The Proposed Ordinance is an explicit and vicious attack on employers by means of a gross violation of their individual rights. If violation of individual rights are “lawful” then individual rights are unlawful. And that is what both judge and City Councilors -- and “Progressives” -- seek to establish. If no one has individual rights, one must have a ruler to say who is right-acting and who is not. What kind of person does ruling others appeals to? Our current City Councilors and their “Progressive” allies.
There are many ugly statements in the Proposed Ordinance. Here are only two, both of which prove the City Councilors’ guilt and reveal their motive.
On the reverse side of the ballot, 13-16-3 states that the Proposed Ordinance is to ". . . provide sick leave for employees or employees' family members’ mental or physical illness. . . ."
This means City Councilors seek to force the employer to agree to the violation of his individual rights, and to force him to pay employees for being sick and employees' family members -- which includes immediate family members as well as every cousin and second cousin, in-law and pretend aunt and uncle one cares to designate.
13-16-4 states: "Exercise of Rights; Retaliation Prohibited."
This means that employees have rights but employers do not. This obvious contradiction shows that City Councilors are ignorant of kindergarten logic and should be disqualified from holding office. There is no way to justify that employees are permitted "the exercise of rights" but employers are not.
Employers provide the seed money to start a business, endure the worry and work and risk in trying to make a go of it, who are resourceful and innovative and provide a value to the community in the form of jobs, goods or services. But, the City Councilors declare, they have no rights. They may not object. They may not defend their right to life and property. If they try, they will be heavily penalized and suffer triple damages.
On these counts alone, the Proposed Ordinance is immoral.
That every City Councilor seriously discussed this travesty and that a judge allowed it to be placed on the ballot shows a crass rejection of individual rights. The motive? Both judge and City Councilors seek to substitute coercion as the appropriate method of social conduct. They want to control business people -- which includes employers and employees alike – and who are -- in intelligence, work ethic, perseverance, courage, responsibility and benevolence -- their betters. They, these ignorant, illogical, interfering “public servants” want to tell those who are knowledgeable, how to spend their money and how to run their business.
I submit the Proposed Ordinance is the admission of a thug -- no different in kind or motive of those who extort through coercion values they themselves cannot create. I urge every citizen to turn over his ballot and vote against the Proposed Ordinance.
Interested readers are invited to subscribe to my no-charge Newsletter for discussions/analysis of ideas and issues and includes a Bulletin Board on which subscribers may comment on whatever concerns them – subject to my editing if necessary. Please contact me at Sylviabokor@aol.com