EULA's have blanket provisions like "If this software destroys the computer, you cannot seek damages, cannot sue, and cannot pursue criminal charges". That's in ALL software. So, unless you don't want to use software, "right to contract" would basically make it impossible for anyone anywhere to sue a software maker. Yay profits!
Socrtease
Verified User
A contract that made someone give up their right to minimum wage would be void as violative of public policy, and why would anyone contract to do that anyway?
These strawmen are getting really easy to knock down
Or they assume that the 10th assures that those rights won't be superseded to the State for regulation. The 10th Amendment seems to be the most forgotten Amendment among those who swear to protect and uphold the constitution.
Socrtease
Verified User
Never seen that and my bet is that if anyone challenged it, depending on the jurisdiction, it would be considered unenforcible boilerplate. All sorts of "fine print" has been struck down. But we are not talking about boiler plate language we are talking about an employment contract. Read it. If you can't read have someone read it to you. We have employment contracts here at the office for associates that become share holders. They agree to a term of years, anywhere from 2 to 4 and we agree to pay them a signing bonus. We also agree that their bonuses will be set with a minimum floor and a maximum ceilling depending on the year we have. They also agree that if they quit before the contract period expires they will not compete within 50 miles of any place we have a physical office. At this point we have one office in Las Cruces. But we are setting up another office in Deming NM and one in Alamogordo NM. They can quit us and go to work for the state anywhere they want. All of this is read and negotiated and if they don't like it they can stay an associate. No force or coersion.
Socrtease
Verified User
So what are you saying here? Do you think that rights we have under the federal constitution should not be rights we have as against the state as well?
I'm saying that the 10th allots unenumerated rights to both the states and the individual. Some of these rights should not be a matter of law at all, other than negative laws against violation of the rights.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
Individual rights come before states rights. Damo, why are you so willing to give the states the OPPURTUNITY to not recongnize rights? How does that make you more free?
How is it more legitimate for a state to violate human rights than the federal government?
You can clearly misunderstand with the best of them. Why are you so willfully disingenuous?
Note, "Some of these rights should not be a matter of law at all except negatively as a deterrence against their violation."
Socrtease
Verified User
You and I are in complete agreement
That is not true of Ron Paul at all. Maybe other conservatives. Where has he argued that the federal government has a right to deny the right to privacy or contract?
Nothing found at the link, just like when we look further into the claim.
RS have you given any thought to what you are going to do when it turns out Ron Paul isn’t President?
Maybe you will find a girl to stalk, like some bored men with obsessive tendencies do? Or, maybe you will start spamming the Home Shopping Network website? I wait with interest to find out.
