MotoHouston.com MotoHouston.com
Register Members List Member Map Media Calendar Garage Forum Home Mark Forums Read

Go Back   MotoHouston.com > Off Topic (everything else) > Off Topic > The Circus
Forgot info?

Welcome to MotoHouston.com! You are currently viewing our forums as a guest which gives you limited access to the community. By joining our free community you will have access to great discounts from our sponsors, the ability to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content, free email, classifieds, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, join our community!

Register Today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.


Like us on Facebook! Regular shirt GIVEAWAYS and more

Advertisement

Reply
Share This Thread: 
Subscribe to this Thread Thread Tools
Old 10-26-2009, 03:10 PM   #1
RoadracerNC
Former Dragon Slayer
 
RoadracerNC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Pearland
Feedback Rating: (0)
Posts: 7,250

Experience: 8 years
Trackdays: 10+











Send a message via AIM to RoadracerNC
"Anti-Rape Clause"

Can someone clarify why exactly there were 30 Republicans that voted agianst this?
__________________
"The liberties of none are safe, unless the liberties of all are protected." -Justice William O. Douglas
RoadracerNC is offline   Reply With Quote
Similar Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Critics blast Tennessee's "sexist" anti-drunk driving campaign NewsBot Houston - Local News 0 07-17-2015 01:11 AM
U.S. marshals seek fugitive with "radical anti-government views" NewsBot Houston - Local News 0 06-02-2015 09:10 PM
Female condom with "teeth" to fight rape. Helios Off Topic 60 06-24-2010 01:22 PM
can some one explain to me wtf "rape-rape" is? logan5 Off Topic 6 09-30-2009 09:12 PM
Advertisement
Old 10-26-2009, 03:13 PM   #2
tkblank
That's totally mexico!
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Spring/Austin
Feedback Rating: (0)
Posts: 1,106


Bike(s):
'03 SV650s (copper)









They want to get their non-consensual on.
tkblank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2009, 03:15 PM   #3
AaronP220
Sir Ballmanship
 
AaronP220's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: NW Houston: Jersey Village
Feedback Rating: (5)
Posts: 20,446

Experience: 5 years
Trackdays: 10+

Bike(s):
2011 Fleshlight









Quote:
Originally Posted by tkblank View Post
They want to get their non-consensual on.
AaronP220 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2009, 03:17 PM   #4
RoadracerNC
Former Dragon Slayer
 
RoadracerNC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Pearland
Feedback Rating: (0)
Posts: 7,250

Experience: 8 years
Trackdays: 10+











Send a message via AIM to RoadracerNC
Quote:
Originally Posted by tkblank View Post
They want to get their non-consensual on.
I wouldn't put it past anyone in Congress.

Bust seriously......how does a party that "prides" itself on law and order let 30 members vote no to keeping the government from using contractors that doesn't allow their employees a day in court when like being raped and stuffed in a box for a few days happen?
__________________
"The liberties of none are safe, unless the liberties of all are protected." -Justice William O. Douglas
RoadracerNC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2009, 03:20 PM   #5
CaJuNsOuLjA
Resident Glasnost
 
CaJuNsOuLjA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: NW: 249 & Beltway
Feedback Rating: (0)
Posts: 11,106

Experience: 3 years

Bike(s):
*SOLD*...(Pending purchase): 2006 CRF 450






Quote:
Originally Posted by RoadracerNC View Post
I wouldn't put it past anyone in Congress.

Bust seriously......how does a party that "prides" itself on law and order let 30 members vote no to keeping the government from using contractors that doesn't allow their employees a day in court when like being raped and stuffed in a box for a few days happen?
Yeah, that's pretty interesting...

I'd like to know why it would be a bad thing to decline contracts to companies whose policies can prove deleterious to its employees- especially as it pertains to this case.
__________________
"They've created a nation of spenders, speculators, and consumers, and they've destroyed the savers, producers, and the investing class that built this country. We're moving from a market-based economy to essentially a planned economy. We're abandoning capitalism and embracing socialism. That's a recipe for disaster." - Peter Schiff
CaJuNsOuLjA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2009, 03:34 PM   #6
RoadracerNC
Former Dragon Slayer
 
RoadracerNC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Pearland
Feedback Rating: (0)
Posts: 7,250

Experience: 8 years
Trackdays: 10+











Send a message via AIM to RoadracerNC
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaJuNsOuLjA View Post
Yeah, that's pretty interesting...

I'd like to know why it would be a bad thing to decline contracts to companies whose policies can prove deleterious to its employees- especially as it pertains to this case.
Well, the two main arguments were:

1: They felt the language in the legislation was broad enough to get rid of arbitration, forcing employees into court for claims that could be settled outside of the court room, saving them $$$$ on lawyers and court fees. Plus, supposedly statics would show that employees have a better chance at getting something out of arbitration, versus the legal process.

2: Some of the Republicans felt this would lead to the government requiring all companies to remove this from their contracts, whether they were working for the government or not.
__________________
"The liberties of none are safe, unless the liberties of all are protected." -Justice William O. Douglas
RoadracerNC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2009, 04:31 PM   #7
CaJuNsOuLjA
Resident Glasnost
 
CaJuNsOuLjA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: NW: 249 & Beltway
Feedback Rating: (0)
Posts: 11,106

Experience: 3 years

Bike(s):
*SOLD*...(Pending purchase): 2006 CRF 450






Quote:
Originally Posted by RoadracerNC View Post
1: They felt the language in the legislation was broad enough to get rid of arbitration, forcing employees into court for claims that could be settled outside of the court room, saving them $$$$ on lawyers and court fees. Plus, supposedly statics would show that employees have a better chance at getting something out of arbitration, versus the legal process.
While Im sure there are legitimate concerns in the arena of broad or wide sweeping language as has somehow become the norm in our policy setting these days, I tend to think government concern should be in the inner workings of private business. The policy should simply and concisely prohibit the issue of government contracts to companies who would silence or disallow employees that have been wronged to ameliorate the situation- the added pork should not be considered legit nor allowed. Policies shouldn't be written in books, rather, paragraphs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RoadracerNC View Post
2: Some of the Republicans felt this would lead to the government requiring all companies to remove this from their contracts, whether they were working for the government or not.
Again very possible, the Dems are all about snatchin up as much power as they can muster these days.
__________________
"They've created a nation of spenders, speculators, and consumers, and they've destroyed the savers, producers, and the investing class that built this country. We're moving from a market-based economy to essentially a planned economy. We're abandoning capitalism and embracing socialism. That's a recipe for disaster." - Peter Schiff
CaJuNsOuLjA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2009, 05:52 PM   #8
FKNA
Senior Member
 
FKNA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Houston
Feedback Rating: (1)
Posts: 6,709

Experience: 10+ years
Trackdays: 3

Bike(s):
2005 Yamaha R1
2008 Goldwing








Quote:
Originally Posted by RoadracerNC View Post
Can someone clarify why exactly there were 30 Republicans that voted agianst this?
Because they have no interest in looking after our country or it's citizens. Those suckers are out for themselves and wanted to make sure they didn't off any of their big campaign contributors. This should have been a no brainer, no one should had voted against that amendment.
FKNA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2009, 06:01 PM   #9
JSki
Senior Member
 
JSki's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Conroe
Feedback Rating: (0)
Posts: 1,651


Bike(s):
06 SV650









Can someone post a link to the bill or an unbiased breakdown if the bill is unavailable?
__________________
"Any man worth his salt will stick up for what he believes right, but it takes a slightly better man to acknowledge instantly and without reservation that he is in error." -Andrew Jackson
JSki is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Advertisement


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:04 AM.


MotoHouston.com is not responsible for the content posted by users.
Privacy Policy