Some questions on personal practices.

[AthenaAwakened]

People tend to engage in very heated debate on events that don't involve them personally, such is human nature, but what if they did?

Here are a few questions.

Would you have sex with a person too drunk to form the sentence, "Yes, I want to"
Would you pay a woman less than a man simply because she took maternity leave?
Would you, if there was no threat of reprisal, take junk food out of a stranger's cart because you saw them about to use an EBT card?
Would you, if you were a judge, automatically award custody of children to the mother? Would you automatically find that a father was free of paying any child support simply because he said that he didn't want the child?
Would you cross a picket line?
Would you strike under any circumstances?
Would you, if you were on a jury, find police officers guilt of brutality? If so, what would you need as a burden of proof?
Would you find an employers guilty of discrimination and again, what is you burden of proof?

 

[Derec]

Would you have sex with a person too drunk to form the sentence, "Yes, I want to"

No, unless possibly if I was similarly inebriated. But this is a bit of a red herring as the "rape culture" crowd defines "too drunk to consent" much more broadly than that (at least as it applies to women). For example in the U(sic)GA case, where a girl was capable of both walking to and from the guy's dorm room and was able to compose coherent text messages both before and after (so she passed your test!) Yet, he was expelled because some anonymous witnesses saw her drinking an unspecified amount of alcohol some unspecified time before she had sex with the guy. And this decision is being widely defended on the feminist left.

Would you pay a woman less than a man simply because she took maternity leave?

Anybody who takes leave for whatever reason compromises their career to a certain extent. Why should women and maternity leave be immune from that? If you chose to become a parent you are aware that it means you cannot commit to your work the same way as before, unless your spouse is "stay at home". Men and women should be paid same for same work but "same work" is the critical point here. If a woman or a man takes 2 or 3 years off to be with their small child(ren) they should not expect to be paid the same as someone (of either gender) who worked through that time collecting experience and keeping current with the industry.

Would you, if there was no threat of reprisal, take junk food out of a stranger's cart because you saw them about to use an EBT card?

No, I would not interfere with their shopping cart, but I do think there should be reasonable limits placed on what is payable with "food stamps". Also we should rethink how eligibility is determined. When I see someone pay with EBT then load their groceries into their new(ish) Lexus SUV because the value of their vehicle is exempt when determining eligibility the system is broken.

Would you, if you were a judge, automatically award custody of children to the mother?

No.

Would you automatically find that a father was free of paying any child support simply because he said that he didn't want the child?

Unfortunately I would not have that discretion but I do think the laws should change to enable men being able to rescind all paternal rights and obligations within a certain pregnancy stage or within a certain time after being informed of the pregnancy, whichever comes later.

Would you cross a picket line?

Depending on the circumstances of the strike but given the current state of the unions I probably would.

Would you strike under any circumstances?

Again depends on the circumstances but probably not.

Would you, if you were on a jury, find police officers guilt of brutality? If so, what would you need as a burden of proof?

If the state proved the guilt beyond a reasonable doubt just like with any other crime and any other defendant.

Would you find an employers guilty of discrimination and again, what is you burden of proof?

I would have to apply "preponderance of evidence" if it was a tort suit. However, I would not vote for any punitive damages because I consider them completely inappropriate in a tort setting, regardless of type of tort pursued.

 

[ksen]

Would you have sex with a person too drunk to form the sentence, "Yes, I want to"

Not if I was capable of making a rational decision.

Would you pay a woman less than a man simply because she took maternity leave?

No.

Would you, if there was no threat of reprisal, take junk food out of a stranger's cart because you saw them about to use an EBT card?

No.

Would you, if you were a judge, automatically award custody of children to the mother?

No.

Would you automatically find that a father was free of paying any child support simply because he said that he didn't want the child?

No.

Would you cross a picket line?

No.

Would you strike under any circumstances?

Yes.

Would you, if you were on a jury, find police officers guilt of brutality?

Yes.

If so, what would you need as a burden of proof?

As little as possible.

Would you find an employers guilty of discrimination

Yes.

and again, what is you burden of proof?

As little as possible.

 

[dystopian]

Would you have sex with a person too drunk to form the sentence, "Yes, I want to"

No.

Would you pay a woman less than a man simply because she took maternity leave?

No.

Would you, if there was no threat of reprisal, take junk food out of a stranger's cart because you saw them about to use an EBT card?

Only if I was really really hungry.

Would you, if you were a judge, automatically award custody of children to the mother? Would you automatically find that a father was free of paying any child support simply because he said that he didn't want the child?

No and no. Case by case.

Would you cross a picket line?

Yes.

Would you strike under any circumstances?

I don't understand the question; saying yes to this would imply I'd *always* be on strike.

Would you, if you were on a jury, find police officers guilt of brutality? If so, what would you need as a burden of proof?

There's no jury system here. If there was though; yes. I imagine the burden of proof would be the same as for a non-police officer being deemed guilty of the crime. Either a smoking gun such as video evidence, or a pile of 'lesser' bits of evidence. Eyewitness testimonials, an expert medical opinion's regarding the sustained injuries, and so on.

Would you find an employers guilty of discrimination and again, what is you burden of proof?

Yes. Same as above.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

People tend to engage in very heated debate on events that don't involve them personally, such is human nature, but what if they did?

Here are a few questions.

Would you have sex with a person too drunk to form the sentence, "Yes, I want to"

I wouldn't have sex with a drunk person, period, even if I was sure of consent.

Would you pay a woman less than a man simply because she took maternity leave?

Assuming there were no legal repercussions, yes. Maternity leave is a very real and often substantial cost to the company and leads to employers being reluctant to hire young women. If we don't try to push off costs like this we won't get the backlash it causes, either.

Would you, if there was no threat of reprisal, take junk food out of a stranger's cart because you saw them about to use an EBT card?

What good would that do?

Would you, if you were a judge, automatically award custody of children to the mother?

Of course not.

Would you automatically find that a father was free of paying any child support simply because he said that he didn't want the child?

You're mixing up two issues--paternity suits and child support. I believe he should have the right to opt out at the same point as she has the right to opt out. If they agreed to create a child, though, he shouldn't have a right to avoid paying his share. I just oppose the abusive situations we see all too often these days. (For example, I would make child support changes automatically retroactive to the date of whatever caused the change in the child support, although if that means extra money is owed it's spread over a period of time, not awarded as a lump sum.)

Would you cross a picket line?

If I did not feel endangered by doing so.

Would you strike under any circumstances?

No. Strikes are legalized extortion. If you're not being treated fairly you find a new job.

Would you, if you were on a jury, find police officers guilt of brutality? If so, what would you need as a burden of proof?

Certainly. I would want some actual evidence of it (and I applaud the introduction of cameras), though, and I recognize human nature--it's not brutality in my book when the cop is a little slow to quit applying force to the guy who has quit resisting.

Would you find an employers guilty of discrimination and again, what is you burden of proof?

Yes, but I'm very leery about the use of statistics as evidence here:

1) When statistics are used to show discrimination they often overlook things that could be measured and are virtually certain to overlook things that aren't so easy to measure.

2) When you are looking at the significance of statistics you need to consider the sample size. Lets say you have 10,000 companies that are run by angels, you know they are not discriminating. They also do not discriminate in hiring so you see honest mixes. Lets say you take a threshold of 99% chance they are discriminating as your evidence they are--oops, you would expect to find 100 that are "guilty" even though you are looking at a group you know is innocent. (This is an issue with DNA testing--one in a trillion odds are not enough when you're dealing with trying to match a criminal against a database of criminals. The poor quality test has 9 points, the good one has 13. A 12 out of 13 match has been found where it's been proven not to be a match {but they are immediate blood relatives.} The (in)Justice Department reacted by blocking attempts to study the problem.)

So long as you live in a one-party state, if you're faced with discrimination drop a recorder in your pocket. Scum will show themselves in time.

 

[Unbeatable]

Would you have sex with a person too drunk to form the sentence, "Yes, I want to"

No. I'm not charming/popular/rich/white enough to get away with rape.

Would you pay a woman less than a man simply because she took maternity leave?

No, I would pay her less in order to save money.

Would you, if there was no threat of reprisal, take junk food out of a stranger's cart because you saw them about to use an EBT card?

No. No matter what they buy with that card, it's nothing compared to what the government wastes on military spending.

Would you, if you were a judge, automatically award custody of children to the mother?

Not if I cared about doing my job(which, if I was working in the judicial system, would be an iffy proposition considering how easy it must be to get jaded). I would award custody based on whatever the evidence suggested was in the children's best interests. But if I was jaded and lazy, I'd automatically award custody to the mother.

Would you automatically find that a father was free of paying any child support simply because he said that he didn't want the child?

Not if I cared about doing my job. I might not make him pay child support if he could prove that he made it clear before conception that he was unwilling to be a father and he used birth control. If I was jaded and lazy, I'd automatically hold him liable for child support just to put somebody on the hook other than the state.

Would you cross a picket line?

I would if I was a non-union employee at a building in front of which the union employees were picketing.

Would you strike under any circumstances?

I'd strike if I had a second income, and thus could afford the temporary loss of income from my union job. My union actually is in a position where the potential for a strike exists somewhere down the line. But if it comes to a vote, I'm voting against a strike because this is my only job.

Would you, if you were on a jury, find police officers guilt of brutality?

Sure.

If so, what would you need as a burden of proof?

I can't predict that.

Would you find an employers guilty of discrimination and again, what is you burden of proof?

Again, yes, but I can't predict what I would need.

 

[Canard DuJour]

People tend to engage in very heated debate on events that don't involve them personally, such is human nature, but what if they did?

Here are a few questions.

Would you have sex with a person too drunk to form the sentence, "Yes, I want to"

No

Would you pay a woman less than a man simply because she took maternity leave?

No, but I can understand a small firm being less inclined to hire a woman likely to take maternity leave. It's not fair but the individual employer doesn't make the rules.

Would you, if there was no threat of reprisal, take junk food out of a stranger's cart because you saw them about to use an EBT card?

No.

Would you, if you were a judge, automatically award custody of children to the mother?

No, but yes if I had no other information.

Would you automatically find that a father was free of paying any child support simply because he said that he didn't want the child?

No, but yes if he'd made that clear beforehand and she'd lied about contraception (rare but does happen).

Would you cross a picket line?

No.

Would you strike under any circumstances?

No, but there are very few under which I'd rule it out (e.g. essential maintenance of dangerous installations)

Would you, if you were on a jury, find police officers guilt of brutality? If so, what would you need as a burden of proof?

Yes, case by case.

Would you find an employers guilty of discrimination and again, what is you burden of proof?

Yes, case by case.

 

[EricK]

People tend to engage in very heated debate on events that don't involve them personally, such is human nature, but what if they did?

Here are a few questions.

Would you have sex with a person too drunk to form the sentence, "Yes, I want to"

No.

Of course, my main problem is with people who are too sober to say "Yes, I want to".

Would you pay a woman less than a man simply because she took maternity leave?

No, if taking into account the value/cost of the maternity leave. i.e. total benefit package would be the same, even if take home pay was different.

Would you, if there was no threat of reprisal, take junk food out of a stranger's cart because you saw them about to use an EBT card?

No. that sounds like a shitty thing to do.

Would you, if you were a judge, automatically award custody of children to the mother?

No.

Would you automatically find that a father was free of paying any child support simply because he said that he didn't want the child?

There are circumstances where I would find one parent doesn't need to pay - but it would be much more stringent than this.

Would you cross a picket line?

Probably - but I'd be more likely to just take the day off.

Would you strike under any circumstances?

Yeah. It's like getting an extra holiday - even if you lose a days pay, it gives you added flexibility which the company might not have otherwise granted.

Would you, if you were on a jury, find police officers guilt of brutality? If so, what would you need as a burden of proof?

Yes. I would apply the same burden of proof as with anyone else.

Would you find an employers guilty of discrimination and again, what is you burden of proof?

What sort of discrimination? I would hope employers use discrimination all the time in their employment practices rather than hiring, promoting or firing people at random.

 

[funinspace]

Would you have sex with a person too drunk to form the sentence, "Yes, I want to"?
- I would hope not, but if I were drunk myself (and not married) I couldn’t swear not.

Would you pay a woman less than a man simply because she took maternity leave?
- No

Would you, if there was no threat of reprisal, take junk food out of a stranger's cart because you saw them about to use an EBT card?
-No

Would you, if you were a judge, automatically award custody of children to the mother? Would you automatically find that a father was free of paying any child support simply because he said that he didn't want the child?
No; and no.

Would you cross a picket line?
- Generally no, but there are exceptions.

Would you strike under any circumstances?
- Never say never…but those aren’t shoes I wear, so I don’t know.

Would you, if you were on a jury, find police officers guilt of brutality? If so, what would you need as a burden of proof?
- Yes; for a felony: evidence beyond reasonable doubt.

Would you find an employers guilty of discrimination and again, what is you burden of proof?
- Civil cases have a lower burden of proof. Basically, it is complicated.

 

[Bronzeage]

Would you have sex with a person too drunk to form the sentence, "Yes, I want to"
No.

Would you pay a woman less than a man simply because she took maternity leave?
Not enough information in the question. Is this paid maternity leave? Would the money lost during unpaid maternity be used to calculate average pay, which would result in lower annual pay, compared to a man who worked 12 months.

Would you, if there was no threat of reprisal, take junk food out of a stranger's cart because you saw them about to use an EBT card?
No.

Would you, if you were a judge, automatically award custody of children to the mother?
No.
Would you automatically find that a father was free of paying any child support simply because he said that he didn't want the child?
Oh, hell no.

Would you cross a picket line?
It would depend on the circumstances. No blanket answer is possilble.

Would you strike under any circumstances?
Yes.

Would you, if you were on a jury, find police officers guilt of brutality? If so, what would you need as a burden of proof?
Police brutality exists and when it happens, there must be consequences. The burden of proof is the same as any other crime. A policeman's job is to gain control of the situation and prevent further harm. If the policeman gains control and then proceeds to commit harm, that's a whole new crime and cannot be allowed.

Would you find an employers guilty of discrimination and again, what is you burden of proof?
This is a civil, not criminal matter, so the burden of proof is much less. However, the actual reading of the law determines whether civil rights have been violated. There are a lot of mean and nasty things which are not punishable by a court.

 

[Garnet]

People tend to engage in very heated debate on events that don't involve them personally, such is human nature, but what if they did?

Here are a few questions.

Would you have sex with a person too drunk to form the sentence, "Yes, I want to"

No.

Would you pay a woman less than a man simply because she took maternity leave?

No.

Would you, if there was no threat of reprisal, take junk food out of a stranger's cart because you saw them about to use an EBT card?

No.

Would you, if you were a judge, automatically award custody of children to the mother? Would you automatically find that a father was free of paying any child support simply because he said that he didn't want the child?

No and no.

Would you cross a picket line?

It depends on the situation. If I was desperate to work and crossing a picket line would be my only option, I'd probably do it.

Would you strike under any circumstances?

I doubt it. I'm not that brave and because of my piss poor money management, I can't go for very long without a paycheck.

Would you, if you were on a jury, find police officers guilt of brutality? If so, what would you need as a burden of proof?

With clear and convincing evidence, yes.

Would you find an employers guilty of discrimination and again, what is you burden of proof?

With clear and convincing evidence, yes.

 

[rousseau]

People tend to engage in very heated debate on events that don't involve them personally, such is human nature, but what if they did?

Here are a few questions.

Would you have sex with a person too drunk to form the sentence, "Yes, I want to"

No

Would you pay a woman less than a man simply because she took maternity leave?

Depends on context. If it was entirely up to me and I'd face no repercussions, no, but that's not always the case.

Would you, if there was no threat of reprisal, take junk food out of a stranger's cart because you saw them about to use an EBT card?

This seems like a strange thing to do.

Would you, if you were a judge, automatically award custody of children to the mother? Would you automatically find that a father was free of paying any child support simply because he said that he didn't want the child?

No.

Would you cross a picket line?

If I had to.

Would you strike under any circumstances?

I don't totally understand this question.

Would you, if you were on a jury, find police officers guilt of brutality? If so, what would you need as a burden of proof?

If they were guilty, why wouldn't I? I would need proof as proof.

Would you find an employers guilty of discrimination and again, what is you burden of proof?

Again, if they were guilty of it, I don't see why not. I would try to know proof when I saw it.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

People tend to engage in very heated debate on events that don't involve them personally, such is human nature, but what if they did?

Here are a few questions.

Would you have sex with a person too drunk to form the sentence, "Yes, I want to"

Maybe if I was also that drunk, but otherwise I wouldn't.

Would you pay a woman less than a man simply because she took maternity leave?

No, but it ma seem that way. If raises were tied to time on duty then leave of any sort would be considered time not on duty. It would be true of both maternity leave and paternity leave.

Would you, if there was no threat of reprisal, take junk food out of a stranger's cart because you saw them about to use an EBT card?

No.

Would you, if you were a judge, automatically award custody of children to the mother? Would you automatically find that a father was free of paying any child support simply because he said that he didn't want the child?

No and no.

Would you cross a picket line?

As an employee or a customer?

Actually my answer is independent of that circumstance. I'd cross if I don't agree with the strike. Nobody gets my loyalty automatically.

Would you strike under any circumstances?

Depends on what you mean by "any". If you mean "are there circumstances under which I would strike?" then yes. If you mean "doesn't matter what the circumstances are the union said to strike" then no, as nobody gets my loyalty automatically.

Would you, if you were on a jury, find police officers guilt of brutality? If so, what would you need as a burden of proof?

I would give the officers a chance to prove their case, but if the recordings "mysteriously disappeared" or "the tape was lost" or "the cell phone recording was deleted" that would, in my opinion, be a confession of guilt.

Would you find an employers guilty of discrimination and again, what is you burden of proof?

I'd need to see a clear and consistent pattern.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Would you have sex with a person too drunk to form the sentence, "Yes, I want to"

Maybe

Would you pay a woman less than a man simply because she took maternity leave?

No

Would you, if there was no threat of reprisal, take junk food out of a stranger's cart because you saw them about to use an EBT card?

No

Would you, if you were a judge, automatically award custody of children to the mother? Would you automatically find that a father was free of paying any child support simply because he said that he didn't want the child?

No

Would you cross a picket line?

Yes

Would you strike under any circumstances?

Yes

Would you, if you were on a jury, find police officers guilt of brutality? If so, what would you need as a burden of proof?

Yes, if there was actual evidence and damages.

Would you find an employers guilty of discrimination and again, what is you burden of proof?

Yes, if there was actual evidence and damages.

 

[gmbteach]

Would you have sex with a person too drunk to form the sentence, "Yes, I want to"

No. But then, this probably applies more for men. Men that have had too much to drink sometimes cannot perform anyway.

Would you pay a woman less than a man simply because she took maternity leave?

No. Equal work = equal pay in my book.

Would you, if there was no threat of reprisal, take junk food out of a stranger's cart because you saw them about to use an EBT card?

What's an EBT Card?

Would you, if you were a judge, automatically award custody of children to the mother?

No.

Would you automatically find that a father was free of paying any child support simply because he said that he didn't want the child?

HELL NO. If you are AWARE you made a child, you should be required to assist in its upbringing. Of course, sperm donors are a different story here.

Would you cross a picket line?

no

Would you strike under any circumstances?

If I had to. Being a teacher, the only feedback I have had is - OMG don't you teachers get enough; and 'how dare you inconvenience us just to get better working conditions' which makes me reluctant.

Would you, if you were on a jury, find police officers guilt of brutality? If so, what would you need as a burden of proof?

Yes, and evidence would be as per usual battery cases - video, photographic etc.

Would you find an employers guilty of discrimination and again, what is you burden of proof?

Yes, and again anecdotal or photographic/video/audio evidence.