So much for freedom of speech and expression.

[Libertarian01]

"Right" or "wrong is subjective. Sometimes cruelly so. Oh, and EEOC should no longer exist. People aren't equal.

While I agree that people are not "equal" I do believe they should be treated equally, within reason. Sense of fair play and all that.

If we throw out EEOC, do we still get to use Title VII of the Civil Rights Act?

Like I said before, most employers win NOT because they are on strong legal ground, but because employees are ignorant.

Regards,

Doug

 

[1775usmarine]

Kilroy was here.

 

[Frank_N_Stein]

I'd leave Frank out of it. I hear he curbstomps.

I am a fan of schnitzel, but I can't fit into small German cars.

 

[Frank_N_Stein]

Yeah, but he's not going to chase you down

I would in my small German car!

 

[Frank_N_Stein]

Just to clarify, where do you stand on the fact that she did NOT say it in public? According the the article she sent him a private message and he then made it public.

Any thoughts on that line of thinking?

I am not arguing here, just wanting your thoughts.

Doug

Was she representing herself as an employee of the company when she sent the message? If I write something offensive/inflammatory on INGO or some other social media site and represent myself as a member of IMPD while doing so, I can face consequences from my department even if I wasn't actually working at the time.

 

[Libertarian01]

Was she representing herself as an employee of the company when she sent the message? If I write something offensive/inflammatory on INGO or some other social media site and represent myself as a member of IMPD while doing so, I can face consequences from my department even if I wasn't actually working at the time.

I was wondering if someone would get around to this question.

In this case it would be hard to say. I would guess that she was expressing her own, personal opinion regarding the guest. I come to this simply because I cannot see a talk show host of a political program presuming to speak for the entire radio station.

Then we could ask "what time did she send the message" hoping to catch her "on the clock", except that we could then rebut that she was "on break" while sending the message.

Regards,

Doug

 

[T.Lex]

But if he's going to say that a company doesn't have the right to fire an employee because that employee said something in a very public way that doesn't reflect the values of the employer, he should expect that to be challenged.

Again, at the risk of filtering gregr's commentary through my own myopia (I'm not as Jung as I used to be), what values is such an employer espousing: the opposite of the 1A. No one doubts (seriously) her right to speak her vulgar mind, nor her employer's right to employ (subject to applicable civil right legislation). But what about the larger value? The value of [strike]free marketing[/strike] acceptance of that which makes us different? Protecting places where diversity of opinion is elevated above adherence to norms?

We should all strive to such acceptance. Those that do not - including the employer - violate the spirit of 1A just as the gov't would.

 

[jamil]

Where can I read up on this debate? I didn't know it was that big of a deal to be a non-believer and have free will.

Nah. I mean, no one's getting excommunicated from non-believership over it.

There's No Such Thing as Free Will - The Atlantic

 

[jamil]

While I agree that people are not "equal" I do believe they should be treated equally, within reason. Sense of fair play and all that.

If we throw out EEOC, do we still get to use Title VII of the Civil Rights Act?

Like I said before, most employers win NOT because they are on strong legal ground, but because employees are ignorant.

Regards,

Doug

The US won't be throwing out the EEOC anytime soon. I don't think government does that great a job at telling us what is equal.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

You're complaining that her insulting remarks lost cost her her job? Isn't that the price of freedom?

gregr, either you refrain from your line of attack or you start wearing Levi's again.

I'm going to skip over 4-eyes and go straight to POINDEXTER!

I recently wasted a perfectly good Poindexter on someone apparently too young to understand the implications. They just looked at me like a dog watching a card trick.

 

[churchmouse]

Once again, WRONG. Our Constitution guarantees freedom of expression and speech. It`s only negotiable if sheep lay down their rights. What`s right is NOT right only when/if, it fits some predetermined criteria.

Let me put this up to you.
You are in a private Forum. Owned and operated by an individual that has set rules that are to be followed if you are to remain in the Forum.

Now, say you step outside the lines and are called out for it. In this call out are we stepping on your freedom of expression.

Post #9 my friend. He gets it.

I am just saying to you, stay inside the lines and nothing is said. Go outside and yes, action taken.
It seems she went outside a set line in the sand.

 

[jamil]

Again, at the risk of filtering gregr's commentary through my own myopia (I'm not as Jung as I used to be), what values is such an employer espousing: the opposite of the 1A. No one doubts (seriously) her right to speak her vulgar mind, nor her employer's right to employ (subject to applicable civil right legislation). But what about the larger value? The value of [strike]free marketing[/strike] acceptance of that which makes us different? Protecting places where diversity of opinion is elevated above adherence to norms?

We should all strive to such acceptance. Those that do not - including the employer - violate the spirit of 1A just as the gov't would.

Post 156 kinda says the same thing.

Morally I think the company is on safe ground to fire her. Aside from the obvious SJW virtue signaling, they're taking the position that it's not commensurate with their values to call homosexuals offensive names. However I think it would have been a better outcome if after it went public, they'd have just said that they'll let the market decide about what she said.

 

[actaeon277]

...
Oh, and to Actaeon277, the Constitution LIMITS me, as an individual, to being age 30 to run for Senate. Minor, I know, but it is a limit on my power to seek office, gain power, and affect a positive change on my fellow Americans.


Regards,

Doug

Being in the Senate, removes you from "Citizen" to "Government".

 

[Bennettjh]

Freedom of speech is only protection from the government not the people.

Ding ding ding!

 

[KG1]

Let me put this up to you.
You are in a private Forum. Owned and operated by an individual that has set rules that are to be followed if you are to remain in the Forum.

Now, say you step outside the lines and are called out for it. In this call out are we stepping on your freedom of expression.

Post #9 my friend. He gets it.

I am just saying to you, stay inside the lines and nothing is said. Go outside and yes, action taken.
It seems she went outside a set line in the sand.

Sometimes peoples emotions boil over and they cross a line which usually leads to consequences. It's happened plenty here on Ingo.

 

[churchmouse]

Sometimes peoples emotions boil over and they cross a line which usually leads to consequences. It's happened plenty here on Ingo.

Ingo was just an easy example. Yes, emotions can and do get the best of us. Happens to me at times.

This is an ever changing world.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Free willy!*

* With the purchase of another willy of equal or greater value.

 

[BGDave]

This has turned into an intellectual discourse. I thought it would stay a good old fashion dog pile thread. I've got a wallet to find and doughnuts to buy.

 

[Woobie]

This has turned into an intellectual discourse. I thought it would stay a good old fashion dog pile thread. I've got a wallet to find and doughnuts to buy.

I know, I was pretty disappointed to see a successful derail, umm, derailed. We need to unban someone or beg them to come back, because we are clearly not as good at this as we used to be.

 

[2A_Tom]

I recently wasted a perfectly good Poindexter on someone apparently too young to understand the implications. They just looked at me like a dog watching a card trick.

Are you related to Felix? I thiught you were Secret Squirrel.