Determinism and Regulation
Liberalism started out as a defense of human freedom and most modern liberals still think they are defending freedom. On the other hand, they also defend intrusive regulations. For example:
According to some philosophers, any behavior that is caused is incompatible with free will. In other words, if you do something for a reason, you are not free. That means that the employees who had a reason to work through lunch are not free. The regulations are saving them from SLAVERY!
California has a crazy law that allows employees to collect substantial ex post facto compensation if they claim they were denied a 10 minute break every four hours or a thirty minute unpaid lunch break after five.
A few weeks ago I was advised by a senior case-worker at the California Department of Labor that the only safe harbor left for employers is to FORCE employees to take an unpaid lunch. This means they clock in and back out, this means they have to leave the job site (because if a customer happens to ask them a question, then they are "working"), and this means we have to ruthlessly enforce it. Or we are liable for scads of penalties.
This explains why Sandra Flake thought having to pay for contraceptives is a violation of her rights. Having to pay for contraceptives provided a reason for her not to have sex, which meant she was not free. (This also applies to anybody who gave her a reason to have sex, which explains sexual-harassment law.)
I won't more than mention that there are reasons to believe pointless actions are also unfree, which reduces your consciousness to the status of a croupier at the human roulette wheel.