All Comments

Previous comments...   You are currently on page 2.
  • Posted by jrberts5 11 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Without the presence of a rational legal code banning the initiation of farce and clearing defining the government's role in protecting the freedom of all from force, it can only be a lose/lose situation. Protection of a specific group under the law from whatever by definition means exclusive of the non-members of that group from protection by the law.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 11 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Yet you seem to propose the dictatorship of the worker. An employer has the right to decide what benefits they are going to provide to their employees. Those employees have the right to decide whether they want to work for that employer. Both are free to choose. What you seem to propose is that the employer be forced (notice the use of the term "force") to provide something that they would choose not to. That is antithetical to Objectivism.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by LetsShrug 11 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Nope sorry, forced participation should not be legal. You have a double standard. Admit it.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo