RE: No freedom of speech if it pisses someone off. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

thompsonx -> RE: No freedom of speech if it pisses someone off. (4/11/2012 3:58:36 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

quote:

Is it your position that a person may be fired from their job because of their political beliefs?


Don't we fire the President because of his?

Butch



A quick check of the constitution indicates that the president is hired for a term of four years. The specifics of how he may be fired are quite clear. Not being rehired is not the same as being fired...but then you already knew that.



thompsonx -> RE: No freedom of speech if it pisses someone off. (4/11/2012 4:01:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Statement of fact.


No...it is your fucking opinion.
My opinion is that those who cannot defend their position with logic and facts usally resort to name calling and personal attacks.

Mine is that people who focus on reinventing the meaning of words to pretend they're making an argument are silly.

I also think it's a pity taking time to enjoy life and be silly has become an insult.


quote:

My opinion is that those who cannot defend their position with logic and facts usally resort to name calling and personal attacks.



kdsub -> RE: No freedom of speech if it pisses someone off. (4/11/2012 6:16:56 PM)

quote:

A quick check of the constitution indicates that the president is hired for a term of four years. The specifics of how he may be fired are quite clear. Not being rehired is not the same as being fired...but then you already knew that


But would you not have to admit it is his political beliefs that gets him fired if he is running for re-election? Or are you in your own little world again.

Butch



Musicmystery -> RE: No freedom of speech if it pisses someone off. (4/11/2012 6:42:28 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Statement of fact.


No...it is your fucking opinion.
My opinion is that those who cannot defend their position with logic and facts usally resort to name calling and personal attacks.

Mine is that people who focus on reinventing the meaning of words to pretend they're making an argument are silly.

I also think it's a pity taking time to enjoy life and be silly has become an insult.


quote:

My opinion is that those who cannot defend their position with logic and facts usally resort to name calling and personal attacks.


Your position is that Major League Baseball, an industry worth billions of dollars, is not a business, and that a franchise's coach is not a representative of the ball club.

Then you want people to prove you wrong.

You are being silly. QED.



VideoAdminGamma -> RE: No freedom of speech if it pisses someone off. (4/11/2012 7:11:18 PM)

Fast reply

Stay on topic, refrain from personal attacks, follow the guidelines and TOS. If you cannot do that then do not post, willingly or not.

VideoAdminGamma



xssve -> RE: No freedom of speech if it pisses someone off. (4/13/2012 10:01:00 AM)

quote:

Your position is that Major League Baseball, an industry worth billions of dollars, is not a business, and that a franchise's coach is not a representative of the ball club.

Then you want people to prove you wrong.

You are being silly. QED.


Well it used to be a game.

People who aren't being silly know that only capital is allowed to speak, that free speech shit is for poor people.



philosophy -> RE: No freedom of speech if it pisses someone off. (4/13/2012 11:11:40 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: xssve



Well it used to be a game.





.....the instant you take money to play (or coach) it stops being just a game.

You've become a professional. Thing about that, is that you are now held to a different standard.

If the coach in question worked for free then this issue would be a straight up and down free speech issue.

But he worked under a contract, and I'd bet dollars to donuts that there was a section in it about bringing the club into disrepute.

Free speech is a wonderful thing, worth fighting and even dying for. However protecting individuals from the consequences of free speech rather defeats the object.



slvemike4u -> RE: No freedom of speech if it pisses someone off. (4/13/2012 11:23:54 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery


quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

for exercising his constitutional rights.

Not at all.

Ozzie has a constitutional right to be an asshole ?
Ho holds a very public job,he ticked off a large contingent of his clubs fans.....take a few days off.
I would say he got off easy.

What are you talking about?

The OP claims constitutional rights were violated. They weren't.



Sorry I was unclear...don't know how I could have been clearer(save for not letting the typo get by me)but I agree with you fully...so I really don't know what you are bitching at me about ?
As I said in the first post(the one you failed to understand) Ozzie got off easy,he could and should have been fired. Employees are not supposed to hurt their employers business.
Ozzie hurt the Marlins at the front office,he offended a large contingent of the Marlins fan base.
Simple,now are we all clear ?



Musicmystery -> RE: No freedom of speech if it pisses someone off. (4/13/2012 11:58:03 AM)

quote:

I really don't know what you are bitching at me about ?


Where did you get the idea I was bitching about anything?

You guys take this forum far too seriously.



xssve -> RE: No freedom of speech if it pisses someone off. (4/13/2012 12:43:13 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy


quote:

ORIGINAL: xssve



Well it used to be a game.





.....the instant you take money to play (or coach) it stops being just a game.

You've become a professional. Thing about that, is that you are now held to a different standard.

If the coach in question worked for free then this issue would be a straight up and down free speech issue.

But he worked under a contract, and I'd bet dollars to donuts that there was a section in it about bringing the club into disrepute.

Free speech is a wonderful thing, worth fighting and even dying for. However protecting individuals from the consequences of free speech rather defeats the object.

Uh, protecting the individual from the consequences is the whole idea, otherwise, it's not free speech, google up "chilling effect"

i.e., fans have every right to disagree with whether fucking Castro was a swell guy or not, but whatisface is free to express his option without fear of reprisal - how is anything else remotely definable as "free speech"?

When you break out the torches and pitchforks, you no longer have a democracy based on consensus formation through reasoned debate, the underlying foundational principle of our entire representative democracy - you have a violent mob.

In other words, where does that end? Instead of arguing with you over the internet, I can just hunt your ass down and kill you, that will settle that argument about who is right or wrong.

Those are the consequences of what you're espousing.

Were you people really not paying attention in class or what?



xssve -> RE: No freedom of speech if it pisses someone off. (4/13/2012 12:51:44 PM)

quote:

Not sure what crawled into your shorts, but you're either missing the point or deliberately distorting it.

If you're not a good fit, we aren't going to work well together, you aren't going to be good for business or for clients, and should work where you and the work you do are more compatible.

And yes, if I'm paying the bills, I get to make that determination.

As do you to decide not to work in this endeavor.

NONE of that is a violation of free speech--in fact, it's pure freedom, all the way around.


Huh, "spineless bootlicking jellyfish" is the word that popped into my mind.

"Statement of fact" as far as I'm concerned.

Here and I thought people were out there killing and dying even as we speak so I can say what I want - apparently they're dying so you can make an extra buck.

sic gloria transit mundi



Real0ne -> RE: No freedom of speech if it pisses someone off. (4/13/2012 1:04:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc2b

The distinction between government censorship and public opprobrium that others have noted is pertinent. Still, I think people tend to go too far in some case in demanding that people be fired for things they said. Just proclaim the guy an asshole (and he is an asshole if he thinks there is anything admirable about a murdering, torturing, dictator) and leave it at that.

If you represented my business, and acted like an asshole publicly, you'd be fired that day.

A business decision, not a free speech statement.


yep and I would have your ass in court for damages for political discrimination before the ink dried on your paper.



Real0ne -> RE: No freedom of speech if it pisses someone off. (4/13/2012 1:08:31 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy


quote:

ORIGINAL: xssve



Well it used to be a game.





.....the instant you take money to play (or coach) it stops being just a game.

You've become a professional. Thing about that, is that you are now held to a different standard.

If the coach in question worked for free then this issue would be a straight up and down free speech issue.

But he worked under a contract, and I'd bet dollars to donuts that there was a section in it about bringing the club into disrepute.

Free speech is a wonderful thing, worth fighting and even dying for. However protecting individuals from the consequences of free speech rather defeats the object.



I did not read it. Was it in the contract yes or no? If yes the contract is in violation of his right to free speech. If no the corporation, a creature of state is in violation of his right to free speech. Oh equitable damages to the team, profits et al? Prove it.



Real0ne -> RE: No freedom of speech if it pisses someone off. (4/13/2012 1:11:33 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: xssve

Well it used to be a game.

People who aren't being silly know that only capital is allowed to speak, that free speech shit is for poor people.


yeh, well look at my thread where all the those COPS shot INNOCENT people. its probly on page 3 right now. BUT let a PRIVATE man shoot someone there will ne 3 pages of threads calling for congressional investigation.



Musicmystery -> RE: No freedom of speech if it pisses someone off. (4/13/2012 2:46:01 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: xssve

quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy


quote:

ORIGINAL: xssve



Well it used to be a game.





.....the instant you take money to play (or coach) it stops being just a game.

You've become a professional. Thing about that, is that you are now held to a different standard.

If the coach in question worked for free then this issue would be a straight up and down free speech issue.

But he worked under a contract, and I'd bet dollars to donuts that there was a section in it about bringing the club into disrepute.

Free speech is a wonderful thing, worth fighting and even dying for. However protecting individuals from the consequences of free speech rather defeats the object.

Uh, protecting the individual from the consequences is the whole idea, otherwise, it's not free speech, google up "chilling effect"

i.e., fans have every right to disagree with whether fucking Castro was a swell guy or not, but whatisface is free to express his option without fear of reprisal - how is anything else remotely definable as "free speech"?

When you break out the torches and pitchforks, you no longer have a democracy based on consensus formation through reasoned debate, the underlying foundational principle of our entire representative democracy - you have a violent mob.

In other words, where does that end? Instead of arguing with you over the internet, I can just hunt your ass down and kill you, that will settle that argument about who is right or wrong.

Those are the consequences of what you're espousing.

Were you people really not paying attention in class or what?

Well, YOU weren't paying attention in class.

"Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech."

Congress hasn't. And he isn't in trouble with the law. He's in trouble with his boss.

What gave you the idea free speech has no consequences? He's in fine with the government. That's free speech.

If his employer is legally wrong, then he can take appropriate legal action under labor law. If he had grounds--he doesn't.

As for baseball no longer being a game once money enters the picture--you're over a century behind. Ever hear of the 1919 Black Sox?




Real0ne -> RE: No freedom of speech if it pisses someone off. (4/13/2012 3:14:09 PM)

labor law my ass, con law.



philosophy -> RE: No freedom of speech if it pisses someone off. (4/13/2012 3:41:11 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: xssve

Uh, protecting the individual from the consequences is the whole idea, otherwise, it's not free speech, google up "chilling effect"



Interesting argument. Google 'shouting fire in a crowded theatre'.

However, you do have a fair point about the chilling effect. But, also to be fair, it is not the state sanctioning this coach, it's his employer. Thus, he has total recourse under the law if he feels the sanctions are unjust or illegal.

quote:

i.e., fans have every right to disagree with whether fucking Castro was a swell guy or not, but whatisface is free to express his option without fear of reprisal - how is anything else remotely definable as "free speech"?


Well, it's clear that you can see no other definition. However, there are some who'd disagree with you. SCOTUS comes to mind. (did you find the 'shouting fire in a crowded theatre' thing yet?)

quote:

When you break out the torches and pitchforks, you no longer have a democracy based on consensus formation through reasoned debate, the underlying foundational principle of our entire representative democracy - you have a violent mob.


No, sorry, that is just flat wrong. Or at least a false analogy. There's no witch hunt here, no mob with flaming torches. Both those events require violence. This is not a question of violence, it's a question of free speech and its potential limits.

quote:

In other words, where does that end? Instead of arguing with you over the internet, I can just hunt your ass down and kill you, that will settle that argument about who is right or wrong.


No. It'd just mean you're mentally unwell.

quote:

Those are the consequences of what you're espousing.


Again, no. A better analogy would be, on the basis of something I wrote here, you approached my employer and informed them that you'd no longer use their services as a result of what I'd said. Oddly enough, an exercise of your right to free speech. Coming up here to kill me would not be an exercise in free speech.

quote:

Were you people really not paying attention in class or what?


Apparently so, as I'm aware of the SCOTUS ruling on the limits of free speech. You know, the group tasked to interpret the US Constitution by the US constitution.



xssve -> RE: No freedom of speech if it pisses someone off. (4/13/2012 4:05:10 PM)

Well in this case, Guillen is an idiot, and he got a five game suspension, BFD, my concern is that a.) it's over a political statement, and political statements are protected speech, period, I don't give a shit who you work for, as are religious beliefs, and b.) he made those statements in an interview that had only peripherally to do with his job, he wasn't on the job.

I have a real with this, particularly w/respect to MM's insistence that paying someone to do a certain job entitles him to dictate their opinions to them, there is a very large chilling effect here, being fired is a legal action.
quote:


No. It'd just mean you're mentally unwell.


Yet it happens all the time in countries were there are no laws protecting the freedom of speech and expression, it's happening right this second in Syria, and it's happened upwards of 8500 times since the Syrian government decided not to protect it's people from the consequences of free speech.

No, coming to kill you would be the opposite of recognizing and upholding your freedom of speech, that was the point, one would be hard pressed to argue that it was freedom of speech if death is the consequence.

But it's not less difficult to argue that consequences of economic sanctions, loss of livelihood, social orstracization, etc., are any less coercive, not quite as final perhaps, but the chilling effect is just as profound and all the more insidious.



xssve -> RE: No freedom of speech if it pisses someone off. (4/13/2012 4:08:17 PM)

"Shouting fire in a crowded theater" does not apply here even peripherally, metaphors about "fiery Latin tempers" notwithstanding. No one was endangered by Guillen's comments but Guillen.



Musicmystery -> RE: No freedom of speech if it pisses someone off. (4/13/2012 4:10:06 PM)

quote:

political statements are protected speech, period


And, he got no flack from the government whatsoever.

That's free speech.

Now....offending your employer's fan base......dumb.



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.078125