Company fires all employees who smoke!

[Ming]

Originally posted by Asher
There is a fundamental difference on discriminating against something out of their control (skin color, height, sex, sexual orientation) and discriminating against something a person chooses to do.

More lame justification... discrimination is discrimination... something you will never understand.

You've made your position very clear... "don't discriminate against me, but I can discriminate against you because it's different"

People have been finding "differences" and justifications for many evil acts... With your attitude, it's no surprise that you fall in this group.

Enjoy your selfish self centered attitudes... it's clear to everybody but you.

It's nice to see that many people see you for what you are... and for those that don't... their problem

[Asher]

Originally posted by Ming
More lame justification... discrimination is discrimination... something you will never understand.

Discrimination is everywhere.

If there wasn't discrimination, the hiring process would be a lottery.

Discrimination is having mens/womens washrooms...discrimination is having a smoking/non-smoking sections.

If you're so hell-bent against any and all discrimination, I look forward to your justification of those blatant cases of discrimination.

Or maybe the most likely scenario is you're defending the smokers here because it's the easiest thing to do.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Asher
There is a fundamental difference on discriminating against something out of their control (skin color, height, sex, sexual orientation) and discriminating against something a person chooses to do.

You choose to have gay sex. You could be like millions in history, and stay in the closet. That you got out of the closet is your choice, and by your logic, you should suffer the consequences.

And I don't buy for one second that it's impossible to quit smoking.

It depends on the people. We aren't created equal. Some will manage to quit, some won't. Some will resist the calls of the cigarette in their youth, some won't. To expect everybody to be able to resist the cigarette is absurd. Not everybody has the same force of will, and not everybody is addiction-sensitive to the same amount.

And for the constant comparison to fat people, too -- if the company gave them 2 years notice and assistance like they gave the smokers (probably access to a gym, weight-less program, nutritionist, etc), then that would be legal too. If people choose not to do anything about their health, which is costing the company money, then they're taking advantage of the company's generosity in paying for your health care.

1. If the company's paying for your health care is "generosity" in your world view, your society of reference is messed up, and I'm very glad not to live there.
2. Again, if there are higher insurance premiums for fat people, the company should give the fat person the option to pay the difference.

[Ming]

Originally posted by Asher
Or maybe the most likely scenario is you're defending the smokers here because it's the easiest thing to do.

No... it's easier to throw around insults and discriminate than it is to stand up for principals... you are the one taking the easy way out

But frankly... this is too easy. With every post you make you show exactly what kind of person you are. It's obvious to anybody looking at this thread...

So enjoy...

[Asher]

Originally posted by Spiffor
You choose to have gay sex.

It is actually different to discriminate based on them having sex, versus which gender they're attracted to.

1. If the company's paying for your health care is "generosity" in your world view, your society of reference is messed up, and I'm very glad not to live there.

It's called a "benefit" for a reason. It's not manadatory, companies don't always do it.

2. Again, if there are higher insurance premiums for fat people, the company should give the fat person the option to pay the difference.

That is one option, but since it's a private company they can do what they wish...

[Asher]

Originally posted by Ming
No... it's easier to throw around insults and discriminate than it is to stand up for principals... you are the one taking the easy way out

But frankly... this is too easy. With every post you make you show exactly what kind of person you are. It's obvious to anybody looking at this thread...

So enjoy...

It's funny that somebody who is pretending to take the high-road here is the one with nothing but a stream of ad hominems, ignoring the content of the actual debate.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Asher
It is actually different to discriminate based on them having sex, versus which gender they're attracted to.

And this is one of the reason the anti-gay bigots give against gay marriage: Everybody is free to have an heterosexual marriage! Gays have the choice to act against their impulses!

Really, no, I don't see any qualitiative difference between discrimination against smoking and gay sex. If tomorrow, your company told you "in two years from now, we will fire any of our employees that has homosexual sex" (with some bull**** justification), would you defend them so adamantly as you defended the employer in this thread?

Edit: forgot about your company giving out material to help you stopping having gay sex: Leviticuses, moralistic and pseudo-mediacl conferences, free hookers.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Spiffor
Really, no, I don't see any qualitiative difference between discrimination against smoking and gay sex. If tomorrow, your company told you "in two years from now, we will fire any of our employees that has homosexual sex" (with some bull**** justification), would you defend them so adamantly as you defended the employer in this thread?

They have every right to do so (in a state like this company is, but not here).

I would definintely take the 2-years notice to find a different company to work for. I wouldn't want to work for such a company.

[Spiffor]

I think the participants of this thread will remember it next time an anti-gay discrimination is discussed

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Asher
They have every right to do so (in a state like this company is, but not here).

The question is not whether it is legal. Nobody challenged the legality of what happened.

The question is whether it is right. You defended that the company was perfectly right in doing so, and you sniped the smoker's likestyle and character on the way.

So, if your company forbids you from having homosexual sex, will you say they are perfectly right in doing so?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Spiffor
I think the participants of this thread will remember it next time an anti-gay discrimination is discussed

It's still a fundamentally different thing.

Not all gays are high-risk, just those who choose to have promiscuous sex.
All smokers are high-risk, they all choose to smoke.

So it would be completely different things to fire a group of people because some of them are high-risk (a group defined on something they can't change), than to fire a group of people because all of them are high-risk (a group defined by a choice they made, and refuse to correct).

[Asher]

Originally posted by Spiffor
The question is not whether it is legal. Nobody challenged the legality of what happened.

The question is whether it is right. You defended that the company was perfectly right in doing so, and you sniped the smoker's likestyle and character on the way.

So, if your company forbids you from having homosexual sex, will you say they are perfectly right in doing so?

I was just justifying it from their POV, and apparently it's an issue for them.

I would say it is "right" because it's not illegal, and it makes sense, but I wouldn't do it myself. It's bad for the corporate culture/PR.

If my company forbids me from having homosexual sex, I'd give them the proverbial finger, and take my knowledge and trade secrets to their competitor.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Spiffor
I think the participants of this thread will remember it next time an anti-gay discrimination is discussed

Not really. I'm not going to allow Asher's trolling to affect my views on other issues, or of people like Boris who would be affected by those issues.

Asher likes to argue. He'll take a position and invite one and all to come knock him down. The more who step up, the more he enjoys it. He'll say some extrme things to get the pot boiling, and to keep it boiling. I'm sure he believes some of them at least partly, but he pushes them to get the ball rolling.