3 ms·
Not narrowly defined (as in, it is not the government preventing you from expressing a political opinion). But it does have the whiff of a coerced surrendering
by lazaroclapp 10y ago
Not narrowly defined (as in, it is not the government preventing you from expressing a political opinion). But it does have the whiff of a coerced surrendering of one's rights. Suppose you could sign a completely unbreakable "indentured servitude" contract with another person, whereby by a specific payment now, you are required to work for them exclusively for the next 10 years in whichever capacity they so chose (as long as the job is legal), without further pay and without the option to resign (even by returning the money or declaring bankruptcy). The above would probably not be slavery in the legal/historical sense, but I think no country that disallows slavery should allow such contract either.
- WalterBright 10y agoAll contracts have remedies for breach of contract. Note that jail is not a valid remedy. I've signed non-disparagement contracts, where the remedy was I had to pay back the money. Seems quite reasonable to me, and not a violation of my rights.
- sokoloff 10y agoSuch a contract would (almost surely) be barred by the 13th Amendment in the US. The 13th Amendment language is much broader than the 1st. "Shall [not] exist" coupled with "Congress shall have the power to enforce this article" is much broader than "Congress shall make no law..."