Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: one_less who wrote (75077)	9/18/2003 8:06:17 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

OK, one more time. Belief: that the practice of massaging anyone whom he might turn on or who might turn him on is harmful because the lesser standard does not adequately deter sexual misconduct in the massage biz. Principle: he stands firm that he won't accept any women or gays as clients in his own practice. (Sheesh, that was like pulling teeth.) Further. We have agreed that, based on freedom of conscience, he should not be forced to service women and gays. Next. What additional considerations is he looking for based on freedom on conscience? If any? Exemption from any liability or laws pertaining to discrimination? Or what?

To: one_less who wrote (75077)	9/18/2003 11:52:38 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

he believes that if he were to work in those conditions the likely hood of his operations contributing to the bad statistics would increase. Since the patient is lying on a table and he's free to get up and walk around or walk out the door, what you're really saying is that he can't control himself, or say "this massage is over" and walk out if things start to get a little near the bone. Unless you are arguing that a patient would leap up, grab him, and forcibly rape him? If you're not suggesting that, they tell him to keep his own hormones under control and it'll be fine.