Is Iowa going to be our first Taliban state? (home, school)

[nashvols]

Originally Posted by marilyn220

No, I don't and if I was thinking about it, this case ruling certainly changed my mind. It's one thing to grapple with my reproductive rights, but losing my job over something not in my control is something I'm not willing to go through.

I'm sorta cute with a big rack. Not that I go out of my way to show them off or anything, but I can't be bothered with losing my job, because some dude or his wife/girlfriend got issues with his self-control around me.

And Kansas was NEVER a thought. Ever. LOL!

Don't worry. When you get fired, it won't be because of your looks.

[tollfree]

The Bloom article was a much bigger deal than this ruling (in Iowa), as irrelevant as the Bloom article actually was.

Nationwide, this ruling is a much bigger deal, but mainly forgotten in Iowa. There's more concern about what Coach Ferentz will do.

[Tek_Freek]

Originally Posted by RonnieJonez

The Bloom article was a much bigger deal than this ruling (in Iowa), as irrelevant as the Bloom article actually was.

Nationwide, this ruling is a much bigger deal, but mainly forgotten in Iowa. There's more concern about what Coach Ferentz will do.

Now that's funny!!

[Tek_Freek]

Originally Posted by capitalcityguy

I do a lot of forum posting and have never been called a troll. If this happens to you, then ask yourself why this might be.

You appear to be trolling here because you started a thread with an inflammatory title and then refused to engage an honest, intellectual discussion on the matter after several people provided well-thoughtout explanations.

You don't have to agree with the explanations, but you have yet to directly counter anything without simply relying on rhetoric and hyperbole.

Finally, using "because it was a headline in the media" as your answer, shows poor judgement. You need to look at legal sources (or media using legal sources), if you want to go down that route. The media is in the business to sensationlizing things and you've bit into it hook, line, and sinker. As has been suggested several times, do your own research.

This. It's obvious to everyone here who is rational that this thread was started out of the need for sensationalism and attention with little regard for the law as it is written. If the OP has a problem with the way the laws is written (I certainly do) then it' is her right to work steadfastly to gt it changed - and I'm wagering that will never happen. And before I hear about "I don't live in Iowa", it doesn't matter what state you live in the law is the same.

[duster1979]

Originally Posted by marilyn220

It sets a dangerous precedent for all women (and some men) attractive or not, if their bosses hit on them, then get fired for not giving it up.

Please provide some documentation that this is what happened or stop making the statement. The woman didn't mention it in her suit so I have no reason to believe that this is the case.

[marilyn220]

Originally Posted by duster1979

Please provide some documentation that this is what happened or stop making the statement. The woman didn't mention it in her suit so I have no reason to believe that this is the case.

You're right and I will admit that I am "puzzled" by why she didn't find the things he said to be a form of sexual harassment. She clearly says that she didn't when questioned. She also says she considered him a 'father figure', but with the sexually offensive statements he makes to you, how do you consider that "fatherly"?

Yes, I am willing to concede that there is more to this story and this woman cannot be a complete dunce on the issue.

Women know from a very young age when a man is hitting on them or being inappropriate. I understand she NEEDED the job due to her family situation, but she sued for the WRONG thing. He did replace her with another woman, so saying she got fired for being a "woman" made no sense.

[econboy]

Claiming that Iowa is a Taliban state because of this is absurd.

The at-will employment laws already have permitted this in MANY states for years. It says nothing about Iowa and more about the nature of employment law and what it means to actually discriminate versus looking out for the health of the business, WHICH A MARRIAGE could very well dicatate.

Was there more to this and is it slimy? Oh certainly! But we can agree something may be wrong from a character standpoint while not breaking any laws. There is a difference and in this case the court ruled that there could be no other ruling. This what the law already is and what it permits.

Court rulings such as this are on the nature and letter of the law and not based on emotional arguments.

[tollfree]

Iowans are generally quick to say things like "While I don't support the KKK, I do support their rights to protest!"

This is no different.

Someone dare say Iowa is boring - now there's a problem. Defcon 1.

[orthosophy]

I'm late to this party, but it's somewhat ironic the people complaining about this would have nothing to say if the fired party was male.

Inconsistency is the mother of a flawed law. That is why the gay marriage ban got shot down, and that is why this got upheld. At issue was not the injured party's gender...that is IN the verdict. At issue was the threat to his domestic situation that employing her would represent. That would have been identical if it was a gay relationship, a furry one, or even an imaginary one.

ALSO - all reports say that this was a reciprocated relationship. The man's wife gave him an ultimatum, and, as a man who supports keeping your promises, if not the overblown social institution of marriage, the doctor decided that he WANTED to stay married. Is everyone complaining single or just hypocritical?

[nashvols]

Originally Posted by RonnieJonez

Iowans are generally quick to say things like "While I don't support the KKK, I do support their rights to protest!"

This is no different.

Someone dare say Iowa is boring - now there's a problem. Defcon 1.

What are you supposed to say? "I support freedom of speech except when I don't agree with it"?

Sounds very progressive.