General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMissouri Advances Bill Allowing Employers to Fire Women for Using Birth Control
Missouri Advances Bill Allowing Employers to Fire Women for Using Birth Control
Posted on Jun 23, 2017
On Tuesday, the Missouri House of Representatives voted in favor of Senate Bill 5, which would modify statewide provisions relating to abortion. Changes would affect local abortion policies, tissue reports, employee disclosure policies and abortion facility inspections.
Pitched as an expansion of religious freedom for employers and landlords, the bill would overturn a St. Louis city ordinance that prevented discrimination against women who have had abortions. The new law would allow employers to fire female employees for having had abortions or using birth control. It would extend the privilege of discrimination to landlords, who could evict women for getting an abortion, getting pregnant out of wedlock or using birth control.
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/missouri_passes_bill_allowing_employers_20170622
joeybee12
(56,177 posts)Or is it Handmaiden. What is this 1850?
Dawson Leery
(19,348 posts)Matthew28
(1,796 posts)Dawson Leery
(19,348 posts)GoCubsGo
(32,074 posts)And, how the hell is any of this constitutional?
loyalsister
(13,390 posts)and be found unconstitutional. The legislature is doing this to piss off STL which passed an antidiscrimination ordinance that this bill will undo. It's petty and will give credentials to the "prolife" legislators and especially the governor. He used to be a Democrat and they are helping to scrub the prochoice brand off of his resume.
Blue_true
(31,261 posts)go out of business.
Initech
(100,036 posts)Ilsa
(61,690 posts)having sex for any resason other than procreation. The women they fire should be able to name the men and expect them to lose their jobs, housing, etc. It's part of MY religion, after all.
smirkymonkey
(63,221 posts)Can this stand? I am watching the 21st century disappear before my eyes and I feel like I am going mad.
Matthew28
(1,796 posts)They won't be happy until we're living in the 15th century and anyone that dares step out of line is hung.
We're watching the death of freedom and people keep voting republican.
roamer65
(36,744 posts)No sex with men until this stupid shit stops.
LeftyMom
(49,212 posts)Sex isn't a favor women dole out to men. Rumor has it we like it too, and it's just as important to our emotional well-being, ability to build and maintain healthy relationships, etc.
Persisted
(290 posts)Just sex with men.
LeftyMom
(49,212 posts)Persisted
(290 posts)decide masturbation isn't sex.
Persisted
(290 posts)roamer65
(36,744 posts)Welcome to DU, btw.
Vinca
(50,236 posts)Do they do home inspections of medicine cabinets or demand an inspection of an IUD string?
Aristus
(66,286 posts)Henry Ford used to have company inspectors break into Ford employee's houses and search the premises for anything Ford might find 'objectionable'. I don't think that word was ever properly defined in the corporate by-laws. But if Ford didn't like something, anything, that was turned up in the search, the employee was fired.
That's the kind of country the vicious Ayn Rand-worshippers want...
Sinistrous
(4,249 posts)jpak
(41,756 posts)Or is this plain old XtianGOP misogyny?
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)this is.
Takket
(21,528 posts)the bill favors one gender over the other. This is a violation of the 14th amendment.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/equal_protection
Egnever
(21,506 posts)This couldn't possibly stand up in court.
One wonders if some of these legislatures even consider the constitution when writing these things.
Blue_true
(31,261 posts)Republicans attack Judges because they want cowered Judges that rubber stamp their bills and ignore the Constitution.
edhopper
(33,479 posts)the Voting Rights Act and whose newest member is a proponent of Religious Liberty?
That Court?
WillowTree
(5,325 posts)I've searched and searched and the only text I can find for SB 5 for this session has nothing to do with abortion or birth control. There's and SB 67 that proposes changes to Missouri's laws applying to abortion facilities, but that's all. Yet every reference to these draconian provisions mentions SB 5, which doesn't seem to apply.
I'd just really like to see what such a ridiculous bill actually says, but I can't find it.
Ron Obvious
(6,261 posts)I'll never understand this mindset, nor for that matter do I understand the opposition of corporate America to single payer healthcare which would be a tremendous convenience for them as well as keeping their workers healthy enough to work without having to administer an insurance programme.
I suppose the dogma (religion, free market) triumphs over common sense capitalism. Bizarre.
defacto7
(13,485 posts)They can get rid of workers for getting pregnant as well as for trying not to get pregnant. The idea is how to keep women from having sex for any other reason than corporate admissible procreation. That's all I can make out of it.
tenderfoot
(8,425 posts)eom
lunasun
(21,646 posts)Americas future
Matthew28
(1,796 posts)Saudi Arabia when it comes to social issues.
We'll of course be even worse economically.
lunasun
(21,646 posts)FormerOstrich
(2,699 posts)blueinredohio
(6,797 posts)or used birth control?