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.
There was no complaint filed, she self reported her posting her picture on twitter or some such, and got fired after this same employer allowed another male employee who used obscene invective to make a political post, to simply erase his boo-boo.
She did all of this while off hours with it not being criminal in nature AND with it not having been proven to have impacted her employer's business.
Apparently you can sign away your constitutional rights through something as innocuous and irrelevant as an employment contract in the U.S.
There is no constitutional right to employment in this country. Making up constitutional rights and then complaining about them being violated is just freakin' creepy. It makes me question if you're "ok".
There is no constitutional right to employment in this country. Making up constitutional rights and then complaining about them being violated is just freakin' creepy. It makes me question if you're "ok".
Firing is simply ending an association. Comparable to me not going to a store to shop anymore. Both parties, employer and employee, remain free to seek new associations of employment.
The biker is 100% free today, just as she was the day she made the gesture.
If she were arrested and convicted of a crime, she might not be free.
Yep. Basically, their point ERASURE is making is that if someone decides not to go see a Louis CK special this week that they're actually violating his free speech. Because they've decided not to pay him after recent news has come out....aka firing him.
Hence why that poster is now on ignore for adding zero sane discourse to actual events.
Ballox! Her private sector employer who does business with the government fired her. There had to be a complaint made.
Welcome to the Fascist state indeed.
On second thought, you're always spouting partisan garbage here. I can't recall when you've made a meaningful, cited addition to well, anything....soooo gonna just skim you off with the rabid right wingers so us sane adults can ignore the garbage. Toodles.
Yep. Basically, their point ERASURE is making is that if someone decides not to go see a Louis CK special this week that they're actually violating his free speech. Because they've decided not to pay him after recent news has come out....aka firing him.
Hence why that poster is now on ignore for adding zero sane discourse to actual events.
Correct observation.
Free Speech is a two way street. The employer simply exercised their version, too. Both were within their rights to do so.
Firing is simply ending an association. Comparable to me not going to a store to shop anymore. Both parties, employer and employee, remain free to seek new associations of employment.
Actually, it depends.
If a person is a well off, than firing might constitute a temporary inconvenience, and in this case these two ( firing and arrest) are difficult to compare. If a person is poor, then firing might constitute a disaster, such as homelessness/debt. Then the two ( arrest and firing) become quite comparable.
Quote:
The biker is 100% free today, just as she was the day she made the gesture.
If she were arrested and convicted of a crime, she might not be free.
She doesn't seem to be too affected by firing, since as the word has it - she is well off.
But it could have been a different outcome for someone lower on a social ladder.
Actually, it depends.
If a person is a well off, than firing might constitute a temporary inconvenience, and in this case these two ( firing and arrest) are difficult to compare. If a person is poor, then firing might constitute a disaster, such as homelessness/debt. Then the two ( arrest and firing) become quite comparable.
.
Employment At Will is wonderful. It is the ultimate 2 way Freedom of Association.
There we go again. "Free speech" and ACTIONS are not one and the same thing. If the biker would have "expressed her right of free speech" by throwing a rock at president, that wouldn't be a "speech" any longer. That would be an action.
Likewise, when the employer "disassociates his business" in response - that's not a speech. That's an ACTION.
P.S. In this case "flipping a bird" is a speech. This is an expression of opinion - not more than that.
Sure, let's look into it. The case you describes involves PUBLIC SAFETY,
I stopped here because no it doesnt. Simply SAYING something on a corner that isnt harming anyone nor would cause harm, does not involve public safety. its freedom of speech, just like the middle finger..
Society doesnt have to ignore others exercising their right to free speech either..
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.
Because they've decided not to pay him after recent news has come out....aka firing him.
