English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories
14

Ok, so there are these new adds about human rights on TV right..

All I want to know is, why would they have human right laws about Discrimination, when apparently there is a new law coming out which gives employers the right to sack employees because they don’t like them.

Also, another human right is freedom of expression, why do people get fined for Graffiti?

Isn’t the government just contradicting themselves???

But I just want to know what are your thoughts on this.

2006-09-07 14:28:37 · 24 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

I see where u are all coming from with graffiti being vandalism, but don't we pay taxes to build these things? so therefore don't we own things as well. I mean alot of people vandalise the skate board park to better it, and people actually don't mid at all so i don't really see the problem here...

2006-09-07 14:44:36 · update #1

24 answers

Well if you don't see the problem with graffiti maybe we should all go to your house and get paint happy???? My gosh what is happened to this world!

2006-09-07 15:00:45 · answer #1 · answered by kirsten215 3 · 0 0

That's what the government is there for. To contradict itsself. Nothing new there. As for Human Rights, there will always be discrimination because peoples view of discrimination differs so much. The not liking the person thing really isn't discrimination. It's just making a nice, happy work place for everyone. No tension. Grafitti is considered vandalism. Just like breaking a window. You are writing something permanent on something you don't own. If Grafitti is done properly, it's art, but you need to watch where it's put. Some people don't like art.

2006-09-07 14:32:21 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

An employer can terminate an employee if the employee is an "at will" employee -- meaning there is no employment contract. Doesn't matter what their sex, nationality, race, or religion is. They can be fired. I don't know about any new law in this regard, this has always been the case.

The graffiti question is absurd on its face: It is not a freedom of expression to vandalize another's property, just like it is not a freedom of expression to yell "fire" in a crowded room when there is no fire and you're doing it just for a joke. Nor can you joke about carrying a bomb aboard an airplane -- that's not freedom of expression.

As for your last question, there is so much hypocrisy in politics, government, and religion, to name just a few, that it makes your question rhetorical and academic. In other words, DUH.

Those are my thoughts.

2006-09-07 14:37:15 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

The whole government contradicts itself it has 2 sets of rules one set is for the politicians and filthy stinking' rich The other is for the rest of us AS For graffiti If it is not done on another person's properly fine But the thing is the majority of it is That is where the problem lies I work for a land developer and more than once our brand new buildings have gotten tagged the costs to remove it off a brick building are not cheap and the cities that we build in require us by law to remove it. Some cities actually do set put areas for graffiti artists and some of the art is quite beautifully done. If people would not deface private or public property with it I would have no problem with it.

2006-09-07 14:32:45 · answer #4 · answered by bisquedog 6 · 0 1

Employers generally have the right to fire anyone without cause. Some states have restricted that, but generally the employer owns the business and has the right to employ who they want. Of course they can't discriminate against a protected class. That includes firing because of religion, sex, race, age, or disability. They can't fire you for that reason, but they can fire you if they don't like you.

The issue of graffiti is that you are not allowed to deface or do what you want with someone Else's property (including public property) While some graffiti is cool to look at, it is not cool to mark up someone Else's property.

Freedom does not mean we are free to do whatever we want. We are allowed freedoms within the confines of law.

2006-09-07 14:34:41 · answer #5 · answered by united9198 7 · 2 0

You are correct that laws do contradict themselfs but most law makers dont realize that. you are also right that graffiti is a way of free expression but if done on buildings train/subway cars its considered destruction of property, althought there are many places which are set off for people to do graffiti which makes it legal. i find graffiti a good way of interpretating others lifestyles. Most descrimination laws are about racial descrimination, and if the new law comes out which will allow employers to sack employees it will most likly be based upon the persons work habbits and ability to work with others. But if a person if fired based on their race and the employer is caught the employer will loose his job for racial descrimination.

2006-09-07 14:39:26 · answer #6 · answered by gerry4756 2 · 1 0

graffiti is defacing someones property, does not come under Freedom of expression. If someone is fored the employer had better have documation of violations to satisfy the Labor Board. Discrimination means you can't look an applicate in the eye and say " we have a policy against hiring single mothers, or renting to a single mother" All applicants are judged on qualifications. or first one to apply for housing with the money.

2006-09-07 14:40:22 · answer #7 · answered by longroad 5 · 2 0

While I agree that freedom of expression is a good thing (mostly), the reason graffiti is a punishable offense is because it is illegal to deface the property of others or public property. You have every right to your opinion, you just can't write it on my building.

It's not the government contradicting themselves, it's society refusing to police themselves and behave morally. They wouldn't have laws against things if someone hadn't done it.

2006-09-07 14:37:37 · answer #8 · answered by hrh_gracee 5 · 2 0

First of all why should an employee have to give a reason for firing you. It's there job and their buisness Thay can do whatever they want. Second when people are expressing themselves with graffiti they are usually doing it on another person property. So in turn you are saying that if I wanted to take you car and write all over it I shouldn't get introuble because I am expressing myself? Think About it.

2006-09-07 14:32:16 · answer #9 · answered by lunitari601 3 · 1 1

I really haven't heard much about this new law coming out but with the second question...graffiti is essentially defacing public (or private) property. Why should people not get in trouble for leaving their mark or whatever all over someone else's property???

add'l details of my own: let's see...a skate park vs. let's see...a public building that is paid for with our money...hmm...what do you think the majority of tax payers are going to say about something they have paid for being vandalized like that.

2006-09-07 14:31:35 · answer #10 · answered by Sunidaze 7 · 2 0

Employers can sack you if they don't like you already. They just have to find a citable reason.

People are fined for graffiti because they are infringing on someone else's right to not have their property defaced.

It's not contradiction, it's how democracy works.

2006-09-07 14:41:58 · answer #11 · answered by fumblingkc 2 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers