Re: Who Could Pass These Job Requirements? [ThisIsIt] [ In reply to ]

Jan 16, 19 7:28

Post #26 of 50 (704 views)

ThisIsIt wrote:

I'd be surprised if even half the employees there meet those requirements, actually I'd be surprised if a quarter do.

Wouldn't any woman be violating the "unique roles of male and female" just by seeking a job, or did religious conservatives decide at some point that a man working and woman being the homemaker no longer constituted unique roles.

I don't recall any portion of Bible stating "thou shall not work outside thy home."

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

Re: Who Could Pass These Job Requirements? [JSA] [ In reply to ]

Jan 16, 19 7:28

Post #27 of 50 (701 views)

JSA wrote:

chaparral wrote:

We don't want teachers to look at pornography in their own private life because we want our teachers to be good role models and not evil people, but we are totally ok with the president raw dogging a porn star while his wife is recovering from giving birth.

Who the hell is this "we" of whom you speak?

Isn't it obvious, all the posters of the lavender room. We had a vote and everything.

Re: Who Could Pass These Job Requirements? [ThisIsIt] [ In reply to ]

Jan 16, 19 7:33

Post #28 of 50 (694 views)

ThisIsIt wrote:

Pyrenean Wolf wrote:

This will be totally illegal in France.
Breaking several laws

It's illegal here in most places of employment too. For some reasons we've decided in certain situations it's ok though. I'm also not sure what is OK and what is not. For instance can private schools discriminate on the basis of religion but race would not be allowed?

It has to be a "bona fide occupational qualification." That means it is needs to be tied to the essential functions of the job and have a rational reason for its existence.

Examples:

Age - Mandatory retirement ages for airline pilots and law enforcement officers based on safety concerns.

National Origin - A French restaurant can require a cook to be French.

Gender - A company that makes men's clothes can require model be male.

Disability - Field agents for law enforcement must be free from physical disabilities.

When it comes to religion, a private parochial school can require teachers be of the same religion or to adhere to the religious tenets of that religion.

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

Re: Who Could Pass These Job Requirements? [chaparral] [ In reply to ]

Jan 16, 19 7:33

Post #29 of 50 (692 views)

chaparral wrote:

JSA wrote:

chaparral wrote:

We don't want teachers to look at pornography in their own private life because we want our teachers to be good role models and not evil people, but we are totally ok with the president raw dogging a porn star while his wife is recovering from giving birth.

Who the hell is this "we" of whom you speak?

Isn't it obvious, all the posters of the lavender room. We had a vote and everything.

I must have been sick that day.

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

Re: Who Could Pass These Job Requirements? [patentattorney] [ In reply to ]

Jan 16, 19 7:35

Post #30 of 50 (683 views)

patentattorney wrote:

If I have been taught anything this year. It’s that if you deny something twice. You didn’t do it.

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

Re: Who Could Pass These Job Requirements? [JSA] [ In reply to ]

Jan 16, 19 7:36

Post #31 of 50 (676 views)

JSA wrote:

chaparral wrote:

We don't want teachers to look at pornography in their own private life because we want our teachers to be good role models and not evil people, but we are totally ok with the president raw dogging a porn star while his wife is recovering from giving birth.

Who the hell is this "we" of whom you speak?

You. Specifically you.

WTF Joel.

chaparral seems to not realize that to a lot of people who want pure teachers, getting a wall built to keep them dirty wetbacks out is far more important than the fact that Senor Presidente is a piece of trash.

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

Re: Who Could Pass These Job Requirements? [chaparral] [ In reply to ]

Jan 16, 19 7:36

Post #32 of 50 (676 views)

chaparral wrote:

trail wrote:

What are "improprieties toward minors"? Is that a euphemism for "don't be like those Catholic clergy?"

I just don't understand how they say "sexual abuse or improprieties toward minors as defined by Scripture and federal or state law." I have read a bit of the bible, federal and state law are much stricter than anything you will find in there involving minors. There is not some edge case where something is allowed by federal or state law, but against scripture. In scripture many of them are minors.

I was thinking the same thing. I wonder where scripture is more strict than modern law? I mean I think you can kill your kid for giving you sass but that clearly runs afoul of modern law.

Re: Who Could Pass These Job Requirements? [JSA] [ In reply to ]

Jan 16, 19 7:37

Post #33 of 50 (675 views)

JSA wrote:

ThisIsIt wrote:

I'd be surprised if even half the employees there meet those requirements, actually I'd be surprised if a quarter do.

Wouldn't any woman be violating the "unique roles of male and female" just by seeking a job, or did religious conservatives decide at some point that a man working and woman being the homemaker no longer constituted unique roles.

I don't recall any portion of Bible stating "thou shall not work outside thy home."

I don't think the unique roles of male and female that many religious types hold to have much to do with scripture.

Last edited by: ThisIsIt: Jan 16, 19 7:43

Re: Who Could Pass These Job Requirements? [JSA] [ In reply to ]

Jan 16, 19 7:40

Post #34 of 50 (670 views)

JSA wrote:

ThisIsIt wrote:

Pyrenean Wolf wrote:

This will be totally illegal in France.
Breaking several laws

It's illegal here in most places of employment too. For some reasons we've decided in certain situations it's ok though. I'm also not sure what is OK and what is not. For instance can private schools discriminate on the basis of religion but race would not be allowed?

It has to be a "bona fide occupational qualification." That means it is needs to be tied to the essential functions of the job and have a rational reason for its existence.

Examples:

Age - Mandatory retirement ages for airline pilots and law enforcement officers based on safety concerns.

National Origin - A French restaurant can require a cook to be French.

Gender - A company that makes men's clothes can require model be male.

Disability - Field agents for law enforcement must be free from physical disabilities.

When it comes to religion, a private parochial school can require teachers be of the same religion or to adhere to the religious tenets of that religion.

So let's say you're the member of some religious sect that holds racist views (whites are superior, you can only marry other whites, etc. etc., substitute blacks if it makes it work better for you). Could you get away with racial discrimination in hiring or student admittance at your private school?

Re: Who Could Pass These Job Requirements? [j p o] [ In reply to ]

Jan 16, 19 7:48

Post #35 of 50 (664 views)

j p o wrote:

"Did you ever have sex before you were married?"

"Um... no?"

"With a little more conviction please..."

"Oh no, I was never convicted."

I wouldn't WANT anyone teaching my kids who could pass this. Think how narrow their world view would be.

This. The only people I have met that could pass those requirements, or at least pretend to, are not people I want anywhere near my kid.

Long Chile was a silly place.

Re: Who Could Pass These Job Requirements? [ThisIsIt] [ In reply to ]

Jan 16, 19 7:58

Post #36 of 50 (648 views)

ThisIsIt wrote:

So let's say you're the member of some religious sect that holds racist views (whites are superior, you can only marry other whites, etc. etc., substitute blacks if it makes it work better for you). Could you get away with racial discrimination in hiring or student admittance at your private school?

Well, we need look no further than the treatment of homosexuals to get the answer - yes. Note, it would have to be a religious private school. Then the school would have to demonstrate a "sincerely held religious belief." That requires showing a legitimate religion and showing the tenets of said religion demand acting in a certain way.

Now, it would be tough to show a bona fide religion has overtly racist tenets. However, look at real life examples like a Christian school refusing to hire a Jew or a Catholic school refusing to hire a Muslim. So, your example suddenly does not appear so far-fetched.

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

Re: Who Could Pass These Job Requirements? [ThisIsIt] [ In reply to ]

Jan 16, 19 7:59

Post #37 of 50 (645 views)

ThisIsIt wrote:

Wouldn't any woman be violating the "unique roles of male and female" just by seeking a job, or did religious conservatives decide at some point that a man working and woman being the homemaker no longer constituted unique roles.

Given the context in which it is found, "any other violation of the unique roles of male and female" means nothing other than genital intercourse. No oral, no anal, no, well, anything but genital intercourse (use your imagination, but you might not be able to work at this school in the future).

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

Last edited by: klehner: Jan 16, 19 8:00

Re: Who Could Pass These Job Requirements? [klehner] [ In reply to ]

Jan 16, 19 8:24

Post #38 of 50 (623 views)

klehner wrote:

ThisIsIt wrote:

Wouldn't any woman be violating the "unique roles of male and female" just by seeking a job, or did religious conservatives decide at some point that a man working and woman being the homemaker no longer constituted unique roles.

Given the context in which it is found, "any other violation of the unique roles of male and female" means nothing other than genital intercourse. No oral, no anal, no, well, anything but genital intercourse (use your imagination, but you might not be able to work at this school in the future).

I'm certainly disqualified based on several criteria. I think only a polygamist homosexual trangender person would be less qualified than me, and maybe not even.

Re: Who Could Pass These Job Requirements? [JSA] [ In reply to ]

Jan 16, 19 8:27

Post #39 of 50 (623 views)

JSA wrote:

Alvin Tostig wrote:

Karen Pence, the with of the Vice President, apparently met the requirements. I'll admit I wouldn't make it.

“Moral misconduct which violates the bona fide occupational qualifications for employees includes, but is not limited to, such behaviors as the following: heterosexual activity outside of marriage (e.g., premarital sex, cohabitation, extramarital sex), homosexual or lesbian sexual activity, polygamy, transgender identity, any other violation of the unique roles of male and female, sexual harassment, use or viewing of pornographic material or websites, and sexual abuse or improprieties toward minors as defined by Scripture and federal or state law.”

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/the-school-that-hired-karen-pence-requires-applicants-to-disavow-gay-marriage-trans-identity/ar-BBSiRhc?li=BBnb7Kz

It's a private school. I don't think they're violating any laws/civil rights. But dang, it sounds like a weird set of requirements for employment.

I had no idea you were a lesbian. Mind blown!

Gee, thanks for outing me. Now I'll never get a job there.

"Human existence is based upon two pillars: Compassion and knowledge. Compassion without knowledge is ineffective; Knowledge without compassion is inhuman." Victor Weisskopf.

Re: Who Could Pass These Job Requirements? [klehner] [ In reply to ]

Jan 16, 19 8:46

Post #40 of 50 (611 views)

klehner wrote:

ThisIsIt wrote:

Wouldn't any woman be violating the "unique roles of male and female" just by seeking a job, or did religious conservatives decide at some point that a man working and woman being the homemaker no longer constituted unique roles.

Given the context in which it is found, "any other violation of the unique roles of male and female" means nothing other than genital intercourse. No oral, no anal, no, well, anything but genital intercourse (use your imagination, but you might not be able to work at this school in the future).

So are you just supposed to stick it in? No warm up? Have these people had sex?

Re: Who Could Pass These Job Requirements? [chaparral] [ In reply to ]

Jan 16, 19 8:50

Post #41 of 50 (609 views)

chaparral wrote:

klehner wrote:

ThisIsIt wrote:

Wouldn't any woman be violating the "unique roles of male and female" just by seeking a job, or did religious conservatives decide at some point that a man working and woman being the homemaker no longer constituted unique roles.

Given the context in which it is found, "any other violation of the unique roles of male and female" means nothing other than genital intercourse. No oral, no anal, no, well, anything but genital intercourse (use your imagination, but you might not be able to work at this school in the future).

So are you just supposed to stick it in? No warm up? Have these people had sex?

No idea if "fluffing" is prohibited by the Bible, but that generally doesn't fall under the category "intercourse."

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

Re: Who Could Pass These Job Requirements? [chaparral] [ In reply to ]

Jan 16, 19 8:52

Post #42 of 50 (601 views)

chaparral wrote:

klehner wrote:

ThisIsIt wrote:

Wouldn't any woman be violating the "unique roles of male and female" just by seeking a job, or did religious conservatives decide at some point that a man working and woman being the homemaker no longer constituted unique roles.

Given the context in which it is found, "any other violation of the unique roles of male and female" means nothing other than genital intercourse. No oral, no anal, no, well, anything but genital intercourse (use your imagination, but you might not be able to work at this school in the future).

So are you just supposed to stick it in? No warm up? Have these people had sex?

I think these people would mostly prefer no one have sex and certainly not enjoy it.

Post deleted by spudone [ In reply to ]

Jan 16, 19 8:58

Post #43 of 50 (596 views)

Re: Who Could Pass These Job Requirements? [spudone] [ In reply to ]

Jan 16, 19 9:06

Post #44 of 50 (586 views)

spudone wrote:

ThisIsIt wrote:

JSA wrote:

ThisIsIt wrote:

I'd be surprised if even half the employees there meet those requirements, actually I'd be surprised if a quarter do.

Wouldn't any woman be violating the "unique roles of male and female" just by seeking a job, or did religious conservatives decide at some point that a man working and woman being the homemaker no longer constituted unique roles.

I don't recall any portion of Bible stating "thou shall not work outside thy home."

I don't think the unique roles of male and female that many religious types hold to have much to do with scripture.

I'm pretty sure "transgender identity" isn't something you're going to find in scripture, either.

I'm like a broken record on this but it's odd they don't mention divorce as being an issue since it's one of the things Jesus actually had something to say about. Catholics deserve some credit for holding the line on that one.

Re: Who Could Pass These Job Requirements? [ThisIsIt] [ In reply to ]

Jan 16, 19 9:54

Post #45 of 50 (561 views)

ThisIsIt wrote:

spudone wrote:

ThisIsIt wrote:

JSA wrote:

ThisIsIt wrote:

I'd be surprised if even half the employees there meet those requirements, actually I'd be surprised if a quarter do.

Wouldn't any woman be violating the "unique roles of male and female" just by seeking a job, or did religious conservatives decide at some point that a man working and woman being the homemaker no longer constituted unique roles.

I don't recall any portion of Bible stating "thou shall not work outside thy home."

I don't think the unique roles of male and female that many religious types hold to have much to do with scripture.

I'm pretty sure "transgender identity" isn't something you're going to find in scripture, either.

I'm like a broken record on this but it's odd they don't mention divorce as being an issue since it's one of the things Jesus actually had something to say about. Catholics deserve some credit for holding the line on that one.

Except that there is one hell of a lot of divorced Catholics out there. Same % as anybody else.

Re: Who Could Pass These Job Requirements? [Alvin Tostig] [ In reply to ]

Jan 16, 19 9:57

Post #46 of 50 (558 views)

Alvin Tostig wrote:

Karen Pence, the with of the Vice President, apparently met the requirements. I'll admit I wouldn't make it.

“Moral misconduct which violates the bona fide occupational qualifications for employees includes, but is not limited to, such behaviors as the following: heterosexual activity outside of marriage (e.g., premarital sex, cohabitation, extramarital sex), homosexual or lesbian sexual activity, polygamy, transgender identity, any other violation of the unique roles of male and female, sexual harassment, use or viewing of pornographic material or websites, and sexual abuse or improprieties toward minors as defined by Scripture and federal or state law.”

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/the-school-that-hired-karen-pence-requires-applicants-to-disavow-gay-marriage-trans-identity/ar-BBSiRhc?li=BBnb7Kz

It's a private school. I don't think they're violating any laws/civil rights. But dang, it sounds like a weird set of requirements for employment.

Good thing these aren't requirements for the VP job, otherwise we'd end up with a permanent Mike Pence. There would probably be no other candidates.

Re: Who Could Pass These Job Requirements? [burnthesheep] [ In reply to ]

Jan 16, 19 10:07

Post #47 of 50 (548 views)

burnthesheep wrote:

Now, if it were the classes involving Bible study of any kind......yes, that's totally fair game. I think the school would have to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the algebra teacher's qualifications according to that crazy statement is integral to teaching algebra.

that's calculus.

Re: Who Could Pass These Job Requirements? [cerveloguy] [ In reply to ]

Jan 16, 19 10:13

Post #48 of 50 (544 views)

cerveloguy wrote:

ThisIsIt wrote:

spudone wrote:

ThisIsIt wrote:

JSA wrote:

ThisIsIt wrote:

I'd be surprised if even half the employees there meet those requirements, actually I'd be surprised if a quarter do.

Wouldn't any woman be violating the "unique roles of male and female" just by seeking a job, or did religious conservatives decide at some point that a man working and woman being the homemaker no longer constituted unique roles.

I don't recall any portion of Bible stating "thou shall not work outside thy home."

I don't think the unique roles of male and female that many religious types hold to have much to do with scripture.

I'm pretty sure "transgender identity" isn't something you're going to find in scripture, either.

I'm like a broken record on this but it's odd they don't mention divorce as being an issue since it's one of the things Jesus actually had something to say about. Catholics deserve some credit for holding the line on that one.

Except that there is one hell of a lot of divorced Catholics out there. Same % as anybody else.

Excuse me, those were not divorces. Those were annulments, which means the marriage never actually happened, how could there be a divorce for a marriage that never happened? Answer that smart ass!

Re: Who Could Pass These Job Requirements? [chaparral] [ In reply to ]

Jan 16, 19 11:23

Post #49 of 50 (517 views)

chaparral wrote:

cerveloguy wrote:

ThisIsIt wrote:

spudone wrote:

ThisIsIt wrote:

JSA wrote:

ThisIsIt wrote:

I'd be surprised if even half the employees there meet those requirements, actually I'd be surprised if a quarter do.

Wouldn't any woman be violating the "unique roles of male and female" just by seeking a job, or did religious conservatives decide at some point that a man working and woman being the homemaker no longer constituted unique roles.

I don't recall any portion of Bible stating "thou shall not work outside thy home."

I don't think the unique roles of male and female that many religious types hold to have much to do with scripture.

I'm pretty sure "transgender identity" isn't something you're going to find in scripture, either.

I'm like a broken record on this but it's odd they don't mention divorce as being an issue since it's one of the things Jesus actually had something to say about. Catholics deserve some credit for holding the line on that one.

Except that there is one hell of a lot of divorced Catholics out there. Same % as anybody else.

Excuse me, those were not divorces. Those were annulments, which means the marriage never actually happened, how could there be a divorce for a marriage that never happened? Answer that smart ass!

Was married in a Catholic church and divorced 15 yrs later. The law says we're divorced so neither of us really give a damn what the Catholic church says.

Re: Who Could Pass These Job Requirements? [Alvin Tostig] [ In reply to ]

Jan 16, 19 12:25

Post #50 of 50 (497 views)

Wasn’t she the poster child for a housewife?

Then Trump threw her under the bus and said she can’t cook as well as McDonalds.

Is it really a surprise she’s looking for a side hustle?

They might be needing a line on health insurance come 2020 too.

Rough week but way to pull yourself up by the bootstraps!

Our Partners

transition-DOT-area-AT-slowtwitch-DOT-com

Advertise with us

©1999-2024 Slowtwitch, Inc., and Slowtwitch.com
Reproduction of material from any Slowtwitch.com page
without written permission is strictly prohibited.