A war on teachers' rights is a war on teachers.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Union rights are defined in the Wagner Act.

[sirs]

Bingo.

The right to peacefully assemble.

And who's advocating that they not be allowed to "peacefully assemble", which has nothing to do with any of the points I'm making??

[sirs]

Union rights are defined in the Wagner Act.

Which has squat to do with Constitutional rights as defined by our Constitution

[Xavier_Onassis]

Like I give a shit.

The obligation to stop at red lights and stop signs are also not in the constitution. So what? Does that give anyone the right to run stop signs and red lights?

Unions and the enforcement of collective bargaining contracts are LEGAL. That is all that matters. Thye do not have to be guaranteed by the Constitution.

[BT]

There is no right to a teacher's union.

Your words. That seem to be at odds with the 1st amendment as interpreted by the Supreme Court.

The Wagner Act was also upheld by SCOTUS as Constitutional.

[sirs]

No there is no right to a Teacher's Union.  That's not the same as folks peacefully assembling.  Now, at least, I can see how you got confused

[BT]

No there is no right to a Teacher's Union.  That's not the same as folks peacefully assembling.  Now, at least, I can see how you got confused

Sure there is. Teachers can assemble just as peacefully as teamsters or auto workers or corporations.

While the United States Constitution's First Amendment identifies the rights to assemble and to petition the government, the text of the First Amendment does not make specific mention of a right to association. Nevertheless, the United States Supreme Court held in NAACP v. Alabama that the freedom of association is an essential part of the Freedom of Speech because, in many cases, people can engage in effective speech only when they join with others.
Intimate association

A fundamental element of personal liberty is the right to choose to enter into and maintain certain intimate human relationships. These intimate human relationships are considered forms of "intimate association." The paradigmatic example of "intimate association" is the family. Depending on the jurisdiction it may also extend to abortion, birth control and private, adult, non-commercial and consensual sexual relationships.
Expressive association

Expressive associations are groups that engage in activities protected by the First Amendment – speech, assembly, press, petitioning government for a redress of grievances, and the free exercise of religion. In Roberts v. United States Jaycees, the Supreme Court held that associations may not exclude people for reasons unrelated to the group's expression. However, in the subsequent decisions of Hurley v. Irish-American Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Group of Boston, the Court ruled that a group may exclude people from membership if their presence would affect the group's ability to advocate a particular point of view. The government cannot, through the use of anti-discrimination laws, force groups to include a message that they do not wish to convey.
Organized labour

The organization of labor was commonly resisted during the 19th century, with even relatively liberal countries such as the United Kingdom banning it for various periods (in the UK's case, between 1820 and 1824).[4]

In the international labour movement, the freedom of association is a right identified under international labour standards as the right of workers to organize and collectively bargain. Freedom of association, in this sense, is recognized as a fundamental human right by a number of documents including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and International Labor Organization Convention C87 and Convention C98 – two of the eight fundamental, core international labour standards. 'Freedom of association' can also refer to legal bans on private contracts negotiated between a private employer and their employees requiring workers at a particular workplace to join a union as a term and condition of employment. Supporters of this sort of private freedom of association claim that the right to join a union incorporates a right not to join a union. In the United States, the term 'right to work' is more common for this type of law.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_association#United_States_Constitution

[sirs]

Sure there isn't, but cudos on the effort to blurr the 2...unionizing vs peaceably assembling

[Xavier_Onassis]

The courts have decided that Americans have the right to unionize and demand that they be given the right to bargain collectively. It is the law.

[BT]

Sure there isn't, but cudos on the effort to blurr the 2...unionizing vs peaceably assembling

What is a union but a peaceful assembly of folks with a common purpose?

Like the NRA! or a church! or the Boy Scouts of America!

[sirs]

Again, trying to blurr an organization with an action.  Not gonna work, I'am afraid

[BT]

No blurring at all. Just proving that you misspoke concerning the constitutional rights to assemble, whether it be a union or a jamboree.

Sure the constitution did not explicitly state the right to form a union, but then it never explicitly states that money is a protected right under the speech clause, which you have argued many a time.

Yet you cite case law to back your claim and ignore case law when it concerns unions.

You can't have it both ways. Any further discussion of your claims is just scrambling and dancing, shucking and jiving and otherwise backing away from your original claim, that there is no right to a teachers union.

[sirs]

Yes, Blurring, and no, I didn't misspeak.  There is no right to a union.  There is a 1st amendment right to peacefully assemble, which is an action.  In that action, folks, may, if they so wish, attempt to unionize, but it's not a right.  Apples Oranges.  Not sure why you're having such a difficult time with the concept

[BT]

Do you have the right to donate to political causes? Yes or No?

[sirs]

Wow, now getting demanding.  I recall the ire that was sent my way, when I merely inferred a request for an answer, when one was not forthcoming.  The answer of course, is of course.  However, I'm not assembling with anyone, but myself, but sure, once can donate to a political cause or party.  Nor does my donation provide me a quid pro quo of legislative action, that directly effects the obligation in tax dollar salary & pensions.  And there in lies the difference between "peacefully assembling" and unionizing, including your efforts to inject the NRA, or Church, or BSA.

I think we're done here, since I'm not in much of a mood to be ordered