Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 19

Thread: Ohio senate bill 5: Many evils including anti gay marrage

  1. #1

    Default Ohio senate bill 5: Many evils including anti gay marrage

    The Ohio senate, by one vote, passed senate bill 5. This mirrors Governor Walker of Wisconsin's bill that strips allot of collective bargaining rights. Here's from an AOL blog about what it does:

    "Here's what we know about SB 5:
    It would limit collective bargaining rights for public employees, including teachers, police officers and firefighters. In its original version, SB 5 included a ban on collective bargaining. After several days of protests at the Ohio statehouse, Senate Republicans agreed to amend SB 5. The bill now permits union negotiations for wages, hours and working conditions, but still bans collective bargaining for benefits. It also eliminates binding arbitration and prohibits public employees from going on strike.
    It revises the process for contract disputes. Under SB 5, elected officials at the state and local levels would be given the authority to resolve contract disputes with public employees.
    Thousands could be affected. Northern Ohio's The Morning Journal reports that 350,000 workers would be impacted by SB 5's changes if it becomes law."

    The biggest two is obviously weakens collective bargaining from any public worker in the state, from city to county to state. As listed it effects police, firefighters, teachers, etc. and makes these employees going on strike A CRIME. Thats wrong in many ways IMO. Especially since it makes it so these politicians an heavily cut their pay, take away their retirement pention, heavily water down or even nearly take away their insurance and they can't do a darn thing.

    But another bombshell in this bill is it full-on bans homosexual marriage here in Ohio:
    "Sec. 3101.01 of S.B. 5: … A marriage may only be entered into by one man and one woman. Any marriage between persons of the same sex is against the strong public policy of this state. Any marriage between persons of the same sex shall have no legal force or effect in this state and, if attempted to be entered into in this state, is void ab initio and shall not be recognized by this state. The recognition or extension by the state of the specific statutory benefits of a legal marriage to non-marital relationships between persons of the same sex or different sexes is against the strong public policy of this state. Any public act, record or judicial proceeding of this state, as defined in section 9.82 of the Revised Code, that extends the specific statutory benefits of legal marriage to non-marital relationships between persons of the same sex or different sexes is void."

    I don't see why it's so bad for homosexual people to marry. We are going BACKWARDS on rights here in the US. Its a complete shame...

    I am glad people are protesting in Columbus and other parts of the state.

  2. #2
    Dwhite

    Default

    Wait. I agree with the limit on bargaining, everybody needs to cut back. But how the hell is gay marriage even related to this in anyway, make it it's own bill so people know about it.

  3. #3

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by Dwhite View Post
    Wait. I agree with the limit on bargaining, everybody needs to cut back. But how the hell is gay marriage even related to this in anyway, make it it's own bill so people know about it.
    Ah, but that would defeat the purpose. The fundamentalist conservatives want gay marriage stopped, so they'll sneak it in where they think they can get away with it. Not that it would get very far if/when taken to the Supreme Court. As I recall, this has been tried before in Ohio, (or maybe somewhere else?) and it got overturned as well.

  4. #4

    Default

    Jeez, what is it with the US legislative process? How is it legal to attach clauses to a bill that have NOTHING to do with its primary purpose? Alright, British parliamentary procedure has a fairly broad "and connecting purposes" clause, that can allow legislation to cover matters outside the Long Title of the bill, but nothing like this.

    Allowing legislation to be passed, not on it's own merits, but on the merits of something more popular, shows contempt for democracy.
    Last edited by Akastus; 04-Mar-2011 at 17:00.

  5. #5

    Default

    1. Get elected because of jobs, jobs, jobs.
    2. Claim you actually had mandate to fight culture wars and strip public unions of rights, neither of which has anything to do with jobs, jobs, jobs.
    3. ?????
    4. PROFIT!!!!

  6. #6

    Default not true

    This is not new code. It already exists under Ohio law.

    The problem here is that people are misreading the bill. Here’s a quick primer:

    * Any underlined text is new language that would be added to existing law.
    * Any Strike-through text is language that would be removed from existing law.
    * Any regular text (not underlined or strike-through) is existing law.

    That particular law was passed in 2004

  7. #7

    Default

    Maby we should take there pay and cut there retirement and heathcare.

  8. #8
    Butterfly Mage

    Default

    As usual, the Republicans aren't interested in jobs or freedom. They are interested solely in establishing a theocratic plutocracy.

  9. #9

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by Dwhite View Post
    Wait. I agree with the limit on bargaining, everybody needs to cut back. But how the hell is gay marriage even related to this in anyway, make it it's own bill so people know about it.
    I have to ask, what does taking away collective bargaining have to do with saving money? To me, nothing. Governor Walker already said it during a prank call to who he thought was one of the Koch brothers, who are his biggest doners of money, that the sole reason he wants to take away collective bargaining is for union busting, one of the several things Republicans have been obsessed with for quite some time. I personally, as someone on the left side of politics, find this wrong as unions are pretty much the only real democratic voice in a corporate system, rather it be public or private. And lets be honest, if a major corporation were a country, it would be a fascism and/or a dictatorship. Big guy(s) calls all the shots, the littler ones have to follow or else, and can't do anything about it. Unions are the only thing that DO let them do something about it....

    So yea, I find this dead wrong. Especially since its the people who put their lives on the line DAILY who are being affected. Police, firefighters. As well as the teachers who are leading the future generation. The last thing I want to see is any of them having to live on food stamps in low-class housing because their job don't pay enough and they can't do anything about it.

    Its a race to the bottom IMO, and its sad our country is going that way...



    Quote Originally Posted by foxkits View Post
    Maby we should take there pay and cut there retirement and heathcare.
    Seriously?! I'm sorry but that have careless written all over it....




    Quote Originally Posted by MEC View Post
    This is not new code. It already exists under Ohio law.

    The problem here is that people are misreading the bill. Here’s a quick primer:

    * Any underlined text is new language that would be added to existing law.
    * Any Strike-through text is language that would be removed from existing law.
    * Any regular text (not underlined or strike-through) is existing law.

    That particular law was passed in 2004
    I forgot about that, they did pass an anti-homosexual law in Ohio back then. So its even more confusing why their doing it again in a bill that has nothing to do with that. It kind of shows the crooked nature of this bill from the get-go. Infact, many Republicans were against this bill and I heard they actually LET GO some Republican who were against it in the process of voting on this and replaced them with Republicans that would vote for it. Talk about "eating your own".



    Quote Originally Posted by Butterfly Mage View Post
    As usual, the Republicans aren't interested in jobs or freedom. They are interested solely in establishing a theocratic plutocracy.
    VERY true about the extreme right wing especially (which includes the "Tea Party"). I have a big feeling that the extreme uber religious right (believe me, we have plenty of that here, especially in Boone County, Kentucky were their pretty much bedfellows with Answers in Genesis and Ken Ham. I've been in the Boone County building, they have AIG mugs and items and have anti-evolution cartoons posted that were suprise, given to them by AIG. BTW, Answers in Genesis runs the Creation "Museum" here and its in Boone County in the city of Petersburg, KY) want to make this country to have laws that look like a Christian version of Middle Eastern Shira law nations, pretty much I am sure the extreme of the Religious Right Wing would LOVE to see Atheists, homosexuals, etc. go to jail JUST for being either one. I mean, they regularly deny that the separation of church and state is part of the constitution (its part of the first amendment) and they want to try to ban teaching of evolution and other subjects of science that can be a threat to religion. And long ago, some states even have anti-Atheist laws like in Tennessee, its in their state constitution that you can not be tried in court or run for governmental office if your an Atheist. You can see it and the rest of the states that have similar clauses in their laws here: http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/St...stitutions.htm . Now the right wing in Tennessee want to arrest anyone and put them in jail for 15 years to anyone that they even suspect is following Shariah law. As much as I am against anything dealing with Shariah law (since I find much of it barbaric and degrading to women), I think people should have the ability to practice whatever they want just as long as it doesn't end up hurting anyone.

    Also, they do heavily support giving the rich anything they want, even though I personally think they ARE a big part of the problem. I mean, why does the top 2% get the big tax breaks? Infact, some of them don't even pay taxes AT ALL because the use a loophole of a offshore tax haven, aka having a mailbox in a island nation so they can claim their not an American company thus avoiding paying income tax. Personally the rich should be taxed the most. I think that would solve the debt problem pretty quickly if people like Bill Gates and the CEO of P&G had to pay more of their billions in taxes. Infact, Bill Gates WANTS that (http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/billi...ry?id=12259003 ). Infact, during the 1950s, we had a 80-90% tax rate on the rich and know what we did with it? Built bridges, roads, dams, aka massively improved our infrastructure. The rich had no problems living it up either in the 1950s. I mean the 50s were iconic in the US because America was on top then. Now all that is in bad need of replacing or maintenance and our politicians (especially right wing ones) refuse to fund these infrastructure projects. If we did taxed the rich more, and cut some funding from the military (another area the right tends to shy away from) we could really help some of our debt problems. Instead the right wing politicians rather take it from the working middle class. BTW, these local government workers here pay taxes too, and their pensions comes from funds from their OWN SALERY...

    I know there's allot of Republicans on this forum but I am saying this about the POLITICIANS. I think Bill Mahr said a very true quote: "The left is going to the right and the right is going to an insane asylum".

    BTW: A "plutonomy" is essentially a society that is built to serve the rich, were the lower class are just servants of the rich. Its surprisingly hard to find a good definition of what the word means on the internet, figures >_>.
    And a "theocracy"? Just think Saudi Arabia or Iran: "Theocracy is a form of government in which a state is understood as governed by immediate divine guidance especially a state ruled by clergy, or by officials who are regarded as divinely guided."
    Last edited by DA360; 04-Mar-2011 at 19:37.

  10. #10
    Dwhite

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by DA360 View Post
    I have to ask, what does taking away collective bargaining have to do with saving money? To me, nothing. Governor Walker already said it during a prank call to who he thought was one of the Koch brothers, who are his biggest doners of money, that the sole reason he wants to take away collective bargaining is for union busting, one of the several things Republicans have been obsessed with for quite some time. I personally, as someone on the left side of politics, find this wrong as unions are pretty much the only real democratic voice in a corporate system, rather it be public or private. And lets be honest, if a major corporation were a country, it would be a fascism and/or a dictatorship. Big guy(s) calls all the shots, the littler ones have to follow or else, and can't do anything about it. Unions are the only thing that DO let them do something about it....
    I think it comes in the future. While every industry has taken huge cuts to survive, the pay, benefits, and vacation of public workers has stayed the same. Saying no to striking is just a precaution so when the contract does go up, the striking wont happen, because when police officers leave everybody suffers,the same goes with firemen, teachers and most other public workers. Also they are at a point where they can do this. If you fire a teacher it wont take long to find a replacement, my district had around 30 or 40 thousand people come from all around the country for a 100 open jobs. And most public workers including benefits are overpayed. So thats probably why

    Hopefully some of the money saved will go back to the programs as a whole to better fund them. *Cough schools Cough police*

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 28
    Last Post: 17-Dec-2010, 15:41
  2. 4 Furs Now Homeless (including 2 ADISC members)
    By Altric in forum Babyfur / Diaperfur
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 15-Dec-2010, 16:27

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
ADISC.org - the Adult Baby / Diaper Lover / Incontinence Support Community.
ADISC.org is designed to be viewed in Firefox, with a resolution of at least 1280 x 1024.