Let's face it folks. The ADA is a another socialist device by secular devils to destroy businesses.
2006-08-28 07:31:47 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
amen take back the gov't from the socialists
2006-08-28 07:34:44 · answer #1 · answered by frederickpuddles 2 · 0⤊ 3⤋
How would one consider it unconstitutional? ADA for the most part puts things in place for people with disabilities to function a little better in the real world. While there are some strange effects, it by and large is a good thing. Besides, aren't you conservative always the ones who don't want social programs but want people to work? How is a disabled person supposed to work if they say can't even get into their place of employment?
It is not out to destroy business, in fact it should help businesses given that now people with disabilities could patronize those businesses.
There are quite a few laws to protect certain people that are NOT in the constitution, yet complement it and are good things in general (e.g. civil rights act, etc.)
Securlar devils? So, how as a Christian (or other religious person) can you NOT support something that helps the least of us?
coragrpyphs-- btw-- yes business should for the most part stay out of business. but there are many times when business runs amok. And, somebody has to look after the public trust which may be infringed by certain businesses.
2006-08-28 07:39:48 · answer #2 · answered by dapixelator 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
It may not be wise, and it may be socialist, but it's not unconstitutional.
Under the Equal Protection clause, laws that make distinctions based on category are evaluated based on the type of class distinction being made. Here, the distinction is between handicapped and non-handicapped people.
Because that is not a suspect or quasi-suspect class, the determination of whether the law is valid (constitutional) is made using what's called Rational Basis review.
This means the law will be found valid as long as it accomplishes some legitimate purpose within the scope of Congressional authority, and as long as the means used bear at least some rational connection to the goal.
The accommodation (or not) of handicapped persons by businesses has a measurable cumulative effect on interstate commerce, which make it a legitimate goal under the Commerce Clause (Article I Section 8). Forcing business to accommodate handicapped people, either as customers or employees, is rationally related to the economic effects on commerce.
Hence, the ADA is constitutional. Note: I think Rational Basis review is a mistake, and I think govt should stay out of business. But under the existing laws, the ADA is valid.
2006-08-28 07:36:17 · answer #3 · answered by coragryph 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Yes, it is unconstitutional. And I work with people with disabilities. But I understand that private businesses are just that, private. They have the unalienable right to be able to serve or not serve anyone they wish, and if they do not wish to be wheelchair accessible (etc), that is also their right. The free market and public pressure will soon determine their fate.
2014-03-22 10:16:02 · answer #4 · answered by ? 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
What, so the disabled dont deserve some form of protection?
You need to brush up on your theories as well, fool. Socialism and Secularism has nothign to do with human rights
2006-08-28 07:39:20 · answer #5 · answered by thomas p 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, it's a good piece of legislation made to ensure that employers give the proper accomodations to disabled employees who can otherwise do the job without a problem.
There have been abuses though. Strippers have been claiming their sex drive is too high, so they need special treatment. Overly obese people say they need special treatment because they're too big. Things like that.
2006-08-28 07:40:07 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
yeah and get all those wheelchair ramps out of there so no one in a wheelchair can get access over steps, and take away the handrails too, good idea no ADA, gimme a break, isn't there something you have better to worry about
2006-08-28 07:38:49 · answer #7 · answered by dunknasty 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
There is nothing in the constitution that prohibits "socialism." There is, however, something in there that allows those "secular devils" to advocate destroying businesses. Buck it up, kid.
2006-08-28 07:41:39 · answer #8 · answered by Evo_Morales 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Unconstitutional...probably not...but the application has expanded far beyond the original intent.
2006-08-28 07:37:58 · answer #9 · answered by Black Fedora 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes, as is about 60%-70% of everything the federal government is currently doing. However, instituting such programs wins politicians votes, so they are not going to fix it.
2006-08-28 07:35:26 · answer #10 · answered by Aegis of Freedom 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
This is why people don't take conservatives seriously when conservatives try talking about compassion.
The shoe simply doesn't fit.
2006-08-28 07:39:35 · answer #11 · answered by brian2412 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋