Toronto sportscaster fired for saying he believes in traditional marriage (employment, illegal)
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.
Toronto TV host fired after tweets on Avery debate - Sports- NBC Sports (http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/43007299/ - broken link)
I'm a gay guy, but I find it disturbing that voicing support for traditional marriage can get a guy fired from his job. Yes, I know that he worked for a private company, but it's still scary. He didn't express his opinion on television or on the radio. All he did was send out a "Tweet" that said he supports traditional marriage, and that got him fired. I think that's terrible.
And before anyone jumps in and starts bashing gays, please take note: This isn't an anti-gay thread. It's a thread in support of free speech, regardless of your sexual orientation!
Canada does not have free speech per se like America does. Minorities can have people arrested if someone says something unpopular or vaguely racist. I believe this is similar to other Dominion countries and England. There wa a case in Austrailia where a guy was sentenced for 3 years for challenging a Jewish protestor at a pro-Palestinian rally.
Though written to prevent neo-Nazis and other odious characters from spewing their toxins, these restrictions have become human rights violations in themselves. Among the targets of these laws have been anti-American protesters, an anti-gay Christian pastor, radical Islamists, anti-Hindu Sikhs, French-Canadian nationalists, a movie sympathetic to South Africa, an anti-Semitic Indian, a pro-Zionist book, a Jewish community leader and Salman Rushdie’s novel “The Satanic Verses.’’
In other words, anybody with an unpopular viewpoint can become fodder for the courts, which alone are granted the freedom to determine the limits of civilized ideas. The laws as they were written were a recipe for censorship, and the meal has now been cooked.
The way I see it, it is not a 'freedom of speech' issue. Rather, it is a private corporation (I assume so) in Canada that does not wish to alienate its viewers and advertisers. Hence, when that sportscaster tweeted his comment, the corporation felt that it had to fire him.
If the corporation had not fired him, many would have felt that the corporation 'adopted' the statement. The corporation did not want that.
I hate to see a person lose their job for simply uttering an opinion. However, if you are in the 'public eye' (as this person was) and work for a corporation, you better watch what you say.
Now that the Toronto sportscaster is unemployed he may, of course, say anything he wants.
I once worked for a small private store. The owner, my boss, easily weighed 400 pounds. I could have have told customers that my boss is 'fat as a fat cow, and that is fat' without fear of The Government taking action against me. However, my boss may have objected to the 'fat cow' part, and fired me.
That fat cow.
That's pretty much it. He wasn't arrested he was fired.
Toronto TV host fired after tweets on Avery debate - Sports- NBC Sports (http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/43007299/ - broken link)
I'm a gay guy, but I find it disturbing that voicing support for traditional marriage can get a guy fired from his job. Yes, I know that he worked for a private company, but it's still scary. He didn't express his opinion on television or on the radio. All he did was send out a "Tweet" that said he supports traditional marriage, and that got him fired. I think that's terrible.
And before anyone jumps in and starts bashing gays, please take note: This isn't an anti-gay thread. It's a thread in support of free speech, regardless of your sexual orientation!
Alienating current or potential customers will always get one fired.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnUnidentifiedMale
Well, it exists, but not to the same extent as it does here in the U.S. It's one of the things I truly cherish about our country.
It's a private company. You have just as much free speech on this forum as the sportscaster did on the TV there. City-data.com owns this forum, and they have the right to tell you what you can and cannot say.
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey
When the state or other entity endeavors to place one group above that of another, free expression of dissent cannot be permitted.
lol you people are ridiculous. Yeah, allowing gays to marry where straights already can clearly means that they are vaulted way above straight people. Right.
The US constitution guarantees equal access to the laws. Bans on same-sex marriage deny an entire class of people - homosexuals - from accessing 1400 civil rights. No heterosexual American (single or coupled) is banned from accessing these rights. Ever homosexual American (single or coupled) is banned from accessing the 1100 that come from the federal government, and most homosexuals are banned from accessing the 300 provided by their state.
The average US citizen avails himself to very, very, very few of the civil rights available to him. Choosing not to access them does not mean access is being denied and that he or she is being discriminated against. My friend Karen has lived in Manhattan her whole life. She's never had a driver's license. Is she being discriminated against and denied access to the civil rights associated with a driver's license simply because she's chosen not to get one? (answer: of course not)
Wrong. A homosexual can access those benefits just as a single hetereosexual can.
Wrong. A homosexual can access those benefits just as a single hetereosexual can.
So a man from a foreign country married to a gay Iowan man can get a spousal immigration visa?
So a women in Vermont who employs her wife doesn't have to pay unemployment insurance tax on her wife's wages?
So a man married to a male military member of the Coquille Indian Tribe will be able to shop at the base commissary (once DADT is officially repealed)?
The answers to these and many, many other questions is NO. If they instead were married heterosexuals, the answers would be YES. These people are not able to access these benefits (civil rights) simply because they are homosexuals.
Well, it exists, but not to the same extent as it does here in the U.S. It's one of the things I truly cherish about our country.
I think Canada cherishes free speech just as much if not MORE than we do. Juan Williams ring a bell? Tim Hardaway?
In any case, i agree with his firing. Not sure that i would've fired him personally, but if my show depends on ratings, i don't want him tweeting his personal opinions that could possibly alienate a sizable group of my audience. And since gays on average tend to be fairly well off, i don't want him saying anything that could cause my sponsors to get nervous either.
I've been saying for a while that some people need to stay the hell away from Twitter. It gets too many people in trouble. The whole damn world doesn't need to know your opinions on everything. I'm a huge fan of plenty of sports personalities in the media, and i don't know where they stand on social issues. Don't want to know either. And i'm sure their networks like it that way.
That's the problem I have with Keith Olbermann being allowed to host a show about politics. People actually give a hoot about what an egomaniac sportshack has to say about politics.
So then, what's the difference between Olbermann, Limbaugh, or Hannity? They're more qualified to speak on political issues just because they've never been involved with sports on the professional level? Brian Kilmeade or Brit Hume are more qualified to speak on political topics than Olbermann?
How? Because they hang around the Ivory Towers of power more than Olbermann does? Makes no sense.
Who cares it is not this Country, they can feel the way they want. However in saying this, i do believe each person has a right to express his or her own views on a subject, without having to pay the ulitmate price, that is ignorant. Or are we going to come to a place where he as people have to hide our true feelings and thoughts.
Or are we going to come to a place where he as people have to hide our true feelings and thoughts.
That's what our country will be coming to. Sadly.
The guy shouldn't be fired. Having an opinion is not homophobic, hateful,r acist, whatever. The "hate" is when you do something about it. He wasn't trying to do something about it.
Some people believe marriage is for 2 adults who love each other.
Some people believe marriage is for 1 man 1 woman.
You may be passionate about one of the two sides, but by no means is the other person wrong or "hateful" simply because of disagreement of opinion.
Had the guy said: "MARRIAGE IS BETWEEN 1 MAN 1 WOMAN AND NOT A BUNCH OF LIMP WRISTED PHAGS AND SHORT HAIRED BURLY DYKES!"
^ example of "hate speech". (Though, I still believe in freedom of speech)
Apparently freedom of speech does not exist in Canada.
Free speech never existed within the walls of a private organization in Canada or the U.S.
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.
