You can login if you already have an account or register by clicking the button below.
Registering is free and all you need is a username and password. We never ask you for your e-mail.
Submissions should be about Q drops or a subject that has been mentioned by Q. Meta posts about Voat or the community are generally off-topic & subject to removal as unmentioned by Q; use submail for concerns or questions.
Freedom of speech is your right. Being a dick is our reason to remove this content. This includes concern-trolling; drama, gossip, or posts about other users; personal attacks; attacks on the community.
Voat Rules
Content violates spam guidelines
Content contains or links to content that is illegal
Content contains personal information that relates to a Voat users real world or online identity
"Critics note that this law also grants perfect legal framework for an employer to microchip their employees in the first place. With this bill on record fans of the technology will have statutes to lean on when they impose their plans. By having rules of prohibition it’s inherent that without exceeding those limits, that the chipping is allowed by law."
If there was no law against it before, I sincerely doubt there was anything preventing employers from requiring micro chipping this entire time. Besides, this is not the end all be all of this legislation. Certainly some company will push for micro chipping within the permissible confines of this legislation, but will be faced with an appeal to some governing body thus creating even further restrictions and interpretations through case law. This argument requires faith in the judicial/administrative system, so go ahead and laugh.
Additionally, if this somehow does contemplate a governmental allowance or furtherance of mandatory micro chipping, then a constitutional argument could probably be made regarding the right to privacy under the 4th Amendment. Don't count on it, however, because the SCOTUS has been issuing crazy rulings lately in an attempt for Roberts to appease the liberal masses and "depoliticize" the appearance of the Court.
view the rest of the comments →
[–] Youtheperson 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
"Critics note that this law also grants perfect legal framework for an employer to microchip their employees in the first place. With this bill on record fans of the technology will have statutes to lean on when they impose their plans. By having rules of prohibition it’s inherent that without exceeding those limits, that the chipping is allowed by law."
If there was no law against it before, I sincerely doubt there was anything preventing employers from requiring micro chipping this entire time. Besides, this is not the end all be all of this legislation. Certainly some company will push for micro chipping within the permissible confines of this legislation, but will be faced with an appeal to some governing body thus creating even further restrictions and interpretations through case law. This argument requires faith in the judicial/administrative system, so go ahead and laugh.
Additionally, if this somehow does contemplate a governmental allowance or furtherance of mandatory micro chipping, then a constitutional argument could probably be made regarding the right to privacy under the 4th Amendment. Don't count on it, however, because the SCOTUS has been issuing crazy rulings lately in an attempt for Roberts to appease the liberal masses and "depoliticize" the appearance of the Court.
No job is worth doing this to yourself.
[–] WillGreeley ago
Run away as fast as possible. Walk away from everything! Escape to another state now!!
Tell any Christian what and why you are running and they will help you!! R U N