Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ron Paul says victim of sex harassment bears some responsibility for resolution
The Boston Globe ^ | January 1, 2012 | Shira Schoenberg

Posted on 01/02/2012 7:22:04 AM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks

Texas Representative Ron Paul today stood by statements he made in his 1987 book arguing that someone who is a victim of sexual harassment in the workplace should bear some responsibility for resolving the problem and that society should not bear the burden of paying for the care of AIDS victims.

In his 1987 book “Freedom Under Siege: The US Constitution after 200-Plus Years,” Paul wrote about sexual harassment in the workplace, “Why don’t they quit once the so-called harassment starts? Obviously the morals of the harasser cannot be defended, but how can the harassee escape some responsibility for the problem?’’

In another passage, Paul wrote, “The individual suffering from AIDS certainly is a victim - frequently a victim of his own lifestyle - but this same individual victimizes innocent citizens by forcing them to pay for his care.”

On Fox News Sunday this morning, host Chris Wallace asked Paul, now a top contender in the Republican presidential race, whether he still agreed with those statements.

On the sexual harassment issue, Paul distinguished between verbal and physical harassment but said neither one warranted a federal law to prevent it.

“If it’s just because somebody told a joke to somebody who was offended, they don’t have a right to go to the federal government and have a policeman come in and put penalties on those individuals,” Paul said of verbal harassment. “They have to say maybe this is not a very good environment. They have the right to work there or not work there.”

Paul continued: “Because people are insulted by rude behavior, I don’t think we should make a federal case about it. I don’t think we need federal laws to deal with that. People should deal with that at home.”

(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: aids; healthinsurance; ronpaul; sexualharassment
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-89 last
To: Riodacat
He's against the Federal Gov't making laws restricting freedoms. He says that if is physical harrassment, then call the cops...

*** Oh, so "Hey girl, you want that assignment then come over here and laugh at my joke about the nun, the rabbi and the vibrator" is ok?***

_________________________________

If you work in an enviornment where there is (in your opinion) offensive verbal dialogue, then bring it up with management and/or go work where you feel more comfortable.

***What if the offensive person is the management? What if the situation is in Detroit or Syracuse or Toledo where there are no other jobs?***

51 posted on 01/02/2012 9:18:32 AM PST by moose-matson (I keep it in my head)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Beagle8U

“Another option is to never hire any women, ever!”

Given all the caterwauling by the feminists on this thread that would usually be a good idea ... except they also have a federal anti-discrimination law so you’re damned if you do and damned if you don’t. This is why we’re loosing all of our freedoms one by one to the nanny state, because women are demanding that big daddy government come in and beat everyone into submission to their every whim. Strange to see on a conservative web site but the feminists and white knights have taken over everywhere, why not here as well.


52 posted on 01/02/2012 9:26:22 AM PST by trapped_in_LA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: PALIN SMITH

It does with me. People have the freedom of speech and if they want to be rude—and offensive—that is allowed in our Constitution. There can be NO LAWS which prevent rudeness. NONE. People used to have the right to do that —and those people would reap their rewards-—no decent person would work for them. We have DESTROYED decency with government intervention. It encourages lies—cheating—immoral behavior, etc.

Paul is absolutely right and we need to get back to original intent of the freedom of association and freedom of thought and speech.

Government interference breeds immorality and evil and corruption and distrust of individuals.


53 posted on 01/02/2012 9:29:41 AM PST by savagesusie (Right Reason According to Nature=Just Law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

“common sense to suggest women being harassed should quit their job?”

Yes, unless you’re a socialist who wants the government in charge of every aspect of your life. It’s a free country and if you can’t handle it and management doesn’t care then leave. Guy have to put up with all sorts of garbage as well, they make the same decisions as to whether or not the good out weighs the bad. If women want to participate in the work place on an even footing then they need to grow up and start acting like adults rather than whinny children.


54 posted on 01/02/2012 9:38:50 AM PST by trapped_in_LA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

Broken clock- right twice a day. “Victims” of diseases spread by BEHAVIOR, like AIDS, should not be cared for with public funds. Charity is around for that purpose.


55 posted on 01/02/2012 9:39:53 AM PST by JimRed (Excising a cancer before it kills us waters the Tree of Liberty! TERM LIMITS, NOW AND FOREVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

This is absolutely correct. The federal government has no constitutional authority to intrude in these matters. The States are responsible.


56 posted on 01/02/2012 9:45:27 AM PST by mas cerveza por favor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trapped_in_LA
“Given all the caterwauling by the feminists on this thread that would usually be a good idea ... except they also have a federal anti-discrimination law so you’re damned if you do and damned if you don’t.”

OK, fine. Hire them and stick them in an office with someone that farts constantly. The same damn Fed laws that says you can't discriminate against them in hiring, says you can't discriminate against those with a medical handicap, such as farting constantly.

I'll bet they don't stay long.

57 posted on 01/02/2012 9:47:36 AM PST by Beagle8U (Free Republic -- One stop shopping ....... It's the Conservative Super WalMart for news .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: trapped_in_LA
“Given all the caterwauling by the feminists on this thread that would usually be a good idea ... except they also have a federal anti-discrimination law so you’re damned if you do and damned if you don’t.”

OK, fine. Hire them and stick them in an office with someone that farts constantly. The same damn Fed laws that says you can't discriminate againt them in hiring, says you can't discriminate against those with a medical handicap, such as farting constantly.

I'll bet they don't stay long.

58 posted on 01/02/2012 9:53:43 AM PST by Beagle8U (Free Republic -- One stop shopping ....... It's the Conservative Super WalMart for news .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Beagle8U

back in the old days, women could work but if they were found to be pregnant, had to quit their job. I worked with a gal who told me she had to bind herself up to keep from showing as long as possible to keep working. Her hus left her with all the kids, sole supporter.


59 posted on 01/02/2012 9:57:57 AM PST by Engedi (Hec)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: trapped_in_LA

His statement shows an astounding level of stupidity. Your willingness jump in and blame the victim is on the same level.

Are allegations of sexual harassment abused? Yes, but 99% of all cases are settled outside of the federal courts.

He didn’t say the system was corrupt, he said if you don’t like it quit. Big difference.


60 posted on 01/02/2012 9:59:12 AM PST by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: miss marmelstein

Yeah, ask Hermain Cain how that all turned out for him.

I blame the HR departments and the Feministas, which have been taken over by the radical Libs.

My sis in law is a hs teacher. She told a young man he looked nice in his new shirt...he reported her, she was investigated, almost lost her job for that comment.


61 posted on 01/02/2012 10:01:15 AM PST by Engedi (Hec)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: SgtHooper

I had a great female boss years ago. Well one of the other bosses at her level, use to come around to the workers ask how you doing, then rub your shoulders. He did this to me. He was married, older man, but very nice. He was the big teddy bear type allways laughing smiling, etc.

So one day I smoked with the female boss on break and just happened to mention how Don likes to give the ladies a shoulder rub. Next thing I know, he stopped doing it...to everyone one of us.

I didn’t threaten him, go to HR, file a lawsuit, etc.


62 posted on 01/02/2012 10:07:30 AM PST by Engedi (Hec)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Engedi

That is truly a sick story!

I teach acting and lately I’m afraid to even approach these young adults. Acting is a physical profession and when you “block” scenes you sometimes have to touch or twist an actor’s position to get the look that you want. I don’t know where it’s all going to end...except that Ron Paul is STILL a freak!


63 posted on 01/02/2012 10:09:07 AM PST by miss marmelstein
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

Sadly most women don’t have husbands any more, so they turn to gov where in the past they would have told thier bigger stronger half if things at work or in town were getting beyond their ability to coup. Nothing shuts up a loud mouth bore like a big strong husband pissed as hell.


64 posted on 01/02/2012 10:09:48 AM PST by jpsb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

“He didn’t say the system was corrupt, he said if you don’t like it quit. Big difference.”

Oh but the system is corrupt, women use this all the time to squeeze a little extra from a business. And even though not too many of these see federal court the threat is enough to have business spending an outrageous amount of time and money trying to insulate themselves from actually ending up in federal court. I’ll bet you have no idea how much this costs businesses in training employees, legal and human resource personnel that administer this and the paying off of the occasional hypersensitive/money grubbing woman that files a complaint.

As far as “blaming the victim” non-sense, I’ve heard that tired old rational so many times that I want to puke and it’s a standard shaming tactic that feminist have used for decades. Doesn’t work with me any more so shove it, women need to grow up and start accepting responsibility if they want to participate in the work place, just like men have for centuries. If they can’t handle it unless they have big daddy government beating everyone into submission then they should just go back to the kitchen.


65 posted on 01/02/2012 10:10:53 AM PST by trapped_in_LA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: savagesusie

I don’t know what jobs you’ve worked at but I don’t know one decent workplace that doesn’t have some rules about behavior. A good company discourages rudeness and immoral behavior and a lousy one - usually - looks the other way. We can see how that’s working out for Penn State.


66 posted on 01/02/2012 10:18:17 AM PST by miss marmelstein
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: trapped_in_LA

You don’t seem to like ladies very much...


67 posted on 01/02/2012 10:19:30 AM PST by miss marmelstein
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

Sadly, some guys with a real dislike of women are coming on this thread. I’ve seen this happen before with sex harrassment issues, Sarah Palin & Michele Bachmann. Gets kinda spooky.


68 posted on 01/02/2012 10:22:00 AM PST by miss marmelstein
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: trapped_in_LA

“I’ll bet you have no idea how much this costs businesses in training employees, legal and human resource personnel that administer this and the paying off of the occasional hypersensitive/money grubbing woman that files a complaint.”

Well since I own a small business I would bet you are wrong.

“As far as “blaming the victim” non-sense, I’ve heard that tired old rational so many times that I want to puke and it’s a standard shaming tactic that feminist have used for decades.”

Well he said if the woman doesn’t like being harassed she should quit. So the woman, or man in some cases, is expected to quit because someone else is breaking the law. You are brilliant.


69 posted on 01/02/2012 10:29:00 AM PST by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: miss marmelstein

“You don’t seem to like ladies very much...”

Not true, I just don’t like feminist very much. I also don’t like having big daddy government in my nickers all day long, which for some reason most women just love ;)


70 posted on 01/02/2012 10:31:35 AM PST by trapped_in_LA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: miss marmelstein

The system is abused, no doubt. Anytime people are involved there will be problems. IMO the problem is the legal system.

Lawyers make money off other peoples hardships.


71 posted on 01/02/2012 10:33:39 AM PST by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

“... expected to quit because someone else is breaking the law. You are brilliant.”

You seem to not be the brightest bulb in the room here, Ron Paul’s whole point was that there shouldn’t BE a federal law dealing with this.


72 posted on 01/02/2012 10:34:30 AM PST by trapped_in_LA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: trapped_in_LA

You can always quit if you dont like working in that environment.


73 posted on 01/02/2012 10:35:12 AM PST by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: trapped_in_LA

Classy response, lol!


74 posted on 01/02/2012 10:36:22 AM PST by miss marmelstein
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: trapped_in_LA

“You seem to not be the brightest bulb in the room here, Ron Paul’s whole point was that there shouldn’t BE a federal law dealing with this.”

Then why did he say women should quit if they don’t like being harassed? See its really quite simple. He says what he really means, Paulbots read what they wanted him to say. Others read the actual words and realize Ron Paul is NUTS!


75 posted on 01/02/2012 10:37:23 AM PST by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: moose-matson
*** Oh, so "Hey girl, you want that assignment then come over here and laugh at my joke about the nun, the rabbi and the vibrator" is ok?***

No, let's create Federal laws and language police to outlaw all offensive language.
OTOH, what happens when you say something contoversial which is deemed offensive to someone else.
For example, we know that much of what Rush Limbaugh says is very offensive to many folks. Who gets to determine what is offensive? When you give the power to the Feds, be careful you don't get a hell of a lot more than you asked for.
Look at the homeland security laws. Who foresaw that would eventually entail young girls and grandmas being groped by federal airport security agents in order to keep you safe.
This is the creeping nanny state.

76 posted on 01/02/2012 1:04:40 PM PST by Riodacat (And when all is said and done, there'll be a hell of a lot more said than done......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Riodacat

There’s offensive language and behavior in society but the focus of the laws is offensive language and behavior in the workplace.


77 posted on 01/02/2012 1:54:18 PM PST by moose-matson (I keep it in my head)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: moose-matson

Well there was one Colonel that kept following me around and asked me out my first week on duty. I went to my adviser (I was in a school) and asked if I had to go out with him, then another young officer told me the Colonel was trying to “get over on” me, so I finally told him no.


78 posted on 01/02/2012 3:29:05 PM PST by yldstrk ( My heroes have always been cowboys)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: yldstrk

Not exactly the same thing. And, how would you have handled it if he were persistant and played the “I can make or ruin your career” card. It is for these very real situations that the laws are there, and, imo, reasonable.


79 posted on 01/02/2012 3:33:36 PM PST by moose-matson (I keep it in my head)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: miss marmelstein

One job I had for 8 months is a good example of my point. I worked in a flower shop—sales. The boss was not very friendly. It was ok with me—I took the job. He was rude to some of the workers-—and they quit. He was rude to me and I quit. He had a high turn over -—it cost him tons of money to train new people all the time. It hurt him-—but it was his right to run his business how he saw fit.

Free markets should have little govt. say and regulations. The owner of the business takes the risks and fronts the money—and should be able to run the business as he sees fit. He could hire all men and government has no right to force him to hire women—or blacks or whomever. They can start their own competing business. If the guy is racist—he will lose business—and hopefully go bankrupt. BUT that is up to choice of the consumers.

We used to have freedom of association and freedom of speech and freedom to fail or flourish. Having government force anything is more evil than the so called “evil” it is trying to prevent——and it is WAY TOO COSTLY!!!!!!!!! and ends up benefiting the politicians and lawyers and judges never the minorities or whomever. It destroys free markets.


80 posted on 01/02/2012 7:44:21 PM PST by savagesusie (Right Reason According to Nature=Just Law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: savagesusie

Sigh. I’m not talking about plain rudeness. I had many bosses who were bizarre and I simply left the job. In NYC, psycho bosses are a dime a dozen. I’m talking about sexual harrassment - criminal activity.


81 posted on 01/03/2012 3:31:27 AM PST by miss marmelstein
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: moose-matson

I am a Christian so it wouldn’t have worked on me. I would have choices. People who are not Christians don’t have the same level of withstanding evil.


82 posted on 01/03/2012 5:41:36 AM PST by yldstrk ( My heroes have always been cowboys)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: yldstrk
Easy answer...but there are millions of examples where women have been co-erced into accepting insulting behavior from men who held a position of influence over their careers.

Perhaps if you had been in such a situation your faith might have saved your career but I'm fairly certain that women of equal if not greater faith have suffered from equal or greater evils.

83 posted on 01/03/2012 6:11:24 AM PST by moose-matson (I keep it in my head)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: miss marmelstein

Bosses can’t assault workers—Criminal activity is already against the law. What are you talking about?

We have laws against physically harming other people. We don’t need “harassment” laws more business regulations which costs more money-—which are like “hate crimes” and just about “hurt” feelings or whatever ends up being a lawyers wet dream and make judges wealthy and politicians wealthy.

We need free markets and free association. No one has to work for anyone else, if they “feel” uncomfortable in a free economy. They can start up their own business. But we are strangled now with regulations and no freedom—it makes us slaves to the more politically connected—the abusers-—the Chicago gang types.

Freedom is the only thing, and The Rule of Law—Just Law—is the ONLY thing which protects people. More government “laws” and intrusion into lawful businesses are the real oppression of freedom and make us slaves—having to work for abusive people and “JUDGES” decide who should be fined for their thoughts or statements.

You get all sorts of corruption and slander and the power to destroy people by slander WHICH IS ALWAYS THE RESULT OF SUCH STUPID laws.


84 posted on 01/03/2012 8:22:36 AM PST by savagesusie (Right Reason According to Nature=Just Law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: savagesusie

Let me ask you: is following an employee into an empty office and trying to kiss her constitute criminal behavior?


85 posted on 01/03/2012 12:28:02 PM PST by miss marmelstein
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: moose-matson

I just hope no one who disbelieves in something called sex harrassment EVER has a daughter. And if they do, I don’t want to hear that those kids have been brought up to deal with it (you know, hitting the boss with a karate chop to the neck and then - somehow - going on to become CEO of the company). Employment doesn’t work like that. Young girls - and I’m gonna be sexist here - especially the pretty ones - are often victims of corrupt, sly employers.

I thought we all learned that from Monica Lewinsky and the vile Bill Clinton. Her name was made a by-word for oral sex - something that lady will take to her grave.


86 posted on 01/03/2012 12:40:55 PM PST by miss marmelstein
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: miss marmelstein

Yes—it is physical assault. There are laws that exist that addresses this-—doesn’t need to be an “employer”.


87 posted on 01/03/2012 1:06:15 PM PST by savagesusie (Right Reason According to Nature=Just Law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: savagesusie

Happened to me in the 1980s. While I knew this was unacceptable, I certainly didn’t think there were any laws to protect me. And I certainly knew that no other employee would take my part against “The Boss” - including HR. Besides, I needed the job.


88 posted on 01/03/2012 1:09:53 PM PST by miss marmelstein
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: miss marmelstein

Yep, a lot of non-real-world posturing on this thread.


89 posted on 01/03/2012 1:10:51 PM PST by moose-matson (I keep it in my head)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-89 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson