Why do all these warehouses deny truck drivers for the right to use the restroom, especially females?
It’s been my experience that the problem is rooted in several issues:Security. Some companies with high value products simply can’t have strangers wandering freely in their facilities, so it may take time out of an employees day to escort the driver to and from the bathroom.Sanitation. Sadly, some do leave a mess, and then others have to deal with it.And sadly, sometimes it’s just blatant ignorance - issues with race or perceived stereotypes about drivers means that shipper/receivers just want to be willfully rude about the whole situation.Drivers are sometimes their own worst enemies however, in which past issues have led to these results - drivers who took it open themselves to wander or explore a plant after using the restroom, or worse yet, theft of products.The unfortunate effect of these issues however is that legitimate needs to use a facility are sometimes denied, leaving drivers with little other option except to urinate outdoors, leading to sanitation and odour issues at the shippers own facility. Some opt to provide an outhouse (pora-pottie) outdoors to at least address the needs of drivers without the related security or sanitation issues. Ideal? No. But better than nothing.
How can fundamental human rights be denied?
Red Ferrer is correct on the first point " Fundamental Human Rights" cannot be denied. They are intrinsic to our human nature.Human Rights can however be ignored or acted against by the courts or individuals if they choose not to see you as a human being. Protecting your own right to life, liberty, and the Pursuit of happiness is your responsibility, for yourself as well as for your offspring. When a person murders another, or a court attempts to legalize another's ability to steal your property without consequence, then they are denying the victim's own humanity in their own mind, as well as their own. It is always necessary in any social system or circumstance that we self govern in order to minimize the risk of losing our own humanity. When we minimmalize the pursuit of our own happiness, we deny the importance of other's rights to pursue theirs as well.
What do some in America's religious right hope to gain by denying climate change?
First up, a perspective: Climate change (CC) was a major issue on which all presidential candidates had to make up their mind and the broad majority of them were concerned about it, up until 2008 that is. That's when the campaign against CC proponents picked up. The basic issue they had with CC is that they said the data is unreliable. Nevermind what 98% of scientists agreed in unison about, they picked out the 2% and through excellent PR aided substantially by some media houses, they were able to create doubt. That the data is unreliable and CC is a propaganda and hoax. It worked to oil compnies favor because CC gaining roots meant a migration away from non-renewable energy sources which hurted their pocket. So, they chipped in with money to fuel the CC deniers. Lastly, there's also a Biblical basis to denying CC; that the Lord created the world 6000 years back and changes in climate are cyclical and His wish. Hence, we should continue to plunder earth of its resources and stay happy. Dumb.
Why would someone want to deny African American the right to vote?
Because they are unintelligent racists ,who have nothing better to do then judge other people....sad isn't it?
If media has the right to ignore non-liberal voices, does that deny liberals the right to demand answers from non-liberals?
All rights in the U.S. are outlined in the constitution, which does not mention liberals, non-liberals, the “media”, or anything about the right to demand answers (interestingly, it does address the right to refuse to answer, via the 5th amendment). There is no liberal media; that is, there is no singular media entity out there coordinating the dissemination, real and imagined, of information in order to advance a predetermined liberal political agenda. There is no “Fox news” for liberals. If you disagree then you are a victim of your own confirmation bias. We all have the right to express our opinions, and ignore (at our own peril) whatever we wish. There isn’t anything in the constitution that protects us from our own ignorance. The most vociferous of those that speak about their “rights” usually don’t consider those rights also apply to that and those which they oppose. They use the constitution the same way they use the bible, justifying everything they believe and hold true (regardless of veracity) using snippets from documents they have no real understanding of, having never actually taken the time to sit down and read the entirety of either. This is heartbreaking and frankly, quite offensive to those of us who have.As just one example, most people do not realize that the constitution did not afford rights to all citizens until it was amended in the 20th century. Women were not allowed to vote until after world war one ended, and people of color were denied true freedom until well after the second world war ended. For most of the the time that the U.S. has existed, our sacred constitution only provided rights to about 35 percent of the population. Fortunately, it also gave us the means to change that. Those changes were brought about by liberal minded people. This is a fact. The definition of “liberal” is one who embraces and promotes change, conservatives are defined as those who oppose it.
Identify four ways states used to deny the right to vote to certain individuals?
Age limits - people under 18 can't vote. Out-of-towners - can't vote in a state where you don't live Living - can't vote if you're dead Cats - can't vote unless you're human
Does a college professor have a right to deny learning disabled students with the required accommodations ?
If the student failed to notify to the professor that he is learning disabled past a certain point. Does the professor have a right to deny the student those accommodations for the remainder of the semester/session ?
Do we really have the right to refuse service to anyone in the USA?
NO YOU DON'TI understand the unwillingness to say that as it may be interpreted as supporting those with ignorant views. But you can't say "we do have the right" and list dozens of scenarios where you don't and only come up with a few instances where you do, those are called exceptions.Saying you have the right to refuse service because you could refuse service to someone who is acting violent or to someone who refuses to pay is like saying you have a right to kill because if someone is trying to kill you then you can legally kill them. These are the exceptions not the norm.If you refuse someone service who is obeying the law chances are you're in violation of some law. This isn't taking sides I'm just stating an objective view.I was going to post this as is but I'm going to add some sources. Most people will point to Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Americans with Disabilities Act when discussing right to refuse service but I believe most people don't realize how many blanket terms are used where even the suggestion of discrimination could put someone in violation of anti-discrimination laws.Under 42 U.S.C. § 2000a-6(a) of the Civil Right Act it states that the attorney general only needs resonable cause to bring on a civil rights suit but what pertains to resonance is for the most part up for interpretation.In the 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design from the Department of Justice states, "These regulations adopted revised, enforceable accessibility standards called the 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design "2010 Standards" or "Standards". The 2010 Standards set minimum requirements – both scoping and technical – for newly designed and constructed or altered State and local government facilities, public accommodations, and commercial facilities to be readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities."What this basically means not only you don't have the right to refuse service but you in order to have a business available to the public you need special accomdations for certain groups or you may be in violation of anti-discrimatory laws.Here is a link that list the requirements one must follow to be ADA compliant.http://www.adabathroom.com/regul...A popular story related to ADA regulations:http://www.theblaze.com/stories/...Other sources:http://www.justice.gov/crt/title...PDF File: http://www.ada.gov/regs2010/2010...