Pot calling Kettle black!

[Kapt Z]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

The consitution specifically states that goverment should not intervene in private buisness.

until they're begged to.

[SteamWake]

Originally Posted by Kapt Z

until they're begged to.

Or its rammed down their throat.

but if a parent wants to spend several thousand dollars funding a private education for their own children so that they can grow up surrounded by members of the community which share the same ideals as the family does - so be it...

The problem there is that the business in question is state funded and recieves additional financial concessions from the state .
Since independant schools and similar business operations are allowed under law to have certain limited discriminatory policies the whole case will revolve around one issue .
Which is , at what stage was the womans faith the reason she didn't get the job , if it is shown it was the first and primary reason then the school is screwed , however if it is shown that she was exactly matched in qualifications to another candidate and the permitted limited discrimination was used as the final decider then she loses the case .
We had similar issues up in Dublin last september , the scope of the limits of discriminatory practice in education .

The consitution specifically states that goverment should not intervene in private buisness.

The constitution states that the government makes the rules for business .

Its the politicos tearing up the constitution not its citizens. Unfortunatly a large part of the population doesent realize this.

The problem is that some people go on about how great the constitution is in regards to the application of an article they like , but when it comes to the application of an article they don't like they rant about it .

[Digital_Trucker]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

The constitution states that the government makes the rules for business .

That's interstate business.

That's interstate business.

Yeah , and the cases during the civil rights thing showed that even local business is interstate business . Plus of course you have the other rulings that local business practice can fall under the protectionism thing which is against the interests of interstate business .
So unless you are one of those inbred shopkeepers from Royston Vasey they have you covered .

who's to say that a more qualified or more experienced person didn't apply for the job?

Errr...that would be the court wouldn't it , where the school will have to show that they chose a better candidate .

[Digital_Trucker]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Yeah , and the cases during the civil rights thing showed that even local business is interstate business . Plus of course you have the other rulings that local business practice can fall under the protectionism thing which is against the interests of interstate business .
So unless you are one of those inbred shopkeepers from Royston Vasey they have you covered .

Yeah, I guess I should have stipulated that it's interstate business unless it's something that's bad for all of the nation. At least that's the way it's supposed to be. In todays US, it's more like "We the Fed shall rule over everything we deem fit to rule over". However, that is NOT the way the Constitution was written or intended. Which is why I commented to begin with. As someone stated earlier, we don't need to rip our Constitution to shreds, it's already been done for us by our elected officials and is in the process of being put into the burn-bag and incinerated.

[GoldenRivet]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

The problem there is that the business in question is state funded and recieves additional financial concessions from the state .
Since independant schools and similar business operations are allowed under law to have certain limited discriminatory policies the whole case will revolve around one issue .
Which is , at what stage was the womans faith the reason she didn't get the job , if it is shown it was the first and primary reason then the school is screwed , however if it is shown that she was exactly matched in qualifications to another candidate and the permitted limited discrimination was used as the final decider then she loses the case .
We had similar issues up in Dublin last september , the scope of the limits of discriminatory practice in education .


The constitution states that the government makes the rules for business .

The problem is that some people go on about how great the constitution is in regards to the application of an article they like , but when it comes to the application of an article they don't like they rant about it .

these kinds of discriminatory cases arise all the time though.

who's to say that a more qualified or more experienced person didn't apply for the job?

[Kapt Z]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

Or its rammed down their throat.

I might have missed it, but I don't think I've heard any company getting federal aid say, "Nah, Mr President. Don't bail us out. We'll just fail thank you."