emilynghiem
Constitutionalist / Universalist
Dear Chuz Life
1. I ANSWERED your question.
You asked for an example of legalized slavery.
I pointed out PRISON LABOR laws
legalize slave labor in that context.
2. If you do not understand my answer,
can we call on one other USER to TRANSLATE FOR YOU.
* PRISON LABOR IS LEGAL
AND IS AN EXAMPLE OF HOW
STATES CAN WRITE LAWS THAT
MAKE SOME FORMS OF SLAVE
LABOR LEGAL BY STATE LAWS*
Can you please
1. explain how "prison labor laws"
do not answer your question?
2. can you select one other USER on here to moderate if you cannot understand
how this answer actual ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION
1. I ANSWERED your question.
You asked for an example of legalized slavery.
I pointed out PRISON LABOR laws
legalize slave labor in that context.
2. If you do not understand my answer,
can we call on one other USER to TRANSLATE FOR YOU.
* PRISON LABOR IS LEGAL
AND IS AN EXAMPLE OF HOW
STATES CAN WRITE LAWS THAT
MAKE SOME FORMS OF SLAVE
LABOR LEGAL BY STATE LAWS*
Can you please
1. explain how "prison labor laws"
do not answer your question?
2. can you select one other USER on here to moderate if you cannot understand
how this answer actual ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION
Thanks for your help in proving my point.Yes Chuz Life I gave an example of how "slavery" is legal if people consent to it:
1. by charitable volunteer work. Even the Jehovah's Witnesses refer to being "faithful and discreet slaves". If you religiously submit to work for free, that is legal through nonprofits and religious organizations.
2. If you volunteer your labor for restitution for wrongdoing, where it is in keeping with laws,
then it is not abusing people or labor by "involuntary servitude". Because it is voluntary and follows given guidelines, such as for prison labor.
do you want more examples?
3. Currently we do allow import and sale of products made by FOREIGN slave labor.
We just don't allow certain labor within the domestic US. (again one exception being prison labor)
Is prison labor a good enough example for you Chuz Life?
Many people contest this practice and the laws on it. Some people believe MORE labor should be forced on inmates; other people believe such labor should not be abused.
so this IS ONE AREA where laws are in place that justify slave labor.
Dear Chuz Life
1. Sorry but the abortion laws ARE A MESSY ISSUE: because the laws affect not only the recognition of life and beliefs on the front end
BUT ALSO the CONSEQUENCES "after the fact" which impact Women more than Men.
so THAT'S WHY it's such a complex issue.
There are MANY criteria that have to be met.
2. as for conditions on slavery it's called CONSENT. when people CONSENT to volunteer labor for free it's called CHARITY.
And YES it is legal to WILLINGLY work for free.
Prison labor is tricky -- if there is restitution owed, that's one thing. but workers in prison cannot be abused either.
so YES THIS GETS MESSY ALSO.
Sorry to break the news to you, Chuz Life
Laws not only have to address the issue, but have to ENFORCEABLE *IN PRACTICE* where they don't violate equal protections and due process of law.
It can get VERY MESSY.
That's why we need to be careful and DILIGENT. We need to work together, including ALL SIDES and ALL OBJECTIONS to resolve conflicts BEFORE WRITING PASSING AND ENFORCING LEGISLATION.
so I AGREE WITH YOU the laws need to be worked out VERY METICULOUSLY IN ADVANCE. *** EXACTLY ***
Dear PK1 and Chuz Life
It's not "either / or" ie pitting the rights to life AT ODDS with the rights of due process. Laws have to meet ALL STANDARDS of Constitutional principles.
Laws would have to satisfy BOTH the arguments of right to life and freedom of choice
in order not to violate Constitutional standards and beliefs, either way.
We'd have to write better laws that both
* acknowledge and protect the right to life beliefs
* but without infringing on the equal beliefs and due process of others
>>> BOTH <<<<
NOT EITHER / OR "in competition" with each other.
If there is conflict, that means that law is not written Constitutionally.
Other examples:
* Sure, we can have health care provisions that "provide for the general welfare" BUT NOT AT THE EXPENSE OF religious freedom, civil liberties and due process of law abiding citizens. The laws on health care HAVE TO MEET ALL CONSTITUTIONAL STANDARDS.
NOT EITHER OR. NOT SATISFYING ONE STANDARD WHILE VIOLATING ANOTHER PART OF THE LAW.
* Same with gun laws. Sure, we need to have public health and safety and law enforcement standards. BUT CAN'T IMPOSE SUCH BUREAUCRATIC REGULATIONS THAT THEY INFRINGE ON CIVIL RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES BY DEPRIVING LAW ABIDING CITIZENS OF FREEDOM WITHOUT DUE PROCESS.
We need regulations but do not need to overregulate.
We need to stick to Constitutional principles and standards
where all sides AGREE it doesn't go too far over or under the intended goals.
As for abortion:
Why not have an agreement that abortion can be banned
in districts or states with a zero percent rate of sexual abuse, relationship abuse, rape, incest and unwanted pregnancy.
Successfully eliminate and ban unwanted sex and pregnancy first.
And after that is achieved, then the residents of that district city county or state can agree to ban abortion since it will no longer impose on or affect women disproportionately.
The men AND women in each district would have to agree to ban any sex that otherwise would lead to unwanted pregnancy, unwanted children and thus unwanted abortion.
One step at a time. Get rid of rape, abuse of sex and relationships.
And then getting rid of abortion will naturally follow as a consequence, and it will not impose any risk or harm of punishing women more than men, when men are equally responsible for the decision to have sex, IF NOT MORE IN THE CASE OF RAPE, COERCION OR OTHER ABUSE.
What a messy post. I can barely make out what you were trying to say. Maybe you should take this back to the drawing board and while you are there, work on an example of how you would apply the same logic of this position of yours to an issue like slavery.
You know.... a way to let people continue to buy, sell and hold slaves so long as certain conditions are met. . .
You gave a very detailed example of a policy on abortion that you would support.
I would like to see you provide the same as a policy that would allow / permit slavery.
Let's not be cute with the words, here. I am talking not talking consent, charity or working for free. I am talking about the denial of someone's rights and freedoms and even their personhood in order to force them to provide labor for others.
So, again... give me a comparable example to the one that you provided about abortion. . . that would allow for society to keep and maintain slavery under our Constitution.
Your hedging, twisting and mental gymnastics speaks volumes.
Sent from my SM-N920V using USMessageBoard.com mobile app