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

Our government is based on the truth that all people have unalienable rights and that among these are the right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Personally I don’t believe these rights include the right to receive something for nothing (e.g., food stamps, medical care), but I do believe a right to pursue employment is reasonably included. If someone wishes to work for compensation of some sort, they should be able to negotiate with someone for that job without interference from a government. I believe this right extends to all people in the world, not just U. S. citizens. Laws that interfere with this right are unjust such as: minimum wage and a requirement for citizenship. Government exists to protect our rights, not take them away.

2007-05-26 08:15:46 · 9 answers · asked by Bryan Kingsford 5 in Politics & Government Immigration

Thanks for your answers so far.

Apparently I need to reiterate that it's entirely appropriate for the government to step in if someone violates the rights of another. As I said, that's the legitimate purpose of government.

Several have made comments about only U. S. Citizens having rights. Please read the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. Everyone has some rights independent of whether some government protects them. Our government is based on this philosophy, even though many people are ignorant of this fact.

I realize there are many laws that aren't consistent with the principles I've described. They should be eliminated. I'm suggesting we work to correct the problem using correct principles. It may take a long time, but law based on correct principles of liberty is important to work towards.

We shouldn't support any laws that violate these principles.

2007-05-26 12:07:40 · update #1

9 answers

in the purest sense you are correct, but in reality that isn't the case and will never probably be the case.

2007-05-26 08:20:36 · answer #1 · answered by DH 4 · 2 2

What a wonderful forum topic. I will star it and keep track of the contributions. Here's mine. While I agree that the government should protect but not interfere primarily the government is in place to protect; especially those who cannot protect themselves. You really are not in a position to negotiate if you do not have any power. How can a seventeen year old without any experience negotiate a fair price for their labor? Once they gain experience and are able to "demand" a higher salary, what prevents you the employer from firing them and hiring a non experienced worker? This is why unions were formed and government minimum wage scales were implemented. We tried it the other way and it didn't work. Children were made to work from six in the morning until six at night with very little compensation. And then there was a little blip in our country history called "slavery era.' Your ability to pursue your happiness can not be at the expense of others. There is a cost for doing business. Now you quoted the Declaration of Independence. If you recall only white men were allowed to have the right to liberty. All of our founding fathers and authors of the constitution owned slaves. Where were their rights to pursue their happiness. Were they allowed to negotiate a fair "wage?" These founding fathers were quite willing to get "something for nothing." Where is the reparation for those lost wages? I could go on and on but I'll stop here. Thanks for the opportunity to share ideas. have a great day and enjoy your star.

2007-05-26 15:47:07 · answer #2 · answered by Luch d 3 · 1 2

All people do have the right to pursue employment. Some constraints to why this isn't being fulfilled:

1. Many are worried that criminals will be put in a bad place (like a criminal teaching our children)

2. Many workers feel they are being paid to little

3. It is very very hard for criminals to get back on the right path even if they really want to.

So the answer? We have a lot of work to do; there are laws that shouldn't be laws and there are lots of people who are supporting them. Let's get to work!

2007-05-26 21:10:05 · answer #3 · answered by Rich K 3 · 1 0

People have the right to pursue employment but only if they are legal citizens of the country. No person has the right to sneak into a country and demand equal status as a citizen.

2007-05-26 16:47:04 · answer #4 · answered by mnwomen 7 · 1 1

Every legal citizen of our country has the right to work and to enjoy the fruits of that labor and the benefits provided by the laws of the land. Any person who is here illegally does not have those rights. They have the right to employment in their own country and to enjoy the fruits of that labor and benefits provided by the laws of their country. Any person who is there illegally does not have those rights. Very simply, do not come unwelcomed into my house and expect to eat my food and sleep in my bed and I will extend the same courtesy to them in their country.

2007-05-26 15:36:45 · answer #5 · answered by cwomo 6 · 4 1

No, all people do not have the right to pursue employment. "Rights" are a fiction. The only rights you have are those that you defend yourself or that your government defends for you.

Now, maybe all people *should* have that right, but even if you take that position, that doesn't mean they can exercise that right to the detriment of *other* people, as America's illegal immigrant invaders do.

Anything else I can clear up for you?

JMB

2007-05-26 15:21:33 · answer #6 · answered by levyrat 4 · 1 1

Only LEGAL CITIZENS of a country have any rights in that country.

2007-05-26 15:49:57 · answer #7 · answered by Julia B 6 · 1 1

Rights in the USA extend ONLY to verifiable US Citizens and all others should ONLY be allowed to Work for Pay ON a Limit Green Card and Expelled when the Work is Completed. Not allowed to become a burden on the Citizens of the USA or Become Street Thugs. We have enough CRIME without allowing aliens to multiply our troubles.
Your Statement about all people MUST be changed to Citizens of the USA, in order for the United States to survive as a Free and Democratic Society. Otherwise the USA will be destroyed by Civil War and Anarchy.

THE BILL OF RIGHTS
Amendments 1-10 of the Constitution

---------------------------------------------------------------------

The Conventions of a number of the States having, at the time of adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added, and as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution;

Resolved, by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two-thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States; all or any of which articles, when ratified by three-fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the said Constitution, namely:


Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.


Amendment II
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.


Amendment III
No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.


Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.


Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.


Amendment VII
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.


Amendment VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.


Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.


Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

2007-05-26 18:17:08 · answer #8 · answered by deacon 2 · 1 1

Child molesters can't be teachers, period.

2007-05-26 15:32:43 · answer #9 · answered by Mizz SJG 7 · 2 1

fedest.com, questions and answers