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.
Well they can't infringe on your 4th amendment rights. I don't think employers should be stifling free speech. Whether they can legally fire you or not doesn't make it less un-American or anti-free speech.
Yes they can infringe on those rights, otherwise drug testing would not be so widespread.
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
As far as I can tell the rally was a group of people that assembled to peaceably petition the government for a redress of grievances.
And did congress fire those people? Or did private citizens?
I don't get how people say private individuals or employers should be able to stifle free expression and assembly as long as they are not the government. It's un-American and violates the spirit of free speech.
Should employers fire gun owners too, since they are not the government and are not infringing on gun owners by making them decide between exercising their 2nd amendment rights or employment?
What about the 4th amendment? Are private individuals or employers allowed to search you at will because they have some kind of suspicion?
What about amendment 9, the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. Doesn't that suggest that people have rights beyond how and what they is framed in the Bill of Rights. Like for instance, to generally have a right to make a living and have free speech at the same time.
Freedom of speech was never meant to be freedom of consequences for that free speech.
Do you think the NFL a private organization should not have been allowed to fire Colin Kaepernick?
I think you do. We didn't always have PC speech and people getting fired for things they said or place they were seen. This is a very recent phenomenon facilitated by politics.
I find it to be fueled by capitalism. When you lay employees off, the companies unemployment rate can go up costing them more money, but when you fire them, the employee is not guaranteed unemployment and usually has to go through an appeal process that they'll likely lose.
Through the years I've seen coworkers lose their job for calling 911 when a customer fell in a store, breaking up a fist fight between customers, getting punched by customers, and trying to stop thieves from stealing.
A private individual can't violate or infringe on your constitutional and civil rights unless strangely it's your 1st amendment rights.
Nonsense. Go tell your boss to go f himself. Watch what happens.
Meanwhile being fired does not stop you from speaking. What you are claiming is fre speech means you have a right to a job regardless of what asinine thing you say. That is just plain old Faldo.
I think you do. We didn't always have PC speech and people getting fired for things they said or place they were seen. This is a very recent phenomenon facilitated by politics.
So please show us where you took up for Colin kaepernick. You must be against the NFL firing him right?
Gotta love these American "patriots" who continue to boldly and proudly display their ignorance of the Constitution.
No doubt these are the same people who wanted Colin Kaepernick to be cut for kneeling during the national anthem.
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.