<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Unions Ready to Pounce on 111th Congress</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2009/01/11/unions-ready-to-pounce-on-111th-congress/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2009/01/11/unions-ready-to-pounce-on-111th-congress/</link>
	<description>Beating Them With Their Own Sickle And Hammer</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 05:22:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Sam</title>
		<link>http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2009/01/11/unions-ready-to-pounce-on-111th-congress/comment-page-1/#comment-111746</link>
		<dc:creator>Sam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Jan 2009 15:33:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stoptheaclu.com/?p=18848#comment-111746</guid>
		<description>Wow, you&#039;re missing the point. She filed when she found out that she was being discriminated against. The discrimination had been happening for years prior to her knowing. All a company has to do under current laws to take advantage of someone is to hide discrimination for 180 days after starting the discriminatory policy then they are free and clear. Ledbetter didn&#039;t wait too long, she didn&#039;t have the opportunity, she wasn&#039;t aware of it until &quot;it was too late&quot; under current laws. Imagine if someone stole all your money from your bank account and there was a statute of limitation of 30 days on it so you didn&#039;t find out that it was stolen until you received a statement 31 days from the theft. Wouldn&#039;t you think that statute of limitation is ridiculous? Same idea...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow, you&#8217;re missing the point. She filed when she found out that she was being discriminated against. The discrimination had been happening for years prior to her knowing. All a company has to do under current laws to take advantage of someone is to hide discrimination for 180 days after starting the discriminatory policy then they are free and clear. Ledbetter didn&#8217;t wait too long, she didn&#8217;t have the opportunity, she wasn&#8217;t aware of it until &#8220;it was too late&#8221; under current laws. Imagine if someone stole all your money from your bank account and there was a statute of limitation of 30 days on it so you didn&#8217;t find out that it was stolen until you received a statement 31 days from the theft. Wouldn&#8217;t you think that statute of limitation is ridiculous? Same idea&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe</title>
		<link>http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2009/01/11/unions-ready-to-pounce-on-111th-congress/comment-page-1/#comment-111745</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Jan 2009 15:29:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stoptheaclu.com/?p=18848#comment-111745</guid>
		<description>Statutes prohibiting private discrimination at the federal level violate: 1) the Constitution (Congress has no authority to do this), 2) natural law  (people have a moral right to associate or not to associate with their fellow human beings and withholding oneself does not violate anyone&#039;s rights) and 3) the laws of economics (they reduce the incentives to hire and especially to promote women and minorities, thereby helping to create a glass ceiling).

The same problems apply to labor union laws.  The labor statutes that we have allow unions to force their way on to other people&#039;s private property and impose conditions on them against their will.  This is called trespass and is the fundamental reason that labor unionism is immoral and indefensible.  In a free society (which we do not have and under corrupt Democratic Party rule it will get even worse), people are free to associate with whomever they wish and to keep unions off their property.  These basic rights will be even more severely violated in the future.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Statutes prohibiting private discrimination at the federal level violate: 1) the Constitution (Congress has no authority to do this), 2) natural law  (people have a moral right to associate or not to associate with their fellow human beings and withholding oneself does not violate anyone&#8217;s rights) and 3) the laws of economics (they reduce the incentives to hire and especially to promote women and minorities, thereby helping to create a glass ceiling).</p>
<p>The same problems apply to labor union laws.  The labor statutes that we have allow unions to force their way on to other people&#8217;s private property and impose conditions on them against their will.  This is called trespass and is the fundamental reason that labor unionism is immoral and indefensible.  In a free society (which we do not have and under corrupt Democratic Party rule it will get even worse), people are free to associate with whomever they wish and to keep unions off their property.  These basic rights will be even more severely violated in the future.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

