You're confusing issues. As with similar confusions about "right to work" (where the putative conflict is between Alice's right to hire whom she chooses and Bob's putative "right to a job"), the confusion lies in what one calls a right.
I assume you are talking about right-to-work labor laws, in which case, it does not refer to the above. It has to do with union-membership (which you more than likely similarly disagree with...) I agree that there is rampant abuse of the word/idea of "rights" in this country and around the world. I similarly think that many political disagreements can be boiled down to this problem.
And just where did anyone in any of these posts call for outlawing any particular language, pidgin, slang, creole, jive, or invented lingo?
I was actually joking, Tim. My original response was sent before I knew of the Oakland initiative. I do not hail from California, the land of Proposition XXX, and find some of them silly. You do advocate the unemployment of people who do utilize such a dialect/language. And I do fear that many people subscribe to your line of thinking. So I do respond to some of your posts earlier than I sometimes should to present a different point of view.
Really, Matt, go back to Rhetoric 101 and learn how to argue.
That's a good argument. Do they teach that ad hominem stuff in that class? ;-) Matt