They won't build it! Hardhats vow not to work on controversial mosque

Ah, so constitutional rights can be trumped by ignorance and bigotry. How absolutely wonderful!

Voegelin said:

New York Daily News

A growing number of New York construction workers are vowing not to work on the mosque planned near Ground Zero.

Read more: They won't build it! Hardhats vow not to work on controversial mosque near Ground Zero​

Click to expand...

It's interresting that you bring this up. I was just thinking about this the other day. I was thinking that even if all of this is approved, it would be hard to find NY workers willing to build it. Then again, how many Muslim construction workers are there?

So, they will bring worker from elsewhere. It is their choice not to work, and not to be paid. In this economy I am sure they will find enough people willing to work on it.

And this is not being built on sacred ground like the hardhat claims, it is two blocks from ground zero.

If the people who refuse to work on this were getting unemployment, I say cut it off and never allow them to get uneployment again; well, never start it up for them either.

As much complaining as people make about unemployment and they refuse to work for what reason, other than bigotry and ignorance.

Voegelin said:

New York Daily News

A growing number of New York construction workers are vowing not to work on the mosque planned near Ground Zero.

Read more: They won't build it! Hardhats vow not to work on controversial mosque near Ground Zero​

Click to expand...

Good for them!

kiwimac said:

Ah, so constitutional rights can be trumped by ignorance and bigotry. How absolutely wonderful!

Click to expand...

How are anyone's Constitutional rights being "trumped"? Don't the workers have the "Constitutional right" to decide what projects they want to work on?

Eazy E said:

If the people who refuse to work on this were getting unemployment, I say cut it off and never allow them to get uneployment again; well, never start it up for them either.

As much complaining as people make about unemployment and they refuse to work for what reason, other than bigotry and ignorance.

Click to expand...

So then, getting the money that they have paid into the system back should be contingent upon their being forced to work on a project they didn't choose and don't approve of?

Some Other Guy said:

So then, getting the money that they have paid into the system back should be contingent upon their being forced to work on a project they didn't choose and don't approve of?

Click to expand...

Such is the price of being a martyr for their cause. Can't have their cake and eat it too.

Eazy E said:

Such is the price of being a martyr for their cause. Can't have their cake and eat it too.

Click to expand...

You keep telling us that you're in the Army. Have things really changed that much since I was discharged or do you still take an oath to defend the Constitution?

Some Other Guy said:

You keep telling us that you're in the Army. Have things really changed that much since I was discharged or do you still take an oath to defend the Constitution?

Click to expand...

Of course we do, but what does that have to do with the topic at hand? They chose not to work here because of personal preference and not because they were erroneously fired; therefore they shouldn't be entitled to unemployment. BTW,have a look at my profile picture for the Army part.

Refusing to work in one of the worst recessions in a hundred years. They will find other people to do the work, and this is a non-issue.

Some Other Guy said:

How are anyone's Constitutional rights being "trumped"? Don't the workers have the "Constitutional right" to decide what projects they want to work on?

Click to expand...

As long as their employer is doing nothing illegal or immoral, no, they don't get to decide. They simply do what their employer has contracted to do.

Eazy E said:

Of course we do, but what does that have to do with the topic at hand?

Click to expand...

You're advocating a violation of their rights.

They chose not to work here because of personal preference and not because they were erroneously fired; therefore they shouldn't be entitled to unemployment. BTW,have a look at my profile picture for the Army part.

Click to expand...

So then, if they choose to work on job "A" over job "B", if the day ever comes that they are unemployed, they should not receive the benefits they have paid for because they choose to work on a project you do not approve of?

Let's say the situation is reversed. Let's say that they are eager to build the Muslim Victory Center and some politician proposes legislation that says that if they build the Muslim Victory Center they should not be entitled to collect unemployment, should they ever lose their jobs. Would you support that?

kiwimac said:

As long as their employer is doing nothing illegal or immoral, no, they don't get to decided. They simply do what their employer has contracted to do.

Click to expand...

I think we tried that with black people back in the 1800s. Didn't work out too well.

kiwimac said:

As long as their employer is doing nothing illegal or immoral, no, they don't get to decide. They simply do what their employer has contracted to do.

Click to expand...

By that logic they would have no right to strike for better wages or working conditions.

Some Other Guy said:

You're advocating a violation of their rights.

Click to expand...

What right was trampled on?

Some Other Guy said:

So then, if they choose to work on job "A" over job "B", if the day ever comes that they are unemployed, they should not receive the benefits they have paid for because they choose to work on a project you do not approve of?

Click to expand...

They're not choosing betweeen two different jobs,they're choosing to not work on a particular job they were contracted to do for personal moral reasons. Therefore, it's a violation of the contract and they are not entitled to their pay.

If you were in the service, you should know how that works. If the Army pays you an enlistment or re-enlistment bonus and you don't fulfill the terms of that contract, they'll take back the money they gave you for it and also not pay you anymore because you didn't complete the contracted job.

Some Other Guy said:

Let's say the situation is reversed. Let's say that they are eager to build the Muslim Victory Center and some politician proposes legislation that says that if they build the Muslim Victory Center they should not be entitled to collect unemployment, should they ever lose their jobs. Would you support that?

Click to expand...

This is completely different than what is happening. I'm not even going to entertain it either.

I am not discussing a worker's right to strike. This is not about their employment terms and conditions this is about whether they have the right to decide FOR their employer whether or not they will do a job. No worker has that right unless the job is illegal or immoral. They can, of course, choose to quit that employer and take their labour elsewhere, that is their right.

Eazy E said:

What right was trampled on?

Click to expand...

Their right to decide what project they want to work on and for whom, and their right not to have their own money withheld from them without due process, and their right to equal protection under the law.

They're not choosing betweeen two different jobs,they're choosing to not work on a particular job

Click to expand...

...in favor of another job.

they were contracted to do for personal moral reasons. Therefore, it's a violation of the contract and they are not entitled to their pay.

Click to expand...

Which contract and where does the contract say that individual workers are not entitled not to work on projects they have moral disagreements with?

If you were in the service, you should know how that works. If the Army pays you an enlistment or re-enlistment bonus and you don't fulfill the terms of that contract, they'll take back the money they gave you for it and also not pay you anymore because you didn't complete the contracted job.

Click to expand...

Except that we're not talking about the Army. Contracts are generally made with contractors (hence the name), and companies, not with individual workers.

This is completely different than what is happening. I'm not even going to entertain it either.

Click to expand...

Ooh, that one hit a nerve.

kiwimac said:

I am not discussing a worker's right to strike. This is not about their employment terms and conditions this is about whether they have the right to decide FOR their employer whether or not they will do a job. No worker has that right unless the job is illegal or immoral. They can, of course, choose to quit that employer and take their labour elsewhere, that is their right.

Click to expand...

What is a strike but deciding not to do a job? All workers have that right. What if the workers believe that the job is immoral? Are you going to decide FOR the workers what their morality should be?