You Smoke….. Your Fired!

smokersThe other day I was listening to WJR 760, the local Detroit talk radio, the show was the Mitch Album show and the topic was companies that fire smokes. The interview itself was very calm, but the post call in, at times got very heated. The question that caused all the heat, “Do companies have a right to fire smokers?” My simple answer, yes they do…. But…

The but in this answer is very big, in fact its huge… As a person who believes in free enterprise and the ability of people and companies to control their destiny. Companies should have the right to decide who should represent them, be it smokers or nonsmoker. But this rule should also hold true for other attributes, such as size, faith, or any other attribute. If, for example I owned a Catholic company or school or hospital, I should have the right to only hire Catholics in good standing. Or if I run an airline, I should have the right to hire only stewards the represent what I want to present my company as. If that is thin beautiful woman, than that’s what I should be allowed to hire.

The fact that several companies will not hire smokers (Source) is a corporate decision, one made to help lower health insurance coast, increase profits and promote a healthy life style. Fine, I’m good with that… As a smoker (well currently a nonsmoker) I good with that, they have the right to decide whom they want working and representing them. So if Delta Airlines decides they no longer want to hire anyone whose weight is over a certain level, to save fuel, promote a healthy life style, than they should have the same right as the companies that fire smokers. If a Catholic hospital wants to hire only Catholics in good standing, to promote the catholic faith, and wants to lower health insurance coast by not covering birth control and abortion, than they should have the same rights as the companies that fire smokers.

The right of privet companies should be respected across the board. The right of a restaurant to bad age groups (Source) should also be respected. We should not allow some rules but not others, fair is fair, to use a liberal phrase. If a company make a bad decision, and offends to many people, they will do one of two things, they will either change or they will close down, it’s that simple. The free market will correct the system, as long as the system is allowed to work.

The problem is, the rules are not fair, and the liberals are picking and choosing what is good for you and what is good for corporations. The problem is, we are not allowing the free market to be free. We are regulating the market, holding it back and creating a false market. A market that is pushed and prodded to follow along a path of socialism. A system of the government telling you what is best for you. Yes I know the government is not forcing companies to fire smokers, but they are forcing Catholic institutions to hire non-Catholics and Delta to hire heavy-set stewards. And give the government time, and they will require companies to hire only non-smokers. Trust me on this, with Obamcare coming, to save money, drive down health care, they will force Americans to quit smoking. Is that a bad thing? Health wise, no, we all know smoking is bad for you, but liberty wise, Hell ya its bad…. What would be next? Drinking? Read Meat? Sugar? Salt? Think not… (Source) Or how about the size of your TV (Source). The government has not right to interfere in your personal life. They tried it with prohibition (Source), it didn’t work to well.

So, does a company have the right to fire smokers…. Sure it does, as long as a company has the right to fire fat people or to fire non-Catholics or anyone else that does  not represent that company’s views. Fair is fair.

God Bless

Paul Sposite

Enhanced by Zemanta

IS it to Far off?

health-care-reform-in-the-199027s-722130The so called Health Care Bill is just one step in many that will turn our great country in to a Socialist State. Consider the following, the government owns or controls:

  1. General Motors
  2. Chrysler
  3. Fannie Mae
  4. Freddie Mac
  5. Financial Institutions
  6. Mortgage Institutions

And now Health Care, and if you consider all the regulations they own our schools Hillsdaleand with Cap and Trade (Cap and Tax) they will own our corporations. The More taxies and regulations the more ownership they gain. How far off do you think it really is before they “own” our faith?

You think I am crying wolf, that I an a chicken little who is yelling that the sky is falling?  Consider this from Hillsdale College’s publication “Imprimis” (The full article is on their website):

Threats to American Philanthropy

…But this freedom to give is now under serious threat. Let me mention three kinds of proposals coming from Capitol Hill, the IRS, state governments, and sometimes from the charitable sector itself, that should be of concern to all Americans.

The first threat comes in the form of one-size-fits-all governance and regulatory proposals that would limit the diversity and independence of the charitable world. In 2003, for instance, Eliot Spitzer, then Attorney General of New York, proposed a prohibition on foundations with less than $20 million in assets. His rationale was that there were too many foundations for regulatory authorities to monitor and police. In 2004, the staff of the Senate Finance Committee proposed that tax-exempt status for charities and foundations be renewed every five years and be contingent on accreditation. In 2007, a top IRS official gave a series of speeches proposing that the IRS evaluate the effectiveness and the governance of public charities and foundations. In 2008, the California State Assembly passed a bill requiring large foundations to disclose the racial, ethnic, and gender composition of their staffs and boards, as well as those of their vendors and grantees. And just two months ago, the Congressional Research Service published a report calling for a new oversight agency for charities and foundations.

The second threat is the increasingly common argument that foundation assets are “public money” and that decisions about grant-making are subject to political control. This argument was made most recently by a prominent member of Congress, Xavier Becerra. He referred to the tax-favored treatment of charitable giving as a “$32 billion earmark” and warned foundations that Congress has an obligation to ensure that philanthropic assets advance the public good.

The Philanthropy Roundtable recently published a monograph that took strong issue with this public money argument. It reviewed the legal history of tax-favored treatment for charitable giving, and it showed conclusively that foundations and other charitable organizations do not lose their private character when they benefit from favorable tax treatment. Moreover, as Chief Justice John Marshall wrote in 1819, in the case of Trustees of Dartmouth College v. Woodward, the grant of a state charter does not render a non-profit corporation and its assets subordinate to that state. Foundations and other charities do have public purposes, and state attorneys general do have the parens patriae power to enforce foundations’ adherence to their stated charitable purposes. But this does not mean that charitable organizations must serve the same ends as those of government or that government may unduly intrude in their governance and other decision-making.

A historic covenant has governed foundations—namely, that they must use their charitable assets for genuinely charitable purposes. Foundation trustees cannot use those assets to fund their daughters’ weddings, for instance, or their favorite political candidates. But so long as they use their assets for charitable purposes and follow some basic disclosure rules, foundations should have wide discretion to choose where to give their money and how to make their charitable contributions.

The third threat to the freedom of American philanthropy is in the form of proposals that would restrict what kind of giving is considered charitable. A growing number of such proposals, for instance, would limit the charitable deduction to direct help for racial minorities and low-income families and communities. Those are worthy purposes for charitable giving, but they are not the only worthy purposes. Americans of all races and income levels can benefit from giving to religious institutions, colleges and universities, hospitals and medical research, the arts, the environment, and many other causes that would not fall under some of the narrow definitions being proposed. Government should not be picking winners and losers in philanthropic giving. Americans should make their charitable decisions themselves….

The simple fact that the government now seems to feel that they need to regulate our donations and control who we choose to support should scare the hell out of everyone. The Nanny state is now becoming the socialist state, a state that controls your money. And who ever controls your money controls you. The day the my free will offering to my Church is scrutinized is the day that America passes the turn-around, we will be beyond the point of return.

Mary_Rosary-3If the government in America can even consider such a bill is scary. How far behind can be a bill that will decide what is and what is not a faith, what is and what is not acceptable religious practices. Will the Catholic Faith be deemed unacceptable? Will our devotions to Mary be considered a cult and not a devotion of our faith.

Are we willing to risk it? Are we willing to allow our government to decide for us what we can and can not believe? I, for one, am truly scared and I, for one, am going to pray for a conversion of hearts with in our government, but I am also going to exercise my rights as a citizen of the United States of American and vote this November for the conservatives who believe in individual freedom and the basic rights of each and every citizen.

As Catholics we are obligated to vote and as Catholics we are obligated to vote for representatives that will up hold our Constitution and or freedoms. We MUST make our voices heard, we must take back our country and our freedoms. The liberals are killing our faith and country and we need to fight back!

Stand UP! Speak Out! and Fight Back!

God Bless


Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto
Ephesians 6:10-11“[The Armor of God] Finally, be strong in the Lord and in his mighty power. Put on the full armor of God so that you can take your stand against the devil’s schemes.”

Brought to you by Copyright (C) . All Rights Reserved.