Originally Posted By WilliamK99 You realize that the law passed in Congress does exactly what you just describe instead of allowing a company to completely subvert the legal process and deny a rape victim all ability to pursue a legal outcome.<< Yes I do, I am playing devil's advocate showing reasons as to why these Senators may have felt they shouldn't have voted for the law the way it was written...
Originally Posted By DAR But it wasn't a vote FOR rape. It was to protect businesses large and small from being part of a lawsuit in which they would have no bearing on.
Originally Posted By DAR It should protect the victim, but it also needs to protect the employer if they're not in any way responsible.
Originally Posted By Mr X If they're not in any way responsible, wouldn't the lawsuit judgement come down in their favor? Are you saying that companies or company owners should have the right to avoid court altogether?
Originally Posted By ecdc >>But it wasn't a vote FOR rape. It was to protect businesses large and small from being part of a lawsuit in which they would have no bearing on.<< No, it doesn't. If a company isn't liable or guilty of anything, then they have nothing to worry about. I mean, isn't that what we hear from conservatives all the time? Extra surveillance and security is ok, because if people aren't doing anything wrong, then they have nothing to fear. Why doesn't that apply here? If companies provide safe environments for their employees and one of their employees is still assaulted, they won't be liable. But if, as in the case of K&R in the instance that spurred Senator Franken's amendment, then they should be sued. Furthermore, this only applies to companies with defense contracts, so let's stop pretending like Ma & Pa's Pizza Joint over on 2nd and Center St is going to go under because some slimy rape victim's going to sue them. Good god, does the insanity ever stop?
Originally Posted By ecdc >>Are you saying that companies or company owners should have the right to avoid court altogether?<< Exactly. What these Senators, and DAR and William, are advocating are different rules for giant corporations with big government contracts than the rest of us. I can be sued at any time. DAR can be sued. If the lawsuit is frivolous, then chances are the judge will rule that our defense costs be paid by the plaintiff. I don't see why this should be any different for these companies? This willingness to defend companies NO MATTER WHAT is gotten to be a parody of itself. This is a Saturday Night Live sketch - a rape victim is told by Republicans she can't sue a company whose negligence aided and abetted the criminal. Wow.
Originally Posted By DAR But this is saying companies are responsible if an assault takes place on its premises.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***But this is saying companies are responsible if an assault takes place on its premises.*** Are you sure? My understanding it that the issue at hand is whether or not a contractor has the right to require employees to sign away their right to sue no matter what, and furthermore the issue has to do with whether or not the government should do business with them, not whether or not they can legally do such a thing (I think they shouldn't be able to, but in any case that's not the issue at hand).
Originally Posted By ecdc >>But this is saying companies are responsible if an assault takes place on its premises.<< No it isn't. It's saying they can be sued. Nothing more. Nothing less. After a lawsuit is filed then it's up to a judge to determine if they're responsible. I don't understand why you support different rules for companies than for the average American? As we learned over the last 15 months, giant corporations are doing just fine. I know some people act like they're an endangered species, but they're doing ok.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>My understanding it that the issue at hand is whether or not a contractor has the right to require employees to sign away their right to sue no matter what.<< Bingo. It changes the law from this: "Hey, no matter how horrible of a work environment we provide for you and no matter if our negligence contributes to you being gang raped, you still can't sue us. Neener, neener, neener!" To this: You have the same rights as any other American. Outrageous! Those bleeding heart liberals are at it again!
Originally Posted By DAR <<Bingo. It changes the law from this: "Hey, no matter how horrible of a work environment we provide for you and no matter if our negligence contributes to you being gang raped, you still can't sue us. Neener, neener, neener!" To this: You have the same rights as any other American.>> Fine but it's not a vote for rape. These senators aren't protecting the rights of the actual rapist(which if I had my way wouldn't have any).
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy Yes. They are protecting the rights of corporations that finance their campaigns.
