cibaeño75 previously said:



Well, Mr. C's argument is that since a company pays for this then to hell if the employee knows or not, the company has rights on the fact that they invested, period. If you read some of the arguments made for slavery in the antebellum South one would come across things like... we (slavers) pay for their medical bills, we pay for their food, baptisms, weddings, etc...trained them to be blacksmiths, etc,,... It's not like the slaves are not getting anything out of it! After all, we're "investing" in them! A similiar argument in the sense that it stems from a mindframe that human beings are commodities and to be treated as such, independent of how the individual might feel because someone else made an "investment".

chillaxin201 previously said:

I want to take out Life Insurance out on AnthonyC, William......... Maybe I'll find someone in DR that will help me cash it in if you know what I mean....

cabaretewilliam previously said:



Now now, lets not get carried away. I do understand though - the communist view historically was always atheist, and their view of humans is that they are expendable, which is why they had no problen killing 140 MILLION or so of their own people....

Glimmertwin previously said:


Willie:

Will you just say ANYTHING to attempt to make a point!!?!?!??1??!
do you go berserk when a jab hits your face and you'd try to bite off an ear???
c'mon, nowhere in communist theory does it say that humans are expendable!! You shouldnt be pissing into the wind, bcs that same remark may be said of religious leaderships, considering how many people wwere slain in the name of a given religion !

dreadlocks previously said:

i would not expect someone as simple minded as anthonyc to understand why the legality of this action MUST be challenged. if you take out an insurance policy on someone's life, what is to stop you from arranging their death?

dreadlocks previously said:

i would not expect someone as simple minded as anthonyc to understand why the legality of this action MUST be challenged. if you take out an insurance policy on someone's life, what is to stop you from arranging their death?

dreadlocks previously said:

as my dear, departed mother always used to say, "trhe worst fate in life is an argument with an idiot".i expressed the opinion that the legality of this issue will be challenged, because, in most states in the union, a policy cannot become an in force policy without the signature of the insured. therefore, there is a likelihood that insuring people without their knowledge is probably a violation of the insurance statutes. also, the concept of "insurable interest" comes into play. that is why you can insure your children, but not your neighbor's children, without their knowledge. then again, my words were prophetic, if only for this reason

Rep. Luis Gutiérrez (D-Illinois) told Chicago Public Radio that he has introduced legislation to prohibit companies from taking out life insurance policies on their lives without their knowledge or consent.

that, my friend, is a challenge to the legality of the practice. so, William, where you and i part company is that i actually know something, unlike you. and another thing i know is that you are an unrepentant piece of slime. begone!