Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

iverglas

(38,549 posts)
6. thank you (edited)
Thu Apr 12, 2012, 01:23 PM
Apr 2012

Perhaps, as host, you would put a request to MIRT for consideration of the situation.

edit - oops, it's going there as I posted.



In our new friend's ideal world, everybody is free to look for other work if they don't like being paid $1 an hour to work with toxic chemicals without protective gear, or if their employer decides that employees of colour, or Jews, or women, should be paid less than other employees.

There are names for people who support that kind of "freedom", i.e. absolute freedom of those with economic power to determine the standard of living that others will enjoy. And those names don't include Democrat, or progressive ... (They do include "liberal" as the world outside the US understands that word. )

In this case, we are seeing "unintended consequences", that we might suspect are not unintended at all -- the consequences of privatizing an important public function/interest like the education of children.

Actual education becomes secondary to other considerations, in ways that are not in the interests of the children or of society as a whole, and obviously of employees. The more situations like this are allowed to spread, the less "free" an employee will be to find other employment, as the field of other employment shrinks. That, on top of things like the harm done to the quality of education in the public system, as the private sector reduces the public system's ability to serve special needs students, for instance, by reducing its funding base. Not to mention the plain ignorant graduates the religious sector produces, hardly the outcome a modern society should be looking for.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

so if she would have had an abortion that would have been alright? ejpoeta Apr 2012 #1
I was thinking along the same lines woodsprite Apr 2012 #2
This message was self-deleted by its author leftyohiolib Apr 2012 #3
Post removed Post removed Apr 2012 #4
not justified. Also, you are posting in a safe haven group. boston bean Apr 2012 #5
thank you (edited) iverglas Apr 2012 #6
Actually, it is in discussion in MIRT boston bean Apr 2012 #7
you blocked the MIRt forum? maddezmom Apr 2012 #10
she blocked the poster in THIS group (HoF) seabeyond Apr 2012 #11
okay. I got here from a post in the MIrt...but I still think she should comment there maddezmom Apr 2012 #12
BB will probably appreciate knowing that it is ok. nt seabeyond Apr 2012 #13
I wasn't trying to give permission if that is what you mean maddezmom Apr 2012 #14
i didnt think you were giving her permission. i thought you were giving her information. seabeyond Apr 2012 #15
And, their first post on DU.... Momentous... hlthe2b Apr 2012 #8
Thanks to our hosts for prompt action here. BlueIris Apr 2012 #20
Volleyball coach and science teacher? Warren DeMontague Apr 2012 #9
I had an employer once who wanted me to sign a contract stating that I wouldn't get pregnant. PassingFair Apr 2012 #16
Um, holy shit. BlueIris Apr 2012 #17
And the employer was a "she".... PassingFair Apr 2012 #18
Ew, just ew. BlueIris Apr 2012 #19
It's weird, isn't it? Warren DeMontague Apr 2012 #21
Latest Discussions»Alliance Forums»History of Feminism»Rockwall teacher fired fo...»Reply #6