<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Responding to Injustice</title>
	<atom:link href="http://generationsforlife.org/2006/1024/responding-to-injustice/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://generationsforlife.org/2006/1024/responding-to-injustice/</link>
	<description>Weblog of the Pro-Life Action League's Youth Outreach Division</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 May 2012 20:49:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael-2</title>
		<link>http://generationsforlife.org/2006/1024/responding-to-injustice/#comment-7615</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael-2</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Oct 2006 10:44:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://generationsforlife.org/2006/1024/responding-to-injustice/#comment-7615</guid>
		<description>I am not sure why  employer and employee can not have a contract that both can agree to, courts notwithstanding.  This total contract would include issues such as work duties and responsibilities, salary, vacation time, maternity leave, and health care.  Now the entire package value is what is important, not some obviously divisive trivia such as the cost of contraceptives.  At least not in a place like the United States where the salary range is what it is.

Someone wants the employer to cover the cost of contraceptives?  Ask for a $5-$40/month raise.  Or maybe, instead of continuing to cover the cost of contraceptives, the employer can teach the employee/spouse fertility monitoring such that there will potentially be NO FURTHER costs.  Kinda like the proverb &quot;give a hungry man a fish and he will be hungry tomorrow asking for another fish; but teach him to catch fish and you may never need to give him anything again&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am not sure why  employer and employee can not have a contract that both can agree to, courts notwithstanding.  This total contract would include issues such as work duties and responsibilities, salary, vacation time, maternity leave, and health care.  Now the entire package value is what is important, not some obviously divisive trivia such as the cost of contraceptives.  At least not in a place like the United States where the salary range is what it is.</p>
<p>Someone wants the employer to cover the cost of contraceptives?  Ask for a $5-$40/month raise.  Or maybe, instead of continuing to cover the cost of contraceptives, the employer can teach the employee/spouse fertility monitoring such that there will potentially be NO FURTHER costs.  Kinda like the proverb &#8220;give a hungry man a fish and he will be hungry tomorrow asking for another fish; but teach him to catch fish and you may never need to give him anything again&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

