Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No, you will never be able to say the N word to black person without getting punched.
Yes, all people want to be treated with respect and without having to hear something insulting.
When you work for a big company, corporation it's up to you to to not ruin their image and their ability to make money with your own personal opinion.
You can still speak your opinion around your friends, and hell maybe in 50 or 100 years, when things are equal, and blacks and Hispanics are not being red lined from living in certain neighborhoods, or shot down by police, maybe then you can say the N-word without being punched.
Nah!
Let me boil it down for you: Either actually listen and then make needed changes, or suffer the consequences.
Thank you for your relevant feedback, Hitler. Make needed changes to personal opinion or suffer the consequences?
It seems as though a lot of you have not exactly read through this thread, and have labelled me a racist already, without knowing me or my stance on any subject. You are applying my post to the issues that evoke emotions in you, and are arguing with a ghost. I'm actually a Libertarian in political views, and abhor anyone who is racist against any ethnicity, as I have a mixed son. I think you angry, assuming posters are proving a lot of my point and I appreciate the living examples.
Thank you for your relevant feedback, Hitler. Make needed changes to personal opinion or suffer the consequences?
It seems as though a lot of you have not exactly read through this thread, and have labelled me a racist already, without knowing me or my stance on any subject. You are applying my post to the issues that evoke emotions in you, and are arguing with a ghost. I'm actually a Libertarian in political views, and abhor anyone who is racist against any ethnicity, as I have a mixed son. I think you angry, assuming posters are proving a lot of my point and I appreciate the living examples.
Peyton, since when did anyone's personal choices or beliefs NOT come with consequences? That's life and has been the case throughout all history.
All are you saying we need to go back to the 1950s where open racism was socially acceptable? Even then, there were consequences. The consequences just effected different people.
OP, what are you really saying? Just come out and say it. Are you afraid to engage?
Peyton, since when did anyone's personal choices or beliefs NOT come with consequences? That's life and has been the case throughout all history.
All are you saying we need to go back to the 1950s where open racism was socially acceptable? Even then, there were consequences. The consequences just effected different people.
OP, what are you really saying? Just come out and say it. Are you afraid to engage?
Sure, hate speech often comes with consequences. Voicing personal opinions that may point out facts but not be popular however, is where this conversation was centered. This post *may* be slightly over your head, since it is a philosophical discussion regarding personal, moral autonomy and how it relates to culture in our country. It was simply an inquisition into the subject and has apparently touched a nerve with people who get emotional about what someone else thinks or says. That's interesting in that it does expose perhaps one of the initiators of the anger/disgust at differing opinions or viewpoints. And the name calling is the icing on the cake.
And no, sorry to disappoint you. I am not "afraid" or holding back a big, racist rant so that you can start berating me. This was just a way to gauge people's thoughts on the subject and get differing viewpoints.
Sure, hate speech often comes with consequences. Voicing personal opinions that may point out facts but not be popular however, is where this conversation was centered. This post *may* be slightly over your head, since it is a philosophical discussion regarding personal, moral autonomy and how it relates to culture in our country. It was simply an inquisition into the subject and has apparently touched a nerve with people who get emotional about what someone else thinks or says. That's interesting in that it does expose perhaps one of the initiators of the anger/disgust at differing opinions or viewpoints. And the name calling is the icing on the cake.
And no, sorry to disappoint you. I am not "afraid" or holding back a big, racist rant so that you can start berating me. This was just a way to gauge people's thoughts on the subject and get differing viewpoints.
Very little is over my head. Can you please provide an example of a personal opinion that points out facts? Having actual context would help this discussion. And it was YOU that referred to "oppressed groups."
So, provide an example and we can talk about it. By the way, are all opinions considered facts?
If you want to continue this pretense of this being a philosophical question, then it's been answered. No one's moral autonomy is under attack. Millions of Americans have millions of different morals as we speak. Is that not true? The answer is yes.
To go further, nowhere is it written that all of those morals or opinions must be liked by anyone.
No, you will never be able to say the N word to black person without getting punched.
Yes, all people want to be treated with respect and without having to hear something insulting.
When you work for a big company, corporation it's up to you to to not ruin their image and their ability to make money with your own personal opinion.
You can still speak your opinion around your friends, and hell maybe in 50 or 100 years, when things are equal, and blacks and Hispanics are not being red lined from living in certain neighborhoods, or shot down by police, maybe then you can say the N-word without being punched.
Nah!
Sure, hate speech often comes with consequences. Voicing personal opinions that may point out facts but not be popular however, is where this conversation was centered. This post *may* be slightly over your head, since it is a philosophical discussion regarding personal, moral autonomy and how it relates to culture in our country. It was simply an inquisition into the subject and has apparently touched a nerve with people who get emotional about what someone else thinks or says. That's interesting in that it does expose perhaps one of the initiators of the anger/disgust at differing opinions or viewpoints. And the name calling is the icing on the cake.
And no, sorry to disappoint you. I am not "afraid" or holding back a big, racist rant so that you can start berating me. This was just a way to gauge people's thoughts on the subject and get differing viewpoints.
The reason people are reading things into your OP and subsequent posts may have something to do with the fact, that you never gave examples of what you're talking about, even though you were asked to. You've been evasive. So you can't blame people for misinterpreting your intent, since you've offered no clarification.
An anti-racist Libertarian. That's fascinating. Aren't the Libertarians the states'-rights people? Are you aware of the history of the states'-rights agenda? It's not very people-of-color-friendly. Just saying.
How about the moral autonomy of Jane Fonda? You know what I'm talking about. And, no, I don't have any problem with her status to a lot of offended Americans as a persona non grata.
How about the burnings of Beatles records when John Lennon opined that his band was bigger than Jesus. Was he not entitled to his own opinion?
How about statements made by Bill Maher after 9/11 (he lost his TV series) and by the Dixie Chicks in 2003 (boycotts and blacklisting for years)?
How about Colin Kaepernick, excoriated and hounded out of a job?
How about Kathy Griffin?
Your present tense - is destroying - portrays this as some sort of current development.
Where was the 'moral autonomy' during McCarthyism? During the Hays Code, when motion pictures could not get distributed unless they hewed to a long laundry list of wholesomeness? Where was the 'moral authority' before the Obscenity Cases ~1960, wherein it was impossible to get certain novels with 'naughty' words and 'objectionable' published in the United States, not because of personal acts such as boycotts but because it was against the law, and those novels could be seized and the publishers or importers or sellers could be fine or criminally prosecuted?
Where was the 'moral autonomy' of gays who were denied the right of marriage before 2015, and that of interracial couples denied the right to marry each other before 1967? How much 'moral autonomy' do you think was granted to a black man and a white woman holding hands and walking down the street in any town in the South in 1950?
Where was the 'moral autonomy' of Ford workers when founder Henry Ford was running things, and the company's Sociological Department would send agents out to investigate workers to make sure they were behaving 'properly' - 'proper' behavior including not drinking alcohol, weren't speaking any language other than English at home, that your wife was not employed, that you were not engaged in any 'immoral' sexual relationships?
What about all those 'moral compasses' that were imposed on people? And you want to compare the more public pressure of today - which is moral autonomy manifest, is it not? - with the past, when it was the law and the threat of incarceration, when it was corporate morality enforcers making employment contingent on a long list of behavioral lines to be toed, when records were being burned in unmistakably fascist symbolism?
I swear, I am continually baffled by the complete lack of historical perspective when it comes to the coerciveness of public opinion.
Consider that in 2020, today the FCC is STILL monitoring broadcast tv and radio for 'wholesome content'!!!
I believe the current fine for a certain curse word slipping on air, is at $300K!! ( Is this really 2020? it doesnt feel like it!)
In this regard the FCC, ( a Federal govt agency) is basically determining what is wholesome and what is not!!
When you work for a company you represent that company. The company typically has standards, ethics, and morals that they expect their employee's to meet. It is up to the employee if they wish to abide by such standards and work for that company.
The public will voice their opinion on everything, it's not "bullying" it is simply their opinion.
How do you know that the religious beliefs of Chik-Fil-A has not impacted their customers or products? In my opinion it has affected customers, both positively and negatively.
I only asked if it affected their products. And it demonstrably did not affect the taste of their chicken.
An anti-racist Libertarian. That's fascinating. Aren't the Libertarians the states'-rights people? Are you aware of the history of the states'-rights agenda? It's not very people-of-color-friendly. Just saying.
And that's insulting, to assume that Libertarians are racist (by saying an anti-racist one is fascinating). I'm a Libertarian. All that is meant by states rights is that this country was not set up as a large, centralized government and that due to the 9th and 10th amendments, anything not enumerated in the federal Constitution as an obligation of the federal government should be remanded to the states, and if not to the states, to the people.
Law-abiding Libertarians can hardly help if there are jerks out there who take it to extremes. One bad apple doesn't spoil the whole bunch, right?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
