Posted on 02/24/2018 2:58:19 PM PST by mdittmar
“Am I mistaken? All replies welcome and encouraged... “
Yeah, you’re mistaken. Public sector unions should be outlawed and their leadership imprisoned. There aren’t enough people working in private sector unions to matter anymore, they will die off on their own.
It is definitely EXTORTION; but the PROTECTION only extends to the LAZY, INCOMPETENT, and CRAZY.
Kind of funny - those who want to say, “You don’t have a right to work unless we say you have a right to work and you pay us the monthly sop”, bitching about the “right to work”...and they claim not being in a union “silences workers’ voices” and ignore that being held captive in a union makes your voice the same as whatever the union decides it should be....
Right to work is a name put on a product. It isn’t a right either. You have the privilege of denying forced entry into a union. So it is just another use of a word. It is not a right.
Rights, in my mind, automatically interject the thought of God given. It is a phrase used to make the topic seem more correct or incorrect by it’s use. You want to make something into a mountain from a molehill? Call it a right. Then for no legitimate reason it becomes more than an issue. By adding the word it becomes imperative. It’s a way to fool the reader or listener.
rwood
Right to work is not trying to fool anybody. If you like being denied a job you’re otherwise able to do without having to pay money into an organization whose function is funding leftist politics, that’s your right, too. Though it perplexes me why you think that should be forced onto others.
“Though it perplexes me why you think that should be forced onto others.”
I’m not forcing anything on anybody. You think the use of words is not a part of our society and how that society reacts to word stimulus by saying right to work is not trying to fool anybody. I was not discussing the actual intent of the document, but the use of certain keywords that catapult the meaning of it. If that document had been called the freedom of employment act, or the opportunity to work free act, would it have had the same effect as to the power of it’s actions as the “right” phrase? And have you forgotten what “it” is. Covert, possibly subliminal, words you don’t hear are just as directive as those you do.
People are effected by words. This is why how you say it can alter the meaning. You said yourself that people should have the right not to fund leftist politics. If you are going to say that then all taxes should be removed because they are contributory to the same purpose? You can’t escape the government and it’s use of your money. You can only recognize and decide on how the action is presented so you can determine its use.
Rights is a power word for the purpose of battering some listeners into acceptance as they mis-understand it’s intent. Others understand the intent and reject it. But not everyone can make that discovery and reaction and that’s why the improper use of the word is so bad.
rwood
I understand where you’re coming from. Misusing words consistently undermines their integrity until they mean little. I’m reminded of Moynihan’s ‘defining deviancy down.’
Rape has lost most of its meaning and emotive power as its definition has been diluted through misuse.
As to ‘rights’ would you agree the horse bolted the barn with the introduction of ‘civil rights?’ Would you agree that Right to Work is the same type of right as a civil right, an “enforceable right or privilege, which if interfered with by another gives rise to an action for injury”?
Bingo! What pathetic deflection by the union thugs...
At one time our society used the term “rights” correctly.
Probably the best example I can display is the plains Indians. Notice I didn’t say indigenous people or native Americans. Those are words that were invented to create a singling out of a group called Indians. So those words are misused, also.
The European settlers were welcomed by the Indians when they showed up to build their homes and farms. And in time, when some of those settlers turned into buffalo hunters, they took away the live blood of the Indians for the absolute wrong reason, money. And when gold was discovered and the farmers turned toward gold and kept encroaching on the Indians, and the Indians objected, the Indians were attacked, killed, and raped by the miners. This led to the Indians fighting back and we all know what happened to Custer when he went in to do a personal vendetta to kill the plains Indians. But, in time, the Indians were captured with two of their main chiefs, Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse being murdered. (Crazy Horse by Indian soldiers in Ft. Robinson, Nebraska when he surrendered and refused to go into a cell) He was going to be imprisoned for trying to protect what belonged to him so his people and family could live a free life without bothering anyone as they had done for centuries.
So their privilege was the opportunity to live. Just like we did when we separated from England in 1783. They had a privilege which was created by a need for God’s gift, life. Did the Civil “Rights” constitute the compromise of life?
Rights, according to one definition, are legal, social, or ethical principles of freedom or entitlement; that is, rights are the fundamental normative rules about what is allowed of people or owed to people, according to some legal system, social convention, or ethical theory.
But I’m sure you notice that these “rights” are man’s societal creation. And they are different with each society. Can people in Maine require their rights to be the same in Wyoming? Can people in China require their rights to be the same in Sweden?
So, as long as someone misuses the term the same as they mis-identify their rights, those rights are incorrect. And as long as the term is used to force obedience and solitude, it is not a privilege to be who you are, and it never could be a right unless it was defined by someone more “in charge” of all men. And that can only be God. And only God has absolute rights. Everything else is a privilege.
rwood
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.