[wideawake]

SACKED smoker Sophie Blinman threatened to take her former employers to court yesterday, fuming: "I'm furious. Surely this is discrimination."

If you can fire smokers for their unhealthy behavior (which you should be able to do if you're paying their health benefits), why shouldn't you be able to fire people who engage in highly dangerous sexual behavior?

[cgbg]

If you compare the sick time and medical bills of people who have children of school age with those (of the same age) who do not it will be clear that parents take off more sick time than non parents because kids catch a lot of contagious diseases and pass them on to their parents. Should employers refuse to hire parents?

[commonerX]

"""why shouldn't you be able to fire people who engage in highly dangerous sexual behavior?"""

Not just dangerous sexual behavior, but any dangerous behavior.

No More:
skiing
Riding motorcycles
Using electric tools
etc...

[El Gato]

if you can fire smokers for their unhealthy behavior (which you should be able to do if you're paying their health benefits), why shouldn't you be able to fire people who engage in highly dangerous sexual behavior?"

One is filthy disgusting behavior, the other is a filthy disgusting behavior sanctioned by the liberal nanny State.

[VaGunGuy]

But I thought England has socialized medicine? Her employers wouldn't pay for her health care then, would they?