This is laughable logic. Unemployed workers who don't won't to pay union dues are denied jobs by the pro union crowd. They have about the same choice as your woman in your phony analogy; actually they have a worse choice. A pregnant woman can always go across the border to another state and get the abortion. But an unemployed worker not so easily. Originally Posted by Whirlaway
Look in the mirror. I'm talking about the way you guys are in this thread predicting doom, gloom, rioting, the dead rising from the grave, dogs and cats living together ... Originally Posted by Yssup Rider
You are the one who predicted the legislation would never be happen.I said it wouldn't happen without legal challenges. Dipshit. A Republican state legislature and governor can railroad anything they like into law. But the proof if its validity generally comes after it survives the legal challenges. Like Voter ID.
Your an ignoramus on political issues. Originally Posted by Whirlaway
This is laughable logic. Unemployed workers who don't won't to pay union dues are denied jobs by the pro union crowd. They have about the same choice as your woman in your phony analogy; actually they have a worse choice. A pregnant woman can always go across the border to another state and get the abortion. But an unemployed worker not so easily. Originally Posted by WhirlawayOnly you would be clueless enough to say having to take a different job is comparable to being forced to bear a child. Of course, like all old, fat, white, male republicans who dominate the anti-choice argument for the republicans, you'll never be faced with the dilemma, will you pinhead?
It's your stupid analogy that equated a job with abortions. You fucking moron.
I was just playing within the confines of your own dumb logic. Your funny. You set up the very bad analogy, then when someone pokes a hole in it, you resort to calling someone a dummy for using the bad analogy you set up !
Fucking unbelievably stupid of you. Originally Posted by Whirlaway
Robert Heinlein
It is my understanding that dues money is not used for contributions to political candidates. Unions use voluntary contributions (PAC $$$) from their members for that purpose.
Furthermore, and here is the point that alot of unions don't get. Workers object to their union dues being funneled into the political process. In this last election alone, millions of dollars in union dues were spent on campaigning and electioneering. That is NOT what union dues were intended to do. Once unions crossed the line into becoming highly visible political operatives, they kind of lose any right to demand that all workers join them and contribute to political causes that the worker does not support. Originally Posted by SinsOfTheFlesh
