Being a Fat Ass is Now Protected by Law

Off Topic
1

Lawyers go to CLE “Continuing Legal Education.” It’s basically refresher class that lasts for 3-4 days, tailored to what you do.

One of the topics in a “general business update” was the ADA, which was an originally reasonable law designed to make sure that people with real disabilities get a fair shot at jobs they can do, with reasonable acmodation (e.g., a ramp for a guy in a wheelchair).

Now, the disability generally had to be: (1) real and substantial and (2) involuntary — not something you did to yourself — e.g., being a drug addict didn’t cut it, for example.

Well, this year the federal government has decided that being fat is the same thing as being blind or in a wheel chair, and not fat peoples’ fault, so the world (and employers) will now have to accomodate people who became immobile because they sit on their asses and shovel crap in their mouths.

The presenter was this big, fat, smug bitch from the EEOC 2 feet wider than the podium behind which she presented. She was out of breath from waddling up 3 steps to the stage, and was clearly very excited about the possibility of the world having to supply her fat ass with fat people scooters.

I was greeted with this news as I sat there, knees aching, having jogged up the firescape to my room (34 stories up) twice as my morning cardio.

2

This type of thread seems to come up on a regular basis in GAL.

I will reiterate what I have said in previous threads: I believe people who are extremely obese to the point of disability suffer from a food addiction (most of the time). Becoming 300lbs+ is HARD and takes a lot of work for most people.

I have no problem with this piece of legislation.

3

Just shoot me in the fucking face right now.

Please.

4

[quote]therajraj wrote:
This type of thread seems to come up on a regular basis in GAL.

I will reiterate what I have said in previous threads: I believe people who are extremely obese to the point of disability suffer from a food addiction (most of the time). Becoming 300lbs+ is HARD and takes a lot of work for most people.

I have no problem with this piece of legislation.

[/quote]

Sorry, this is retarded.

6

[quote]clockworkchad wrote:
what about studies like this? i dont know if this is a credible source but ive heard it mentioned by a few other sources that i do count as credible.
http://www.realclearscience.com/2010/11/25/overeating_releases_039feel-good039_brain_chemicals_238584.html[/quote]

7

[quote]clockworkchad wrote:
Jesus tapdancing christ.

Some people overeat to cope with problems, some people smoke meth to cope with problems. i genuinely feel that there are a lot of people that cure depression with gorging themselves, and are addicted to food as you mentioned.

what about studies like this? i dont know if this is a credible source but ive heard it mentioned by a few other sources that i do count as credible.
http://www.realclearscience.com/2010/11/25/overeating_releases_039feel-good039_brain_chemicals_238584.html[/quote]

Not exactly a stretch seeing how we’re instinctually programmed to survive and reproduce.

8

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:
This type of thread seems to come up on a regular basis in GAL.

I will reiterate what I have said in previous threads: I believe people who are extremely obese to the point of disability suffer from a food addiction (most of the time). Becoming 300lbs+ is HARD and takes a lot of work for most people.

I have no problem with this piece of legislation.

[/quote]

Sorry, this is retarded.[/quote]

x2. Is reducing activity and increasing consumption of ding-dongs hard? I’m confused unless your sarcasm flew right over my head.

9

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
Lawyers go to CLE “Continuing Legal Education.” It’s basically refresher class that lasts for 3-4 days, tailored to what you do.

One of the topics in a “general business update” was the ADA, which was an originally reasonable law designed to make sure that people with real disabilities get a fair shot at jobs they can do, with reasonable acmodation (e.g., a ramp for a guy in a wheelchair).

Now, the disability generally had to be: (1) real and substantial and (2) involuntary — not something you did to yourself — e.g., being a drug addict didn’t cut it, for example.

Well, this year the federal government has decided that being fat is the same thing as being blind or in a wheel chair, and not fat peoples’ fault, so the world (and employers) will now have to accomodate people who became immobile because they sit on their asses and shovel crap in their mouths.

The presenter was this big, fat, smug bitch from the EEOC 2 feet wider than the podium behind which she presented. She was out of breath from waddling up 3 steps to the stage, and was clearly very excited about the possibility of the world having to supply her fat ass with fat people scooters.

I was greeted with this news as I sat there, knees aching, having jogged up the firescape to my room (34 stories up) twice as my morning cardio.[/quote]

I saw this coming…it’s been a trend to expand the protections. I managed complex claims for 20 years.

10

Well, that’s bull. If it ain’t your fault being fat, then whose is it?

11

[quote]biglifter wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:
This type of thread seems to come up on a regular basis in GAL.

I will reiterate what I have said in previous threads: I believe people who are extremely obese to the point of disability suffer from a food addiction (most of the time). Becoming 300lbs+ is HARD and takes a lot of work for most people.

I have no problem with this piece of legislation.

[/quote]

Sorry, this is retarded.[/quote]

x2. Is reducing activity and increasing consumption of ding-dongs hard? I’m confused unless your sarcasm flew right over my head.[/quote]

Uhhhh… Yeah it is hard when you’re ADDICTED. That is why I used that term. It’s easy to say from your end just like It’s easy for a non-smoker to tell a smoker to “simply stop smoking”

I’m not talking about overweight or severely overweight people, but the far end of the spectrum.

12

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
Lawyers go to CLE “Continuing Legal Education.” It’s basically refresher class that lasts for 3-4 days, tailored to what you do.

One of the topics in a “general business update” was the ADA, which was an originally reasonable law designed to make sure that people with real disabilities get a fair shot at jobs they can do, with reasonable acmodation (e.g., a ramp for a guy in a wheelchair).

Now, the disability generally had to be: (1) real and substantial and (2) involuntary — not something you did to yourself — e.g., being a drug addict didn’t cut it, for example.

Well, this year the federal government has decided that being fat is the same thing as being blind or in a wheel chair, and not fat peoples’ fault, so the world (and employers) will now have to accomodate people who became immobile because they sit on their asses and shovel crap in their mouths.

The presenter was this big, fat, smug bitch from the EEOC 2 feet wider than the podium behind which she presented. She was out of breath from waddling up 3 steps to the stage, and was clearly very excited about the possibility of the world having to supply her fat ass with fat people scooters.

I was greeted with this news as I sat there, knees aching, having jogged up the firescape to my room (34 stories up) twice as my morning cardio.[/quote]

I am not happy you did this, unfortunatley some of the posters after you have no clue what you are talking about. Short attention span of youth today.

I am a mid-level provider that does pre-employment physicals for a fortune 500 company. Part of my job is qualifications due to ADA. I will hopefully make a point that some of the slow witted can understand.

This would mean that a construction job site would have to accommodate a 500 pound guy to be a scaffold builder. Now the guy couldnt climb the scaffold and do the job so the site would have to basically find a part of the job he could do. Like stand at the bottom and basically be a fucking anchor for everyone else. So what does this mean.

Increased fucking cost for labor.

Any of you get pissed when you see them working on the street and 5 guys are standing around 1 guy working? That is because labor laws now require how much they can work in a given hour. Now you can expect to see the good year blimp standing right next to the other guys holding a shovel.

13

What’s funny is that the U.S knows that they have the reputation for the being the most obese country in the world, yet they still make accomodations for the obese. There’s no incentive for obese people to lose weight if they’re having their hands held for being fat.

I’m tired of all these excuses for our health problems like not having exactly 1000 mg of calcium a day, anything more than .2 grams of protein per pound of BW will kill you, yadda yadda.
Just make it a little harder to be so damn sedentary in this country and watch health issues decrease.

14

[quote]DJHT wrote:

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
Lawyers go to CLE “Continuing Legal Education.” It’s basically refresher class that lasts for 3-4 days, tailored to what you do.

One of the topics in a “general business update” was the ADA, which was an originally reasonable law designed to make sure that people with real disabilities get a fair shot at jobs they can do, with reasonable acmodation (e.g., a ramp for a guy in a wheelchair).

Now, the disability generally had to be: (1) real and substantial and (2) involuntary — not something you did to yourself — e.g., being a drug addict didn’t cut it, for example.

Well, this year the federal government has decided that being fat is the same thing as being blind or in a wheel chair, and not fat peoples’ fault, so the world (and employers) will now have to accomodate people who became immobile because they sit on their asses and shovel crap in their mouths.

The presenter was this big, fat, smug bitch from the EEOC 2 feet wider than the podium behind which she presented. She was out of breath from waddling up 3 steps to the stage, and was clearly very excited about the possibility of the world having to supply her fat ass with fat people scooters.

I was greeted with this news as I sat there, knees aching, having jogged up the firescape to my room (34 stories up) twice as my morning cardio.[/quote]

I am not happy you did this, unfortunatley some of the posters after you have no clue what you are talking about. Short attention span of youth today.

I am a mid-level provider that does pre-employment physicals for a fortune 500 company. Part of my job is qualifications due to ADA. I will hopefully make a point that some of the slow witted can understand.

This would mean that a construction job site would have to accommodate a 500 pound guy to be a scaffold builder. Now the guy couldnt climb the scaffold and do the job so the site would have to basically find a part of the job he could do. Like stand at the bottom and basically be a fucking anchor for everyone else. So what does this mean.

Increased fucking cost for labor.

Any of you get pissed when you see them working on the street and 5 guys are standing around 1 guy working? That is because labor laws now require how much they can work in a given hour. Now you can expect to see the good year blimp standing right next to the other guys holding a shovel. [/quote]

In the OP it said “get a fair shot at jobs they can do.” Is this what the OP was referring to, a scaffold builder? Really?

15

[quote]clockworkchad wrote:
Jesus tapdancing christ.

Some people overeat to cope with problems, some people smoke meth to cope with problems. i genuinely feel that there are a lot of people that cure depression with gorging themselves, and are addicted to food as you mentioned.

what about studies like this? i dont know if this is a credible source but ive heard it mentioned by a few other sources that i do count as credible.
http://www.realclearscience.com/2010/11/25/overeating_releases_039feel-good039_brain_chemicals_238584.html[/quote]

That’s great and all, but being a drug addict (or any kind of addict, for that matter) is not a “disability” as defined by law.

Being fat is a “disease” according to our lords and masters in Washington.

Now, any time a fat ass gets fired, he or she will sue, claiming he or she was fired because he was fat.

On the bright side, however, that’s more money for the legal profession, so I suppose I shouldn’t kvetch.

16

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]DJHT wrote:

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
Lawyers go to CLE “Continuing Legal Education.” It’s basically refresher class that lasts for 3-4 days, tailored to what you do.

One of the topics in a “general business update” was the ADA, which was an originally reasonable law designed to make sure that people with real disabilities get a fair shot at jobs they can do, with reasonable acmodation (e.g., a ramp for a guy in a wheelchair).

Now, the disability generally had to be: (1) real and substantial and (2) involuntary — not something you did to yourself — e.g., being a drug addict didn’t cut it, for example.

Well, this year the federal government has decided that being fat is the same thing as being blind or in a wheel chair, and not fat peoples’ fault, so the world (and employers) will now have to accomodate people who became immobile because they sit on their asses and shovel crap in their mouths.

The presenter was this big, fat, smug bitch from the EEOC 2 feet wider than the podium behind which she presented. She was out of breath from waddling up 3 steps to the stage, and was clearly very excited about the possibility of the world having to supply her fat ass with fat people scooters.

I was greeted with this news as I sat there, knees aching, having jogged up the firescape to my room (34 stories up) twice as my morning cardio.[/quote]

I am not happy you did this, unfortunatley some of the posters after you have no clue what you are talking about. Short attention span of youth today.

I am a mid-level provider that does pre-employment physicals for a fortune 500 company. Part of my job is qualifications due to ADA. I will hopefully make a point that some of the slow witted can understand.

This would mean that a construction job site would have to accommodate a 500 pound guy to be a scaffold builder. Now the guy couldnt climb the scaffold and do the job so the site would have to basically find a part of the job he could do. Like stand at the bottom and basically be a fucking anchor for everyone else. So what does this mean.

Increased fucking cost for labor.

Any of you get pissed when you see them working on the street and 5 guys are standing around 1 guy working? That is because labor laws now require how much they can work in a given hour. Now you can expect to see the good year blimp standing right next to the other guys holding a shovel. [/quote]

In the OP it said “get a fair shot at jobs they can do.” Is this what the OP was referring to, a scaffold builder? Really?
[/quote]

Not a scaffold builder (necessarily) but a guy who uses one, maybe.

In the real world what will happen is people will get fat and they will be put in “make work” jobs, because you can’t fire them because they can’t do their job anymore because they got too fat.

So they will hang around the workplace, drink coffee, and do nothing, but cost money.

17

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]DJHT wrote:

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
Lawyers go to CLE “Continuing Legal Education.” It’s basically refresher class that lasts for 3-4 days, tailored to what you do.

One of the topics in a “general business update” was the ADA, which was an originally reasonable law designed to make sure that people with real disabilities get a fair shot at jobs they can do, with reasonable acmodation (e.g., a ramp for a guy in a wheelchair).

Now, the disability generally had to be: (1) real and substantial and (2) involuntary — not something you did to yourself — e.g., being a drug addict didn’t cut it, for example.

Well, this year the federal government has decided that being fat is the same thing as being blind or in a wheel chair, and not fat peoples’ fault, so the world (and employers) will now have to accomodate people who became immobile because they sit on their asses and shovel crap in their mouths.

The presenter was this big, fat, smug bitch from the EEOC 2 feet wider than the podium behind which she presented. She was out of breath from waddling up 3 steps to the stage, and was clearly very excited about the possibility of the world having to supply her fat ass with fat people scooters.

I was greeted with this news as I sat there, knees aching, having jogged up the firescape to my room (34 stories up) twice as my morning cardio.[/quote]

I am not happy you did this, unfortunatley some of the posters after you have no clue what you are talking about. Short attention span of youth today.

I am a mid-level provider that does pre-employment physicals for a fortune 500 company. Part of my job is qualifications due to ADA. I will hopefully make a point that some of the slow witted can understand.

This would mean that a construction job site would have to accommodate a 500 pound guy to be a scaffold builder. Now the guy couldnt climb the scaffold and do the job so the site would have to basically find a part of the job he could do. Like stand at the bottom and basically be a fucking anchor for everyone else. So what does this mean.

Increased fucking cost for labor.

Any of you get pissed when you see them working on the street and 5 guys are standing around 1 guy working? That is because labor laws now require how much they can work in a given hour. Now you can expect to see the good year blimp standing right next to the other guys holding a shovel. [/quote]

In the OP it said “get a fair shot at jobs they can do.” Is this what the OP was referring to, a scaffold builder? Really?
[/quote]

Go back and read it again, Jewbacca is a Lawyer this was not a study. He knows the ADA and so do I, DO YOU. They are pushing for the fact that an obese person has a right to that job, that their weight should not be taken into account for the job. If you refuse them the job due to there weight they can bring a claim of descrimination against the company. Thus the companies will now start hiring Jabba the Hut to avoid any more descrimination suits. God some times you guys make me want to drink. DO not talk shit about things you dont know about. FUCK

18

A disease? These people seem to be pretty willing to encourage this disease to take hold of them…

19

[quote]therajraj wrote:
This type of thread seems to come up on a regular basis in GAL.

I will reiterate what I have said in previous threads: I believe people who are extremely obese to the point of disability suffer from a food addiction (most of the time). Becoming 300lbs+ is HARD and takes a lot of work for most people.

I have no problem with this piece of legislation.

[/quote]

Addiction is covered by the ADA?

20

[quote]rrjc5488 wrote:
Just shoot me in the fucking face right now.

Please.[/quote]

This was pretty much my reaction.

21

[quote]DJHT wrote:

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
Lawyers go to CLE “Continuing Legal Education.” It’s basically refresher class that lasts for 3-4 days, tailored to what you do.

One of the topics in a “general business update” was the ADA, which was an originally reasonable law designed to make sure that people with real disabilities get a fair shot at jobs they can do, with reasonable acmodation (e.g., a ramp for a guy in a wheelchair).

Now, the disability generally had to be: (1) real and substantial and (2) involuntary — not something you did to yourself — e.g., being a drug addict didn’t cut it, for example.

Well, this year the federal government has decided that being fat is the same thing as being blind or in a wheel chair, and not fat peoples’ fault, so the world (and employers) will now have to accomodate people who became immobile because they sit on their asses and shovel crap in their mouths.

The presenter was this big, fat, smug bitch from the EEOC 2 feet wider than the podium behind which she presented. She was out of breath from waddling up 3 steps to the stage, and was clearly very excited about the possibility of the world having to supply her fat ass with fat people scooters.

I was greeted with this news as I sat there, knees aching, having jogged up the firescape to my room (34 stories up) twice as my morning cardio.[/quote]

I am not happy you did this, unfortunatley some of the posters after you have no clue what you are talking about. Short attention span of youth today.

I am a mid-level provider that does pre-employment physicals for a fortune 500 company. Part of my job is qualifications due to ADA. I will hopefully make a point that some of the slow witted can understand.

This would mean that a construction job site would have to accommodate a 500 pound guy to be a scaffold builder. Now the guy couldnt climb the scaffold and do the job so the site would have to basically find a part of the job he could do. Like stand at the bottom and basically be a fucking anchor for everyone else. So what does this mean.

Increased fucking cost for labor.

Any of you get pissed when you see them working on the street and 5 guys are standing around 1 guy working? That is because labor laws now require how much they can work in a given hour. Now you can expect to see the good year blimp standing right next to the other guys holding a shovel. [/quote]

This is not correct. You have to make REASONABLE accommodations and they still have to be able to perform the essential functions of the job.